Author: Catherine Busk

Welcome pack for new UG students.

I will focus my intervention on my work as a college Admissions tutor.

I propose to make a welcome pack tailored to one of the courses (BA Acting & Performance), which aims to provide the First Year lead with information on students  (access) needs, prior to starting. The pack would be given to the students upon completing  enrolment when they receive their UAL e-mail.

Often, there is a gap where information doesnt pass from the admissions process to enrollment, and so with regards to access needs or support plans academic staff often don’t know until way after the student has arrived, how best to adapt teaching plans for the individual and the cohort. For example, last September a student enrolled who has cerebral palsy, and who needed to access a lift, as well as needing a chair and at times a wheel chair in sessions. The students classes were all planned on the second floor in a building which requires a key for the lift from Estates, and the staff (at the time) did not have access to the key. Furthermore, the academic team, for example movement practitioners, had not planned the sessions for participants with physical limitations. Whilst this of course is not a problem as plans were adapted, it was the lack of previous information that made for a clumsy start for the student.

The welcome pack would include information such as the courses dress code for practical sessions, but also a section on, wellbeing within the art of doing (the practicalities). Providing an opportunity for the students to share any information they think will be useful for the tutor. For example, is could look like:

Working with voice:

            On the course you will work with your voice, both spoken and singing or other wise.

Working with movement:

You will be working with movement and getting to know the limitations as well as all the possibilities of moving your body. This means working standing, on the floor, sitting as well as running or jumping with in your physical possibilities.

Working with breath:

Breath work is an essential part of performance, you will be working with your breath and getting to know how this can be useful for voice and movement work.

Working with script:

You will be working with words, punctuation, as well as creatively playing with script and text.

With all this in mind: are there any concerns or anything you think is useful for us to know about so that we can best provide support when you arrive?

I have structured these to help situate the student in the course content. For example, breath work can be overwhelming for someone with acute anxiety, here they are able to think that breath work is a requirement of the course, and ( hopefully) feel they are able to voice an concerns before starting.

Small things like this can go a long way into making a student feel welcome, but also for academics to have sufficient time to prepare and plan, not just the practical elements of unit 1, but also reading materials.

Similarly this will allow yr 1 leads to quickly asses which students will need to be sign posted to which student services on day 1, as opposed to month 3.

Of course all this is subject to:

-students being willing to disclose personal information (which usually isn’t a problem on this course)

-students reading their e-mails to receive the welcome pack (this I see as the biggest hindrance).

Kwame Appiah (2014) dissects the dictionary  definition of ‘Religion as a belief in god and spiritual things’. In a way he juxtaposes this by saying, its not as simple as this; faith and spiritual beliefs are not one thing, but an array of elements or systems of beliefs. This links directly to what Singh S (2016) says in Trinity Universities video that you can’t (and shouldn’t) paint a single community with a single brush stroke. Meaning, that with in a religion or a belief system there will be many different lived experiences of that belief, i.e. differences exist within communities and we must challenge stereotypes. Jawad, H (2022) also highlights the need to challenge stereotypes in her articles on Islam, women and sports. This made me circle back to representation with in Acting and Performance (and Theatre Making in general) and reminded me of an blog post by Kanita T (2022) on Muslim representation in film and television. Both Kanita and Jawad discuss the dangers of stereotypes and in a sense, how the body is viewed through a type casted lens. Both reiterate Appiah and Singhs point, that, much like how a single person experiences a disability will differ from one person to another, the experience of a religion or faith will be diverse with in a community. This begs the question therefore, why representation in performance tends to stereotype so much. Here, I believe that Appiah’s (2014) point about Colonialism and European views of religion come in to play, where religion or different faiths are often viewed through a Christian centric (euro-centric) culture of ‘What do others have that isn’t like or is like Christianity”, which centres the experience through  a Christian culture. I believe has lead to representation in performance being more often than not stereotyping. As I write this, I am aware that this is a huge topic, and I’m simplifying it massively.

