This is a cumulative post where I detail my own perceptions of the group work sessions. These are tutor led with input from other 3.1 students.

6th Oct – Session 6 – Reflective Presentations & Evaluations

The presentation or evaluation is a part of assessment submission. The choice is up to the student but should meet the guinelines of a written document of 750 words or a 6 minute video presentation.

The choice is a matter of what student is most comfortable with so is a matter than depends upon your own strengths. In my last assessment at Level 2 I produced an initial written evaluation and for assessment I made a short video after tutor feedback which said I was able to convey more of a sense of myself and of my work through speaking. One interesting thought is that my previous video I used it to mix words and images but there is no reason why I could not add images into a written submission. Not just images of creative works but also mind maps and images of ideas.

A basic question is to consider what the purpose of the presentation or evaluation and what these should achieve?

• Help to make sense of learning journey.
• An opportunity to reflect on what you have read and written.
• A chance to consider any creative works you have looked at or created.
• To ask what has gone well or what can be improved or developed.
• To analyse and think about how you can further develop your skills and ideas.
• To reflect on your personal journey, how you here and where you are going?
• To identify key markers in your learning journey

We should consider our audience for the presentation or evaluation whether myself, other academics, assessors, tutor. Who is the audience?

The presentation or evaluation is about reflective learning.

 

8th Sept – Session 5 – Learning Outcomes Part ii

I reviewed this workshop using the recording rather than dialling in directly as was away with limited internet access whe workshop held.Workshop started with examples of each learning outcome phrased as a question and asking students how this change in approach worked for us.

Key point was that as a question this seemed to emphasise the learning outcomes as part of our own process and brought out personal thoughts. importantly this is a process to allow us to identify gaps, re-structure our research and creative work then re-evaluate this response to learning outcomes.

LO1 – Examine your emerging practice through a considered body of self-directed work

As a question this could become something like:

How have I used my self-directed body of work to consider a more complex and more critical approach which forms and shapes my creative practice? How is practice emerging from this process?

The considered body of self-directed work is what we have done on the unit so far in research and creative work and the emerging practice can be what we aim to be that might continue to evolve for the rest of our lives.

 

LO2 – Apply relevant research methods and subject knowledge to test, inform, and develop your work.

As a question this could become something like:

How am I applying relevant research method and subject knowledge to test, inform and develop my work?

What is the relevant research method?

This, as in Carlo Ginzburg’s Myths, Emblems and Clues, is about following a path or a track or evidence or steps left by our research methods and creative works as we perceive this evidence.

What was I reading as part of my research methods and what did that lead to as part of image creation and analysis?

 

LO3 – Present informed connections between your research and practice interests.

As a question this could become something like:

Am I/What are these connections/How do I present informed connections between my research and practice interests? What are these informed connections and how do I demonstrate these? Why do I do it this way and not in another way? Why this approach and not that approach?

There is a nuance here as 3.1 is concerned with preliminary research, the idea of research interests has not reached any kind of conclusion or destination.

LO4 – Articulate your creative ideas and critical thinking using suitable communication methods.

As a question this could become something like:

How do I perceive or articulate my creative ideas and critical thinking using relevant methods of communication?

Imagining or envisiging how the visual and written end product might look whether a video, a photobook, a dissertation or whatever.

One final thing of note on call was a short rule:

What is my photograph of?
What is my photograph about?
What does my photograph mean to me?

The next session might look at the shift from 3.1 to 3.2 or presentations and reflection output on our works.

 

11th Aug – Session 4 – Learning Outcomes

The learning outcomes for this unit are as follows:

LO1 – Examine your emerging practice through a considered body of self-directed work

LO2 – Apply relevant research methods and subject knowledge to test, inform, and develop your work.

LO3 – Present informed connections between your research and practice interests.

LO4 – Articulate your creative ideas and critical thinking using suitable communication methods.

We started by discussing what the learning outcomes were and what they were for. Learning outcomes in Photography 3 are regulated by each individual student’s research and creative output.

There were a few questions specific to assessment from the group and one suggestion was to use the learning outcomes or rather how we refine our understanding of these outcomes as an ongoing progress. At start of level 3 study, our understanding of these might shift some way to how we might understand these at end of 3.1. Another suggestion to try and look at our work holistically and try and find most relevant posts in our blogs which relate our practical and theorectical work plus introduces our own thoughts.

I wondered myself about assessment at 3.1 level and, from a personal development point of view, the value of assessment at this intermediate point in course.

The next session will explore learning outcomes at a more targetted level. Before then we should try and turn each outcome into a question rather than a statement.

 

14th July – Session 3 – Academic Proposals

I dialed into this call but was deep in grip of Covid so wasn’t at my best but regardless of that, here a summary of workshop.

The academic proposal forms part of literature review. The proposal is a gateway leading towards the next level of research. The proposal sits within a view of previous work and future works and possible direction of travel. It is important to consider the rationale beind my work; where is it going, why it is important to me and to the discipline of photography and in debates within photography. Importantly what is my research about and what is it not about? My chosen source texts are those which are most relevant to my research. Why are my chosen sources important to the understanding of my chosen subject? There is scope here to change or shape my understanding of this topic.

We spoke about key words and distilling down into just a few wods what our project and research is about. Why are these particular words necessary and important to my subject? The use of key words could form base for the proposal.

The next workshop is on learning outcomes but in future we will also look at the move from 3.1 to 3.2.

9th June – Session 2 – Literature Review

I couldn’t dial into this meeting directly so made use of the recorded meeting. Not ideal as unable to ask any questions but still far better than nothing.

