Creative Difference: Feedback and Assessment in Fine Art Dr
Venda Louise Pollock & Chris Jones (Fine Art) Sandy Alden &
Brenda Wilkinson (Student Wellbeing) with James Ricketts as student
lead Slide 2 Creative Difference CONTEXT : Assessment &
feedback identified as problematic within A&D subject areas
(Vaughan & Yorke 2009; Orr 2007; Mason & Steers 2006)
Attention tends to focus on alternative assessment methods,
particularly for written elements (e.g. see Middlemass 2010;
writing-pad) but other recent research (e.g. Pollock & Alden
2012) looks toward an empowering and inclusive learning process as
a means to a positive student experience Research has been
undertaken into summative assessment (e,g, Vaughan and Yorke 2009)
and interest in discipline (HEA STEM/HEA A&H workshop 2012)
Within studio-based subjects, multiple forms of feedback but
understanding of their impact upon assessment is unclear (Blair
2006; Fortnum, Houghton & Sim 2009). Important because learners
in creative disciplines shown to excel in learning but often
struggle with assessment (Robinson 2001) Slide 3 Creative
Difference Despite investment in feedback, many complain they do
not receive enough feedback on their work (Bright 2010; Gladstone
2010; Gladstone 2013) > perception problem? Follow up of the
analysis of NSS comments has made institutions more aware that
feedback in general, whether formative or summative, is often not
recognised or understood by many students. This led one institution
to comment that Our students wouldnt recognise they were receiving
feedback even if we all went round wearing Tshirts that said You
are now getting feedback. Another commented that it appeared that
the only form of feedback students in Art & Design recognise is
that tailored to them as individuals what do I have to do to get a
better mark (i.e. 1 st or 2:1)? Yorke and Vaughn 2009: 17 Slide 4
AIM : identify, investigate & improve means of formative and
summative feedback Creative Difference STAGES : 1.Investigate
current perceptions of what constitutes feedback, from staff and
student perspectives to improve understanding of feedback and its
mechanisms 2.Identify current methods of recording and using
feedback and to look at potential alternative methods, such as
smart technologies 3.Evaluate Open Studios in relation to formative
and summative feedback to gain insight into the effectiveness of
the feedback/assessment loop 4.Revisit and redevelop Open Studios
in light of findings Slide 5 Slide 6 Creative Difference
METHODOLOGY Interviews with staff (own institution and broader
sector) Interviews with students (own institution and broader
sector) Focus groups with students Module evaluations and further
discussion groups Sector questionnaire TPSRS session
QuiLT/Blackboard discussion group Discussions with staff/students
at Teaching and Learning Committee Day-long staff/student workshop
with c.20 stage 1 students looking at feedback/transition (included
mock assessment exercise) Slide 7 Creative Difference FEEDBACK
MECHANISMS IN FINE ART One-on-one tutorials Group Crits Peer-review
Visiting Lecturer tutorial Assessment tutorial Studio cruising
Written feedback End of year tutorial Technical feedback in
workshops and from technicians Slide 8 Slide 9 Slide 10 Creative
Difference Characteristics of THE STUDIO : Defined as learning
through action investigative and creative process driven by
research, exploration and experimentation Milieu for creative
action with: (a) A culture (people) who build a creative community
(b) A mode of teaching and learning characterised by processes of
critical reflection, small class sizes, face-to-face contact (c) A
series of projects and activities that reflect and integrate
professional practice (d) A physical space or constructed
environment, teaching and workshop space, tools and equipment and
technical assistance appropriate to project needs
www.studioteaching.org Slide 11 Creative Difference THE STUDIO :
Distinctive: signature pedagogy habitual, routine, visible,
accountable, interdependent, collaborative, emotional,
unpredictable and affect laden (Shulman 2005) Koch et al 2002: 16:
[a] challenging studio environment contains many aspects: relating
knowledge to student experience and vision, a multiplicity of
pedagogical and learning styles. A variety of student-faculty and
student-student encounters, an ability to take risks, and an
opportunity to share power to construct new knowledge and to
transform thinking. Feedback in the studio (M. Price et al 2010):
In an environment espousing a focus on the development of