Rekis (2023) discusses Intersectionality within identity and epistemic injustice. This “dense” article highlights (for me) a point that is important, that marginalization won’t be the same for all students who are religious. For example, a Christian in the UK will have a different sense of marginalization to that a (for example), Buddhist, or a Hindu etc. ‘A student within a religious minority may have a decreased sense of wellbeing and an increased religious scepticism’. Therefore, a better understanding of the impact or religion and epistemic injustice for a student requires a better understanding of religious identity and the differences within different identities. This article made me think about the admissions process, and how, for example the data that we measure rarely displays religion. Other protected characteristics are available in the admissions process (if an applicant allows it), but religion (to my knowledge) is not one of them. I’m not saying it should be, but it is an interesting observation. I also thought about the ever growing community students from main land China, and I question,  How are we supporting or understanding their beliefs, and multi faceted connections to faith?. I highlight this community of students, since they make up on average 70-80% of the overseas student population and I often wonder just how much or how little we (as an organisation) are doing to support their inclusion. 

…So my food for thought keeps circling around representation within performance, but also within the admissions process.

Refernces

Appiah, K.A. (2014). Is religion good or bad? (This is a trick question.) TED. Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X2et2KO8gcY [Accessed 17 May 2025].

Kantia, T (2022) https://ktariq.medium.com/muslim-representation-in-film-and-television-d53db37178b4

Jawad, H. (2022). Islam, Women and Sport: The Case of Visible Muslim Women. LSE Religion and Global Society. Available at: https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/religionglobalsociety/2022/09/islam-women-and-sport-the-case-of-visible-muslim-women/ [Accessed 17 May 2025].

Rekis, J. (2023). Religious Identity and Epistemic Injustice: An Intersectional Account. Hypatia, 38, pp.779–800.

Trinity University. (2016). Challenging Race, Religion, and Stereotypes in the Classroom. YouTube. Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0CAOKTo_DOk [Accessed 17 May 2025].

Blog 1 : Disability

Diability and race:

“Do we really want to tackle discrimination?”  “Racism is within in the system, it is inherently systemic.” Ade Adepitan

Adepitan A, talks about the intersection of his disability and race, and gives examples of being discriminated for being both disabled and of colour. Moreover he ends leaving the crucial point that discrimination is so systemic it isn’t blatent, and it is hard to prove, but does not mean it isn’t there.

These points seem so pertinent, like with racism, ableism is also inherently systemic, equal access to possibilities for education, entertainment, art, etc etc, would mean a society willing and wanting to tackle discrimination. However, I don’t think this is a society that does…. This would mean far too many born with privilege needing to yield the very power they were born into.

Friends and strangers: Deaf West Theatre.

Sara Novic (Deaf Writer): “ I can 100 promise that you learning sign language is easier than a deaf person learning to speak.”

Artist Christine Sun Kim discusses her journey into Art as a deaf woman, and the lack of access to (for example) art classes, because the institution wasn’t equipped (i.e. a lack of a translator).  She discusses that it is easier to be in the deaf community that within a deaf and non-deaf community sign language for the deaf community and the fear around being in a non-deaf community particularly with regards to how misunderstandings (in communications) can affect daily life. However, she goes on to say talk about the importance of integration and collaboration, and the importance of visibility when it comes to the deaf community. For example, her Captions of Sound project was particularly poignant.

“If we aren’t seen, we have no place to be.”: she ends stating this, which made me think of non visible disabilities: how can we represent and visible those with disabilities which are hidden?

Disability and `Gender.

Chay Brown discusses the lack of access for disabled people within the LGBTQ+ community, or moreover the need for more considerations and adaptations for people with disabilities at LGBTQ+ events. He discusses the intersections of his gender as a transman , and his disabilities, which I understood to be related to mental health.  

What these interviews highlight is the need for access and adaptation. Where possibilities may be available, there is no point if there are not adaptations or adequate access to them. They all highlight how, in general, society places the responsibility on the individual rather than the responsibility of the community to adapt and change. They also highlight that the intersection of disability with other factors such (for example) race, gender, or economic possibilities are complex. For example,  it wont be the same for a person of colour who has a disability as a white person of colour with disabilities, and here lies the complexity of inclusion, and the intersection discriminator factors which lead to the marginalization of some. Another point made clear is the need for visualization.

Whilst watching these, I was reminded of the Palestinian artist and comedian Maysoon Zahid who  states the intersections of her possible discriminatory factors, using humour she says: “I’ve got 99 problems, and palsy is just one. If there was an Oppression Olympics, I would win the gold medal. I’m Palestinian, Muslim, I’m female, I’m disabled, and I live in New Jersey.”

