I was nervously awaiting the return of my 3.2 work submitted for the Spring Assessment but in the end was busy doing other things and email slipped unnoticed into my mailbox. This always a nervous time of the year for me. A check on my progress with some feedback put together with formal mark to be used for my degree.

First things first then, my mark. I received a mark of 67% which was very close to my mark for 3.1 at 70%. Initially I was a little disappointed at this and it took me a couple of days of reflection to go back and read the comments and thinks about what was said and then produce this reflective piece. Why then the initial feeling of disappointment? I think I hoped for the amount of work I put in, especially on my dissertation, that this might have been better received. Having said this the comments were very positive. “Your dissertation is interesting and adds to the debates on the topic. You demonstrate a thorough range of relevant and detailed research, and apply strong fluent critical thinking.” Very positive comments with helpful feedback on how this work could have been improved by, “The assessors feel that this could be further refined into a more rigorous academic practice which uses counter-argument to further the argument and a deeper and more complex consideration of and engagement with sources. This would allow you to further establish your statements and support your theses.”  This feedback made me question my sense of disappointment and think to myself that my work was appreciated. I was amazed at final comment, “Nevertheless, you have proven yourself to be a strong writer, a strong thinker and committed to your development.” I have never considered myself a strong writer of academic texts and instead tried to focus my energies on making the dissertation readable with a sense of flow and interest. I was briefly frustrated at this feedback on how to improve my work wondering if it bolting door after horse has bolted. However, on reflection, I have to ask myself what my dissertation was for. Was it to be written then forgotten or was it there to be improved and passed on, perhaps to help others in the liminal space linked with loss and grief. It so happens that today a society I joined which focuses on death studies were in touch with me. The member secretary of the society, The Association for the Study of Death and Society, was very interested in my work and we discussed that many students enrolled within the sphere of death studies have a personal experience with loss. I asked about this dissertation or a revision of it might interest the society for publication in their journal and this will be taken to the society council in May for consideration. I was also invited to take part in a podcast. This will be interesting and stretching task to describe my work for an audience interested in death studies but without the background to my work with my OCA tutors and peer group have gained.

My assessment feedback then went onto speak on my creative and collaborative works. This was thought to be “interesting and varied” and that, “We also believe that this could have been a bit more tailored to your topic and considerate of your potential future audience.” Maybe there is an element here of assessors looking beyond 3.2 and indeed comments made on how I should consider my creative work for 3.3 based on what I have done in 3.2. “The final presentation of your work and the use of text is an important factor to consider, not only for assessment but for any type of publication of work. We feel that this approach could be reconsidered in terms of graphic design, presentation, visual cohesion and coherence.” I think this a crucial point. Looking beyond assessment and, by inference, marks. 3.2 is a stepping stone to 3.3 but actually that is a narrow way to consider it and of more importance if my own growth, in terms of learning and artistic practice but also in building on the emotional element of my work and in drilling down to how I want to present my finished work and what I want to do next. This final point also has an external element which is making progress. There is a Museum of Loss and Renewal based in Italy near to Naples and in the Orkney Isles. The Museum not a tradition place of objects but instead acts as an art project which offers space to artists for residencies. I thought that this would be a relevant opportunity based on my own research and might provide interesting creative opportunities. I have provisionally made contact with the curator and also with Creative Scotland about the potential for a grant. It is interesting that these threads came together as I was tossing and turning about what to make of the Assessment.

All in all, a very positive place to be having completed 3.1 and 3.2. Where I was initially a little downcast and upbeat and looking forwards to next steps.