Making judgements about students making work: Lecturers’ assessment practices in art and design

Abstract

This document is the author deposited version. You are advised to consult the publisher's version if you wish to cite from it. Published versionORR, Susan and BLOXHAM, Sue (2013). Making judgements about students making work : lecturers' assessment practices in art and design. Arts and Humanities in Higher Education, 12 (2-3), 234-253. Copyright and re-use policy AbstractThis research study explores the assessment practices in two higher education art and design departments. The key aim of this research was to explore art and design studio assessment practices as lived by and experienced by art and design lecturers. This work draws on two bodies of pre existing research. Firstly this study adopted innovative methodological approaches that have been employed to good effect to explore assessment in text based subjects (think aloud) and moderation mark agreement (observation). Secondly the study builds on existing research into the assessment of creative practice. By applying thinking aloud methodologies into a creative practice assessment context the authors seek to illuminate the 'in practice' rather than espoused assessment approaches adopted. The analysis suggests that lecturers in the study employed three macro conceptions of quality to support the judgement process. These were; the demonstration of significant learning over time, the demonstration of effective studentship and the presentation of meaningful art/design work. Introduction: Studio based PedagogyThe studio is at the heart of art and design education in higher education. Typically undergraduate art and design students are set open-ended project briefs that direct the development of their individual art/design practice. This project centered learning approach is a defining element of studio based pedagogy. Students interpret the project brief and carry out research and development activity that culminates in the submission of a body of work. This pedagogy can be characterised as 'self directed [..] and very free form curriculum' (Svensson and Edstrom (2011, 1). At different points over the course of study there will be studio Crits. The term Crit describes studio based formative or summative feedback in small or large group situations with students and lecturers (Blythman, Blair and Orr 2008). These Crits offer an opportunity for staff and students to discuss and evaluate the work.

Exploring learning-oriented assessment processes

“…The Architecture case provides some support for that position in that the portfolio represented both a final summative product and formative processes of iteration, feedback and self-evaluation underpinning its development. This resonates with the position of Orr and Bloxham (2012) who assert that in Art and Design students' development work and final work are assessed in their totality, challenging the notion of the separation of formative and summative assessment. This scope for interweaving of teaching, learning and assessment is something teachers in other contexts or disciplines might strive to emulate.…”

What’s the point of moderation? A discussion of the purposes achieved through contemporary moderation practices

“…Gaining consensus on judgement decisions can mask the level of academic engagement that has occurred in the moderation discussion. Consensus can be reached by agreeing on marks, yet with little reference to the evidence used to justify decisions, or with unjustified reference to evidence not listed in the criteria (Orr and Bloxham 2013). While such consensus may satisfy the need for accountability and reassure markers in responding to students' queries, it hardly assures the fidelity of the final grade.…”

Developing Inclusive Pedagogies in HE through an Understanding of the Learner-Consumer: Promiscuity, Hybridisation, and Innovation

“…Students' awareness of the power relations between themselves and their tutors helps to explain why some of them might enjoy so-called 'active' learning less than lectures, and also why the experience of receiving feedback is perceived by them as demotivating and unfair. Research has shown that tutors often make judgements about students, (not just their work), when marking and giving feedback (Orr 2010;Orr and Bloxham 2013). Research also shows that, far from being supported and enabled, students often feel disempowered by feedback from tutors, which they see as reflecting the values of the tutor (Blair 2007;Winstone et al 2017), rather than a recognition of the student's own values and ambitions.…”