She also highlight the importance of representation within theatre. This, for me is particularly important. Within the performing arts representation is everything. It is a way to visibilize, but often those who are chosen to represent, may not have the best lived experience to portray a character. For example, from women being acted by men in Shakespearian times to, what we see more frequently- non disabled actors playing disabled or neuro divergent characters, or non muslim actors playing muslim characters. There are many reasons leading to this, for example lack of scripts be written (or lack of support for scripts being written) by minority communities, but also this comes back to education. If there is a lack of adequate access to performing arts training for the disabled (for example), the possibilities will be less. I could expand beyond the word limit on this, and I am only discussing this superficially, but this leads me to my next thought.

Training at UAL, and recruitment: I work as an associate lecturer (in performance) and as an admissions tutor. There is great pressure to hit targets: offer targets, conversion targets, intake targets, and within those carefully measured (by algorhythms) data to suggest how many of these offers should be contextual admissions. I.e. applicants who have protected characteristics, and applicants who, more often than not have less access to trainging. Here comes the tension point, and my rhetorical question, I believe for this unit. “How beneficial is it for the applicant to recieve an offer of a place, if there is not adequate infrastructure on the ground to support them through their time at uni? Are we really able to create, re-create and work with the individuals’ access needs. Of course we are able to, and of course we should –  but this requires a web of structured support that enables the students to thrive, without saturating the workload of the tutor or the disability and inclusion team.

Finally, this exercise has made me think further, as to how accessible the admissions process is for some, and how could it improve.

References

Video 1: Ade Adepitan gives amazing explanation of systemic racism, ParalympicsGB, 2020′

‘Video 2: Christine Sun Kim in “Friends & Strangers” – Season 11, Art21, 2023′

‘Video 3: Intersectionality in Focus: Empowering Voices during UK Disability History Month 2023, ParaPride, 2023′

Crenshaw, K. (1991). Mapping the Margins: Intersectionality, Identity Politics, and Violence against Women of Colour. Stanford Law Review, 43(6), 1241–1299.

…some thoughts on my learning and my online learning.

Online learning and learning styles. My professional life, as a creative, as a teacher, as a therapist is based on, in and around movement. Movement has always been a part of my life from an early age. I’m an 80’s child, when education didn’t quite understand the hyperactive child or the distracted child, who’s learning style was not understood. I managed, I masked and I achieved, but my “savour” so to speak was through dance, and how this lead me to build a career based on movement. I learn through movement. I am not alone in this. There are many ways of learning, but I feel I am ‘here’ on the PG cert to think about how I, (in someways), represent the learners who absorb information experientially through moving and through doing, alongside with other creative styles.

So, online learning, sat down (all be it on my ball) is a challenge. Miro, I find to evoke panic in me. The sensations in my body speed up, my heart rate increases, my breath shortens and I panic. I can’t move the cursor, all these colours and post it’s are moving and everyone is going quicker than me, like flight trackers their arrows are speeding along the page mapping different flight paths as they move and write their reflections, and every one… can… see….. Oh god, they can see my cursor isn’t moving. Shit. I’ll just move my curser so it looks like I am keeping up….. …..and suddenly I am plunged back to primary school where my thoughts went at 100miles an hour and I lost the thread of what the teacher said, and I feel lost, and I’m just waiting for the teacher to say “are you even listening at all Catherine”.

I breath.

 I bounce on my ball,

I ground my feet, and I come back to my body. I say to my self: That’s ok. Bounce away. Stretch, come back to your breath. Observe and take your time.

 Then I start with just 1 post it. 1 is enough.

Contextual Background:

As an associate lecture, I was teaching 2^nd year students from BA Contemporary Theatre and BA Acting and Performance courses, on the Collective and Collaborative Practices Unit. My contact with the students was 3 hours a week and the task was to tutor the students on movement based theatre in a devised performance piece, to be placed within the music festival Boomtown. The contact time of these students was shared with lecturers from sibling courses, such as Costume and Theatre design, and the students were working for the first time with their peers from other (design for performance) courses. In terms of diverse needs, the group was composed of some students with differing levels of experience as well as diverse learning or support needs. For example, some held ISAs, for neurodiverse reasons (such as ADHD and Dyslexia), and others didn’t, but expressed going through physical health issues. I also noted that there were varying levels of confidence within the group, as well as varying levels of English as a second language. Some fluent and able to express themselves fluidly and coherently, others less so.

