Seminar: Models & Theories of Learning
This session reflected on the respective task reading, as a group activity. We also looked at; deconstructed and reconstructed, the marking matrix currently in use for UG assessment. As a group this was a very insightful exercise – mostly thanks to my particular peers on this occasion. We considered what prejudices we may hold, personally and institutionally, and how we might make the process more transparent and fair. We then assessed each other, using our new criteria, on our ability to having worked collaboratively througout the seminar. This aspect seemed less useful in this particular instance, but I personally think it would be a fantastic way to moderate crits, which can become rather harsh or not especially constructive within pee-peer assessment. Among teachers, we were far too conscientious and the marking was not particularly nuanced. Instead, we used the opportunity to reflect on what each other’s strengths were throughout the seminar, and perhaps what could be improved. Below is an image of how I was assessed by my peers.
The session concluded with a 2 minute presentation on a subject (unprepared) of our choice among different, smaller groups. I chose to talk about my passion project, which are the dance lessons I currently teach outside of UAL. The questions proposed at the beginning by Lindsay were very pertinent for any speaker and, what I found most useful, was the idea of setting ahead of a presentation, 1/2 goals of what you want the listeners to take away. This removes the pressures of formal speaking (reading out papers at a conference, for example) and, instead, focusses the work toward a common goal. I try to do this with my own lectures in that I always set outcomes for the lecture that I share with the students, which we then reflect on (assess my lecture) at the end. For example:
- To understand the critical concept of XYZ
- To be able to think of your own example that problematises/reflects this concept
- To be able to answer the essay question