independent thinkers, feedback can only be positioned as advice
rather than instruction. Students have a choice about whether to
act on feedback. Their motives to do so or not may result from
positive responses such as deep consideration of the feedback and
reasoned rejection of it, or negative responses such as distrust of
the feedback provider. Slide 12 Slide 13 Creative Difference
Characteristics of THE CRIT : group discussion with peers and
tutors Flourishes if : outcome matters to those involved; where
criteria for judging are open to scrutiny, debate and
transformation; there is accountability; there is willingness to
take responsibility to express and take honest opinion (Soep 2005)
BUT: can cause anxiety that reduces its effectiveness As normative
feedback it is important as it helps students to develop critical
awareness of their own and peers work (Schute 2008); helps to shape
students evaluative skills (Juwah et al 2004) Slide 14 Slide 15
Creative Difference STAGE 1: Investigate current perceptions of
what constitutes feedback, from staff and student perspectives to
improve understanding of feedback and its mechanisms CONTEXT:
Research shows there remains student confusion about feedback and
different interpretation of assessment feedback by students and
staff (Blair 2004, 2006, 2009; Davies 2000, 2002; Crooks 1998;
Fleming 1998; Kent 1995; Oak 1998; Sadler 2005; Askew and Lodge
2000; Baume, Yorke and Coffey 2004; Biggs 2003; Black and William
2003; Harlem and James 1997; Rust 2002) Cantella 2001: 319: The
particular character and activity that goes into making of art does
not fit comfortably into any system of general assessment criteria
Slide 16 Creative Difference CONTEXT : Our students on Assessment:
Art cant easily be measured by exact numbers; [a percentage mark]
means very little in terms of you pushing your ideas and working
practice. Its also just to satisfy an institutional mold, not the
individuals practice; important as benchmark but not necessarily
important to practice Students want feedback (Hyland 2000;
ODonovan, Price and Rust 2001)BUT students dont necessarily
understand or use feedback (Gibbs and Simpson 2004; Lea and Street
1998; McCune 2004) More feedback doesnt necessarily mean more
learning (Kulhavy et al 1985) Slide 17 Creative Difference OUR
FINDINGS : STAFF WHAT CONSTITUTED FEEDBACK Written after assessment
Feedback is the response to assessment (verbal or written) but
generally I think everything we do is feedback A distinction
between feedback in teaching and feedback for assessment Formative
ie one-to-one tutorial, visiting tutor sessions, peer discussion in
the studio, crits All dialogues between student and tutor whether
written, oral, formal or informal There was one comment about
feedback being the foundation of what we do but with no explanation
of this in context to practice. Similarly defining feedback as all
mechanisms of responding to students work. Various opinions on
whether the staff or students voice should be dominant some saying
it altered whether the feedback was formative or summative Slide 18
Creative Difference OUR FINDINGS : STAFF GOOD FEEDBACK Individual
Evidenced Responsive Honest Clear Concise Feed-forward Slide 19
Creative Difference OUR FINDINGS : Student WHAT CONSTITUTED
FEEDBACK No consensus on what constituted feedback Most students,
particularly early stages, focused on written feedback (but
evidence of shift in perceptions by Stages 2/3) Most Stage 1
students used to directive feedback and found adjustment to
facilitative feedback difficult Most students made notes during
tutorials in a sketchbook but found it difficult to articulate how
they applied feedback [e.g. Crisp 2007; Higgins et al 2002):
receiving feedback and being able to act on it should not be
equated] Contrary to much of the literature (Smith and Gorard 2005;
Crisp 2007) most of our students more interested in the feedback
than the mark particularly in the mid-stages of the degree
programme Slide 20 OUR FINDINGS: Student FEEDBACK PREFERENCES
Preference for oral forms of feedback, or oral combined with
written (if post- assessment) Peer review and written feedback seen
as least useful: written feedback no point for discussion, can just
throw it away and forget about it, constantly there to be
interpreted (good/bad); peer review: Peers might not be honest
enough One-on-One tutorials and group crits seen as most useful:
more conversational and greater understanding, allows conversation
and dialogue where ideas can be thought out verbally rather than