Evaluation:

My approach for the sessions followed a structure of check in, warm up (physical), creating or activity (skills and knowledge), showing (performing work in progress) to peers, feedback (crits), close. Upon meeting the group, it was clear that that there was a disparity in knowledge and skills, as well as differing ways of being present (2022, Harris K). Some students proactive, enthusiastic, and confident, others not and some with a reluctance to collaborate and a reluctance to engage in the ‘physical in theatres’ (2016, Murray S & Keefe J). The attendance was irregular, in the contact hours and in the independent rehearsals, which was a huge challenge for all involved, since working as an ensemble relies heavily on the act of being present. Inevitably my enthusiasm and confidence wavered at times, when meet with a “split group”. Some students arrived with work done and ideas to share, others arrived often blocking said ideas and some didn’t arrive at all. Overall, it was a continual balancing act of; How to include the absent members of the group, without stunting the progress of the work? Especially when my enthusiasm mirrored that of the group and dipped and I found I had less energy to try and include those who weren’t present. All this said, the group were able to come together and find a sense of ensemble to create an immersive performance piece.

Moving forwards

The check in

As time went on, and faced with a sense of disappointment, Check ins sometimes became less in duration with a sense of urgency to get to the: ‘making and creating’. It’s at these very moments that a check in is important. This is the moment, I can attune (1985, Stern D) to the group; quickly assess their needs and adapt my approach accordingly to where the group are at, as opposed to where I think they are at, or where I, ideally would like them to be.  For example, in the check ins I was able to establish how the students with physical pain were and adapt the following warm up to include them. Similarly, in the check in, I could gage how much energy the group were arriving with, to see if I needed to bring energy level up, or find a middle ground between differencing energy and attention levels (2014, Lutzker P). Check ins became less, as also the group arrived later and later to the class. However, it is important to maintain the check in for all the above reasons.

Warm ups:

These were important, and I found that the group were perfectly able to lead these themselves. If I were to do this again, I would encourage the group to lead the warmup themselves and join in. I believe this would have given space for the students with English as a second language to be able to lead and therefore be more included, as a movement warm up does not need to rely on language.

Creating/activity: PLAY

I included two skills-based practices (Laban, and Viewpoints). Whilst these worked well and enabled the students to use some of these methods to create, I could have included more play. This was a reflection fed back by a student stating that the group only began to play with one another towards the middle/end of the project. Play builds a sense of cohesion, enables trust, and allows for a playful sense of error (1993, Nachmanovitch S). Play is core to my professional practise, and I have previously always used it at the beginning of sessions to build a sense of ensemble, and to create an environment for exploration, improvisation, and creativity. I have seen that it helps hugely with students who have ADHD, in bring their attention into the present. Play is also known for building confidence and trust. This would have helped the students who were less confident to feel safe to “fail”. So, it begs the question why I left this out with these students? Perhaps the rush to produce overtook, or the 3 hours only meant that play took a hit.

Showing and feedback

This was an intrinsic part of the process and was important for the group. The showing/or the performing, and in the beginning, group discussions/feedback or Crit was shared. However, with time being pressured, the feedback became tutor to subgroup, and subgroup to tutor. Here, I felt that the peer-to-peer whole group reflections should have been a weekly thing, as opposed to a bi weekly thing, as I felt there was a risk of “cruising through and dispensing wisdom” (2017, Orr & Shreeve) as opposed to really working collectively with the students.

Close. Generally, this worked well, but what I saw was that the more silent members of the group perhaps were not given the right kind of space to feedback, perhaps “the pressure to actively participate actually [became] counter-productive”(2002, Harris, pg 103). I.e. I could have found a way that was not reliant on the verbal for other members of the group to close or check out, again, particularly relevant for the EAL students and the less confident members of the group.

References/ Bibliography:

Harris K (2022), Vol 5 / Issue 1, Embracing the silence: introverted learning and the online classroom, pp. 101–104 , Spark: UAL Creative Teaching and Learning Journal

Lutzker P (2014), RoSE – Research on Steiner Education. Vol 5 / Special issue pp. 65-72 Attunment and Teaching.

Murray S & Keefe J (2016), Physical Theatres a critical Introduction. London:Routeledge.

Nachmanovitch S, (1993),Free Play: Power of Improvisation in Life and the Arts: Improvisation in Life and Art. New York: Jeremy Tarcher.

