Contextual Background (c.50 words):
I am the personal tutor to a study abroad group from the Singaporean art institute, Nanyang Academy of Fine Arts (NAFA). We meet every Friday and discuss their ideas which will then be finalised in a group exhibition.
Evaluation (c.100 words):
As NAFA’s coaching tutor my approach is dynamic and varied. I incorporate presentations, recap key teaching materials that they have done in other classes, and conduct one-on-one tutorials to provide personalised guidance.
A key challenge has been that NAFA students are unfamiliar with UAL’s assessment criteria and come from a completely different academic background, which can affect how they receive feedback and assess their work. Additionally, while they are not formally assessed by UAL’s marking criteria, they must still work within the courses guidelines.
Despite this, I have introduced NAFA students to UAL’s assessment criteria, ensuring they understand its meaning and how to approach it both practically and theoretically. The NAFA Study Abroad initiative introduces foreign students to diverse learning opportunities and alternative assessment methods. Through this experience, I have become increasingly mindful of ensuring that learning outcomes are met effectively and that critical engagement is progressing well.
Moving forwards (c.350 words)
Informal peer to peer assessment/feedback
From what I have been told NAFA students have not yet had peer to peer reviews of their work. I see this as a valuable opportunity to introduce them to this model of assessment and feedback, which can significantly enhance their learning experience.
As Race (2001, pg. 6) highlights, peer assessment allows students to gain insights into their own practice by evaluating the work of others. This process fosters a ‘deeper learning experience in itself than just reading or observing the assessment artefacts.’ (cite). Engaging in peer reviews encourages critical thinking, self-reflection, and a more active role in the learning process.
By using UAL’s assessment criteria as a framework, NAFA students can develop a clearer understanding of each criterion while also acknowledging alternative assessment methods. This approach not only familiarises them with different evaluation standards but also promotes a more independent and self-sufficient learning environment. I believe that shifting some responsibility away from tutors and empowering students to assess and critique each other’s work will create a more holistic, creative, and critically engaged learning space – ultimately leading to stronger academic and artistic outcomes.
However, I will not implement peer-to-peer assessment through formal means, such as summative evaluation methods. Instead, I will keep the process informal, allowing for a more flexible and organic exchange of feedback.
Danvers (2007, p. 3) states that “perspectivism involves a belief that knowledge is always partial, incomplete, and contingent. There can be no absolute, objective, or complete view on any subject.” Using perspectivism as a framework, I aim to encourage students to engage with diverse viewpoints and develop an adaptable, evolving approach to their work. Facilitating this through an informal peer review process will help students refine their intentions and expectations, fostering a more reflective and open-ended engagement with their creative and academic development.
References (additional to word count)
Race, P. (2001). A Briefing on Self, Peer and Group Assessment. LTSN Generic Centre, Assessment Series No. 9.
Danvers, J. (2007) ‘Qualitative rather than Quantitative: the assessment of arts education’, Networks, 1, pp. 14-19. Available at: http://arts.brighton.ac.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0010/59419/John-Danvers-article-Networks-1.pdf (Accessed: 18 March 2025).