having to find the words to write down; group crits: more chance to
explain yourself and see how your work is received by an audience;
range of views and ideas Creative Difference Slide 21 STAGE 2 :
Identify current methods of recording and using feedback and to
look at potential alternative methods, such as smart technologies
TECHNOLOGY: Students not interested in using smart technologies
(NB: right technology might not be there yet) and fast-paced
evolution of technology difficult to embed/habituate Recording
feedback seen as useful (supported by research in other
disciplines) in conjunction with sketchbooks Im left with a general
sense of what was said and try to scribble it down after but I
forget.) Gladstone 2013 digitally recording feedback: addresses
differences in perceptions between staff/student; improves students
understanding of formative feedback; students can receive feedback
when ready and review; spend more time with feedback than if
written (Higgins et al 2002) Parkin et al 2012: online publication
of grades and feedback/adaptive release of grades were found to
significantly enhance students engagement with feedback Slide 22
Creative Difference STAGE 3/4: Evaluate Open Studios in relation to
formative and summative feedback to gain insight into the
effectiveness of the feedback/assessment loop. Revisit and
redevelop Open Studios in light of findings OPEN STUDIOS:
assessment model Students display work in their studio space for
assessment Open Studios was focussed on Stages 2 and 3, now likely
to be Stages 1-3 Studios open to all year groups, staff and the
general public evening viewing with invitations sent Discussion
encouraged between peers and via crits, and cross-year crits
Assessment via assessment tutorial and staff assessing work
External experts (artists, curators, theorists etc) run group crits
Written feedback given after assessment tutorial with assessment
grade. Slide 23 Creative Difference OUR FINDINGS : OPEN STUDIOS
Generated constructive discussions about work Students thought
about the relationship between how you display your work and its
content Welcomed the diverse interactions surrounding the event
Sense of professional practice in thinking about display and
receiving diverse opinions (Candy et al 1994: if students are to be
encouraged to be lifelong learners, they must be weaned away from
any tendency towards over-reliance on the opinions of others.
Ultimately, in real world contexts, they must be able to judge or
evaluate the adequacy, completeness or appropriateness of their own
learning, so whatever assessment practices are used must be
comprehensible to the learners so that they can be internalized as
criteria for critical self-evaluation. Slide 24 Creative Difference
OUR FINDINGS : OPEN STUDIOS Demonstrated the complexity of the
learning environment in which assessment takes place provided a
valued situated assessment with clear links to other feedback
mechanisms experienced in the year and to the final degree show
Students are not overly focused on assessment criteria/grades but
Open Studios provides a valuable point to introduce and develop
thinking around criteria and assessment through an iterative
assessment model. Value involvement of external actors for
different feedback content and range of approaches In experience a
range of feedback mechanisms around one assessment/focal point,
students develop their skills in becoming more discerning learners.
Slide 25 Creative Difference OUTCOMES : Improved understanding of
feedback in Fine Art pedagogy, including types and purposes of
feedback, recording and reflecting on feedback, and feedbacks
relationship to assessment Shift in student perception in what
constitutes feedback: from viewing it as assessment tutorials and
related written feedback to perceiving a variety of kinds of
discourse around practice as feedback Better practice for
integrating feedback into the curriculum, particularly in relation
to assessment A clear, evaluated and developed example of an
assessment integrating a variety of feedback modes and professional
practice experience Enhanced approaches for discussing feedback and
assessment with students through staff-student workshops Slide 26
Creative Difference OUTCOMES : Advantages of taking a
multidimensional view of feedback where situational and individual
characteristics of the instructional context and learner are
considered along with the nature an quality of the feedback message
(Schute 2008: 176) COMING SOON: Fine Arts staff/student co-authored
Feedback Sketchbook