Orr, S., and Shreeve, A. (2017). Art and design pedagogy in higher education: knowledge, values and ambiguity in the creative curriculum. Routledge

Stern, D. N. (1985). The interpersonal world of the infant: View from psychoanalysis and development psychology. Affect Attunement. New York, NY: Basic Books.

Contextual Background 

As an associate lecture, I was teaching 2^nd year students from BA Contemporary Theatre and  BA Acting and Performance courses, on the Collective and Collaborative Practices Unit. My contact with the students was 3 hours a week and the task was to tutor the students on movement based theatre in a devised performance piece, to be placed within the music festival Boomtown. The biggest pedagogical challenges was working with a big disparity in terms of knowledge and skills, as well as difference in how the participants engaged with regards to collaboration which meant that my planning had to be flexible enough to cater for the changes (i.e. the irregular attendance and participation), but at the same time ensure the LO’s were meet for effective learning.

Evaluation

The students, coming from two different BA course have had a different experience in terms of both course content (skills and knowledge), and student to staff ratio (meaning the amount of 1:1 feedback and tutorship received). They also had a differing sense of belonging; some enthusiastic to be studying, others quite vocally disappointed. Adding to this a handful of students were very under confident and relucted to show work in progress. As an associate lecturer, I get chunks of time with students within different units, and in this case, 3 hours a week felt like too little to be able to make a meaningful impact for effective learning. Having taught on the same unit before, but with 6 hours of contact time a week for the full 10 weeks (rather than 7), it felt like a challenge, and my planning had to be streamlined asking, ‘What is the most important? Delivery of skills and knowledge, or space for students to reflect and create in their own (movement) language’. The answer being, of course, both, but I often thought that in this limited time: less is more – plan for less content for a more effective learning that goes deeper.

Moving forward:

What worked well:

Trusting my practise, and that movement sometimes knows based: Using the warm up and movement activities (knowledge and skills using Laban and Viewpoints methods) allowed for the less confident students to have something “concreate” to hold onto, and were not left in the void of “now create something” independently. I.e. this was where I was building skills and knowledge. Furthermore, using exercises such as mirroring and “flocking” encourages the groups kinesthetic response, and kinesthetic empathy – skills fundamental to performing as an ensemble with improvised content (2012, Reynolds D & Matthew R). The more experienced students were also able to grab onto these methods and really begin to enquire and question how they were useful (or not). Similarly, “Coming back to the body” also allowed for the group to find a greater sense of ensemble, or cohesion, as well as an ownership of their work and the space (2014, Bogart & Landau, &, 2009, Moore JL).

Naming not interpreting: Naming what I was seeing, and not interpreting [for example, I can see that you have less energy today, rather than, “why aren’t you giving it 100%”], and,

using open ended questions during crit [for example,  “I’m curious to know what the groups thoughts were behind the changes you made”, as opposed to “Why did you change that?] were all important for more effective learning as they proved to gain the students trust in me, as well as leave from for their confidence to grow.

Encouraging the small positives, the small progress: It was important to name when the students had done work outside of the session, as well as name when within the session, they were able to create material together. This sounds obvious, and perhaps (to me) patronising, but this group needed the positive reinforcement for effective learning, it enabled them to become “unstuck”.

Adapting my planning, adapting my approach: I learned that the less confident students responded more positively to a more directive approach. Although this is not my chosen method (to direct, as opposed to work with), the response from the students was a lot more positive. So I began to include in my planning creative exercises that had a more directive approach, without loosing what I already had planned for moments where more advanced students were able to be more divisive. For example, I gave directive task that lead to a concreate outcome, as well as providing an enquiry based approach, for example, giving them a stimuli question to create material from.

What could be improved:

Highlighting the “Pedagogies of ambiguity” (2017, Ori & Shreeve) more. I.e. trust in the process of not knowing how the piece will be, until the piece comes together. Like the positive reinforcement, this group needed more of a reminder to trust the process. Not just by trusting me as an experienced practitioner, but also trusting the other lecturers, as well as the unit or the project brief. This was also seen by a tendency to go with the first outcome, rather than really going through trial and error in the research and development phase.

Planning and delivering 1:1 tutorials mid way through the process. This was not scheduled into my HPL hours, but the students, and myself would have benefited from 1:1 Tutorials mid way through. I believe this would have helped and improved engagement in the mid point dip, as well as the possibility to further adapt lesson plans to the needs of the students for effective learning.

References/bibliography:

Bogart A and Landau T (2014), The viewpoints book: A Practical Guide to Viewpoints and composition. Nick Hern books.

