Case Study 3

Assessing learning and exchanging feedback

Contextual Background

Crits 

The studio Crit is the format we use to present and evaluate work together in FCP. While I have a lot of experience facilitating peer discussion in various educational settings and moderating panels, I actually have had very little experience leading Crit spaces prior to beginning my role.

Evaluation 

The Crit format can be challenging both in terms of managing a large cohort of students which allows enough time for feedback, and ways to lead and facilitate a discursive and critical space. In December 2023 I was co-lead on what I regard a very unsuccessful crit for a research project Primary Source. Together, we settled on a formal front of the class presentation of student research, with tutor feedback following, and little space for peer feedback. While this allowed us to take notes for assessment, the energy in the room was terrible, and led to disengagement from students.

Moving Forwards 

I’d like to create a crit environment which empowers student voices, and fosters authentic communication from students and tutors alike; to redefine the crit as a space that prioritises student voice over tutor feedback (Written feedback is the ideal space for more focussed tutor feedback). To develop this, it may be helpful to work together with students through an open dialogue at the beginning of the academic year to unpick perception of what the Crit space is for

Communication styles –  What does it mean to be critical?

I would like to respond to feedback from a respected peer that I am not challenging the students enough. While I take on board there is space to improve my ability to ‘challenge’, my natural inclination is centred as a tutor as a moderator, and is geared towards ‘students working together to foster a sense of self reflective learning’ (Brooks) But perhaps the two don’t have to be mutually exclusive? 

How can authentic feedback be delivered in a way that is constructive rather than judgemental? I will use from Rosenburg’s NVC that separation of evaluation and 

Some students still crave the authority of a tutor, an older ‘harsh’ critique style that CSM fashion is notorious for, and are reluctant to move toward a peer led system. Alongside final crits, it will be vital to integrate more opportunities for peer led feedback throughout the year, encouraging and nurturing this environment for discussion. Students working in smaller groups and interim reviews for example. 

Reframe the Crit as a bridge to sharing work with an audience beyond class

I have already started to take action in response to PGCert readings. For a recent brief, Fashion Film Now, myself and colleagues chose to reframe the Crit as Film Club. A lot of pre-planning was required on behalf of tutors to organise student content for sharing, while students had to pay careful attention to  industry standard submission guidelines for screenings that ran to a tight deadline. We split the cohort into 2 groups and I used hybrid learning tools in the form of a Miro board helping to facilitate discussion and draw out student voices.

Following on from this, a selection of films were screened at the Everyman Cinema KX as part of Knowledge Exchange partnership, with films were chosen via an anonymous vote. 

Connecting peer led crits with live opportunities to show work outside of the University setting will be a valuable approach to continue.

Reading/ References  

Brooks, K (2008) Students critique of feedback  Art, Design and Media, Networks

Willcocks, J & Mahon, K (2023)  The potential of online object-based learning activities to support the teaching of intersectional environmentalism in art and design higher education Art, Design & Communication in Higher EducationVolume 22 Number 2