An assessment of a BA1 submission for case study.
The unit comprises of 3 elements that make up the hand in:
- Biography 1 – 4 workshop tasks with extensions themed around researching a notable individual of the student’s choice.
- Critical Practice Project – A visual (up to) 2000-word essay across 8 – 12 physical pages about their individual.
- Biography 2 – A proposal for their self-lead project for next term based on researching their individual.
My year leader specified we feedback with one positive comment and one area for improvement for each element:
Biography 1:
1 Strength: There are some interesting references on your padlet, it’s good that you are using film to research; its often a more entertaining and therefore effective way to gain knowledge. However, just planting links to sources doesn’t count, I need to know what you’ve observed from them.
1 Area to Improve: You are missing evidence of studio workshops that is essential to pass this element of the unit. Where are your 3d experiments and work from the concertina book drawing from different perspectives?
CPP:
1 Strength: Your imagery subtly and tastefully enhances the content of your thoughtful text and the simplistic layout reads like a stream of consciousness. You have skewed convention in a way that proficiently illustrates McGregor’s own unconventional approach.
1 Area to Improve: The flow of the essay is stifled by the blank pages. Spreading the text across these pages with some relevant imagery could have maintained the energy you’ve created elsewhere in the publication.
Biography 2 Proposal:
1 Strength: Unfortunately, I can’t give a strength if I don’t have access to the document.
1 Area to improve: You clearly haven’t checked through your PDF otherwise you would have spotted this. In addition, there is no evidence of your Linked in learning.”
We have to mark each assessment criteria encompassing the following:
- Critical Practice project – Knowledge
- Biography 1 – Enquiry, Process, Realisation, Communication
- Biography 2 – Enquiry, Process, Realisation, Communication
- LinkedIn training: – Knowledge and Process
This student through a technical error (posting a password protected document) hasn’t provided ‘Biography 2’ in her submission. So combined with half of ‘Biography 1’ missing she can’t pass. But how do I equate that to grading if each element counts for different parts of the assessment criteria? So in order for it to make a fail I would have to mark all elements down to an F average. Furthermore, if her knowledge is solely the CPP which I would grade at a B would mean I’d have to pull the other elements down even further? So it would be graded:
- Enquiry: F
- Knowledge: B
- Process: F
- Communication: F
- Realisation: F
…which doesn’t reflect my feeling at all.
This a great example of where these criteria just don’t work. The division of efforts is impossible to equate fairly and the limitation of our feedback means I can’t fully communicate the positives of the submission. In addition, I know this student is having doubts about the course and in seeing these grades will no doubt put her off even more. I could just reach out to get access to the documents but professionally know that’s not an option. Realistically all I can do is ask for parity and try and fight her corner somehow.