Moore, CL. (2009). The Harmonic Structure of Movement, Music and Dance According to Rudolf Laban: An Examination of His Unpublished Writings and Drawings. London: Routeledge

Orr, S., and Shreeve, A. (2017). Art and design pedagogy in higher education: knowledge, values and ambiguity in the creative curriculum. Routledge

Reynolds D & Matthew R (2012), Kinesthetic Empathy in Creative and Cultural Practices, Bristol: Intellect Books.

Contextual Background.

I taught students from two different performance BA’s together, for 3 hours a week over the duration of 8 weeks. One of the key challenges for learning and exchanging feedback, was that as a HPL, I was not involved in the formative assessments, due to the organisation of the unit, and time /budget constraints. The unit is holistically assessed, and normally on these courses the performance outcome will be part of the summative assessment (usually alongside a portfolio). However, in this case, a portfolio is the only submission for summative assessment, which meant that students needed to document verbally, and visually their process, as well as write reflectively whilst weaving in theoretical stance points. This was another key challenge.

Evaluation

There are elements of “authentic assessment” (2018, Villaroel V) happening within my teaching, where, through the creation of an ensemble performance, as a tutor I am holding in mind professional standards, both while assessing (formatively or summatively) as well as within the live feedback in the sessions (the mini crits). I believe this is the less tangible, and implicit mode of assessing as I am continually thinking of real world relevance, and application of skills in the profession (2018, Villaroel V). That said, the main focus of assessment is Constructive Alignment: supporting learning activities appropriate to achieving the desired learning outcomes (2007, Biggs). I’m assessing as closely to professional standards as possible, whilst including the academic context and the process taken to achieve the desired learning outcomes in the spectrum of ways to evidence them, I.e. from satisfactory to excellent.

Over the course of the unit, students received continual “live” feedback, both tutor 1:1 feedback, and group feedback (tutor and peer) within the sessions. This enabled a flow of “constructive criticism from similar minds” (2008, Brooks K, pg4). In some weeks I followed this up by writing the verbal feedback in an e-mail.

All this said, in this unit, I found that the students from one of the courses were dishearten with their grades, and not clear as to why they were assessed as they were. Despite receiving tutorials regarding how and when they would be assessed, as well as supporting lectures on portfolio submissions, and clear questions to structure their portfolios, students seemed to focus on the grade as opposed to the nature of how they fulfilled the assessment criteria. I believe this lack of understanding (of their grade) was in part because their summative assessment was done by a different tutor, who co-lead some of the teaching, and was not their first marker for the summative assessment. I.e. it was difficult for some of the student link the feedback from me, to the feedback from their other tutor in the summative assessment.

Moving forwards.

It was hard for some students to commit to weekly feedbacks, and as mentioned above not all students were able to join the dots between the “live” feedback, the formative assessment and the summative. Thinking that, ‘…Information does not become “feedback” unless it is provided within a system that can use that information to affect future performance’ (2011, William, pg 4), I believe  that an [explicit] question for their portfolio to include reflections on both their formative assessment, as well as weekly feedback (mini crits) within their portfolio submission  would help students make the links between  week to week feedback, formative assessment (the midpoint check-in), and the final outcome.

In my previous institution, self-assessments were part of all syllabi, and I have found them to be useful to enable open discussions over assessments and grades. Therefore, if I were to have more time with the students, I would also implement, self-assessments (Race 2001), within the formative and summative assessment, using the UAL assessment criteria rubric to help students understand the differences in the grades. For example, helping a student to understand that if they consider their work to be “good”, then this would be good evidence of the criteria, which is a C grade. Having this dialogue, I have found helps students to align their observations of their work with mine, but also gives them an opportunity to discuss their grade, before being handed feedback two weeks after the unit has finished (2008, Brookes K).

It is of course, ideal that the tutor doing the summative assessment is involved with the formative assessment. Placing myself in the shoes of a student, who already has difficulty in engaging and understanding the university structures as a working system, it makes no sense to have different tutors doing formative and summative assessment. Although we communicated continually with one another (my peer and I), this was perhaps not evident to students. Therefore, I would insist that time, within my contractual hours, be given for both formative and summative assessment, as well as 1:1 Tutorials.