I made 8 pages of notes on this meeting yet will try and distill my thoughts down to the most vital points covered. I hope these thoughts prove correct but at next feedback session will ask for feedback on my notes here.

The literature review connects and binds with the proposal for my dissertation. A crucial point is that literature review is about my research and my journey. What is important to me about my choices and interests and how I analyse and perceive my thoughts and how a particular point might impact me. Despite this appearing contradictory to what I have just written, the literature review should be based on my judgements rather than my opinions. One other thing to add here is that the literature review helps refine my practice and ideas from being broad and abstract to being much narrower and tightly focussed. At this stage, as am not certain on where my work is heading, this feels like something to look forwards to.

The dissertation itself forms part of the next unit in 3.2. The dissertation proposal and the literature review in 3.1 relate to my research involving reading relevant texts. I wonder here if the literature review is purely interested in texts or if my study of the work of other practitioners based upon my own experiments and creating my own visual pieces might in a way also form part of this review? It seems to me that practical creative works must also ask a question and seek to lead the audience on a journey and might present conclusions and if so can be analysed in a similar way to texts.

The literature review starts with a summary of critical sources I have used in my work. The literature must only use ‘proper souces’ by which I mean accredited, trusted sources so not blogs or wiki and not work from undergraduates. This summary involves looking at the main aim/s of the written work and the question the author asks. The review needs an evaluation to show how this question is answered in the conclusion and indeed how successful or unsuccesful the written work might be in answering the question it poses. The literature review isn’t at all the same as an essay whether a critical review or a disertation. Equally, it isn’t just a long list of reading materials. One of links provided by tutor from the University of Toronto says that the literature review is a piece of discursive prose. The University of Toronto document says that the literature review should “synthesise results into a summary of what is and is not known“. I wasn’t very clear what synthetise meant in this context so here is my understanding. I think what is meant here is that the series of texts for which I have provided a summary and evaluation should be reviewed to see how one compliments the next, so putting together the ideas from different sources into a coherent whole which relates to my own area of interest. This makes sense to me in how my own ideas and research will fit in with this synthesis and explains why every source I have looked at does not need to appear in the literature review.  The literature review relates to and helps make sense of the dissertation proposal and is backwards and forward looking. It looks back at what I have researched and what I feel is most relevant, but equally, as the sythesis is written, the literature review must be able to show gaps where I have not explored certain avenues. It feels like some kind of visual map might be useful here.

The literature review and the dissertation proposal has an element of review abut them. To view my work from a slightly different perspective apart from how I might look at it when very close to each written or practical piece I am studying and based on this different perspective to bring the potential to reconsider, to rethink and to articulate my work differently which in turn might mean a review and redraft of my literature review and proposal.

My tutor ended this long session with some homework which made me smile. To practice the approaches mentioned on this call and produce some drafts for student review and feedback and of course to look at their examples and to review and provide feedback.

 

5th May – Session 1 – Project Plan

There been lots of discussion amongst students about project plans. Questions been raised about how the plan sits within the confines of the unit, what it is for, how the work runs alongside the plan and how the work impacts the plan and how what is written impacts the work.

My own view of project plans based on what these been used for at work as a project manager. They nothing more than a tool to help with delivery of a project or a set piece of work. The plan can be as complex or simplistic as the project manager likes as this is really about personal preference. When I was delivering projects, the plan was used as follows:-

• to define what was needed to build the project
• to define a timescale for the project
• to mark down main milestones of what might be delivered
• to define external and internal requirements needed which might have been delivered outwith confines of my project
• financial management
• resource management
• the plan also tied closely together with managing potential risks and issues. The plan might need to be amended to overcome risks and issues.

I have always been conscious that I do not want to spend too long on an arts course working on a project plan so for me I see this as a background task.

The plan is about progress and allowing flexibility to change plan as we go. Often at the start the end point is not always clear. Projects do not often define what exactly the end point will look like. In my technical IT projects, I was often working without a technical design of what I was going to build and without a set of requirements from what the customer expected to see. So the idea of flexibility is key to the plan.

I built a couple of quick plans at start of course. One was a basic plan and one more complex (actually too complex). I only ever showed one to my tutor as the more technical of the two, which used the same software I would have used at work. I always considered this just a personal document for my own use. I show an image from this for illustration.

The specific elements of the Group Work call which I jotted down notes on were as follows:-

• that plan gives the document with which to gauge progress allowing backwards review of what been done so far and forwards contemplation of what to come.
• marking milestones – so fixed elements the project will deliver such as the dissertation, the literature review, research, reading, field trips, creative practical works
• fleshing out these milestones such as showing how literature will take shape and when or how to prepare and execute practical work or planning for dissertation

Based on what I learned, I can see what is expected from plan even though as I initially thought, this is a background task. The plan doesn’t need to be submitted for assessment. I will maybe spend a little (and I do mean a little) time just shaping my public plan to dig in a little more to the meat of the tasks so it is a little closer to my more detailed plan. Interestingly, I also used a simplistic time management / task managment plan for Photography 2 Digital Image and Culture although didn’t even think this worthy of discussion so didn’t mention it to my tutor at the time so didn’t submit anyuthing about that either. I saw this as an uninteresting grey detail of my practice at a very low level and which would be of no interest to anyone. Maybe just as an IT professional, something that was such an everyday thing I never thought this worth commenting on. As an aside, I worked beside woman who when she had builders in drew up a project plan to define their work schedule. Always made me smile the thought of moving office work into home environment. I bet the builders were delighted!

Group Work Call next month is on the Literature Review