Linking back to my thoughts in case study 2. Less is more. Perhaps less delivery, but a more “allrounder” approach to the unit as whole would be more appropriate: i.e. yielding delivery time to help students connect the dots with assessments would be better for this experience and ultimately for assessing their learning.

Bibliography

Biggs, J. B. (2007), Chapter 4, Using constructive Alignment in outcomes based teaching and learning in Using   Consttuctive Alignment: University Press.

Brooks, K (2008), : ‘Could do Better?’: students’ critique of written feedback. https://23045626.myblog.arts.ac.uk/files/2024/04/Brooks-2008-Students-critique-of-feedback-in-AD.pdf

Race P (2001), Student guide to assessment, https://phil-race.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Assessment_guide_for_students.pdf

Villarroel, V. et al. (2018) ‘Authentic assessment: creating a blueprint for course design’, Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 43(5), pp. 840-854.  

William, D. (2011) ‘What is assessment for learning’, Studies in Educational

Evaluation, 37(1), pp. 3–14.

Content of Feedback

“Feedback works best when it makes a clear statement of intent, is focused, and constructive. It doesn’t work when it is vague, negative and obtuse. So far, so obvious. Yet this chimes with wider discourses concerning the ‘mismatch’ of tutors’ and students’ perceptions of learning. For example, Clerehan (2002, p.80) describes the problem of tutors’ ‘vague exhortations’ when it comes to assessment advice, and Blair’s own warning about tutors’ somewhat complacent assumptions that students shared their perceptions.”

I definitely can relate to this. When Time is tight, and marking turn around even tighter, I can remember times when I have streamlined my written feedback, particularly as a HPL, when all the hours have been ‘used up’ for teaching delivery.

I also think that within performance, there is sometimes a difficultly in relating the Learning Outcomes in tangible and perceivable assessment criteria, which students can relate to, as often UALs criteria is very design based. This means spending a great deal of time trying to put into words that are accessible and feedback, that feeds forwards and is helpful, and not just a copy past of an assessment rubric.

I also think that the minute a grade is involved in feedback, it is harder for students to relate to feedback. For example, “you showed good evidence of knowledge when ….,”  will refer to a C grade with regards to the assessment criteria. I find, often students think “good” will be a B or an A. Theres a mismatch here, as perhaps, to students a C grade is no longer felt as ‘good’.

Feedback exchange: When to give feedback. This is very relevant, and tricky if you are hourly paid as the feedback is submitted, students move onto another unit, and I may not be around teaching in those months.

1:1 tutorials: Where and when possible, I’ve always been a fan of 1:1 tutorials, but, again, time and resources makes this a stress point, as Brooks rightly points out:

“Tutorials can be labour intensive for the tutor – as we all know, the ‘ten minute slot’ allotted to each student so that so many students can be seen per hour, inevitably overruns. Secondly, students may not need the tutorial, as much as they need support in knowing when and why to contact the tutor.

Feedback sessions

“Is there something to be gained here from supplementing, or even reconsidering, such sessions as primarily sessions of constructive peer support? In such sessions the emphasis could more usefully be on developing independent learning skills, and learning when and what questions are appropriate to ask, thus generating a sense of responsibility in/ownership of one’s learning? “

I very much support this notion. Learning how to give feedback, and practicing a constructive and communicative language is a key skill within theatre making that students need to learn. If this is embedded within the assessment system (like peer reviews etc), it’s a win win.  

“Are we giving general advice on how to improve, to support their general progress? Or are we justifying the mark? “

I think we need to do both, we need to be clear why we are giving the grade we are giving, and how it relates to the learning outcomes, but also we should be giving a notion as to how work can be improved.

Discussions:

I thought about the role of technicians with in UAL, and how (or why) they currently don’t assess. This seems strange to me, as they are just as much on the ground and involved with the student work as academics. Surely this would avoid the hierarchy of lecturer v’s students, by adding a more holistic way of assessing. For example, technicians are well placed to asses process, as well as enquiry. Of course, this would lead to financial changes (and, for example,  technicians being seen as grade 5 not grade 4 etc etc), but its food for thought.

I also often think, where are we assessing the “soft skills” (like, self awareness, self regulation, confidence, empathy etc etc). We do, by nature, its within collaboration (for example), and implicitly its within Process, but perhaps if soft skills were valued as much as hard skills, we would be more equipped to assess more holistically. This discussion emerged out of reading this article, but isn’t coherently related to it.

Photo’s taken by me, with permission from the participants to post/publish.