The Media School

Coursework Feedback

2015/16

MA in Creative and Media Education

Level M

UNIT3: Pedagogy

Title of Brief: ‘Mixtape Habitus’ and Independently Curated Culture.

This assignment is a formal element of coursework worth 100% of the overall unit mark

Student’s Family name: Sloan.

Student’s First name: Greg.

FEEDBACK:

Criterion

Comment

1. Identification and critical analysis of an issue or problem related to your current creative or media teaching practice. Demonstrate that you have examined an issue or problem in your own teaching and/or current practices in your sector. (10%)

This project takes a very systematic approach to gathering a persuasive evidence base for its identified problem. Students’ cultural capital (what it is, and where they can get it) is the prime concern here, but, in a way which neatly sidesteps elitist prescribed notions of ‘culture’. Interviews, questionnaires and focus groups are carried out with staff and students.

2. Critical evaluation and application of relevant media education literature and practice. With reference to appropriate sources, demonstrate a detailed understanding of relevant theoretical and critical positions and current practices relevant to the issue or problem under scrutiny. (20%)

White quite subjective in places, and sometimes anecdotal, the project discusses recent education policy and their influences, as well as theoretical work from Bourdieu. There is a particularly good critique of Hirsch.

3. Identification and evaluation of relevant research methodologies, including action inquiry. Demonstrate that you have examined and evaluated appropriate research techniques which can help you analyse the issue or problem under scrutiny. (20%)

While the project self-identifies as action research – and there is a good discussion of what this is, and some reflection at the very end – it does not ‘look’ much like an action research project; it is difficult to see where the first cycle starts/stops, and while further work is planned in detail, again, it is difficult to see how it fits into an action research model. On the other hand, the presentation of data from the interviews and focus groups is excellent.

4. Production of a coherent and well-planned pedagogic response to the issue or problem under scrutiny. Show how you would initiate and manage positive change in response to your analysis of the identified issue or problem. (40%)

The pedagogic response and intervention is certainly well-planned; the ‘mixtape’ idea is nicely explained and justified, while students’ natural resistances are anticipated and accounted for. Sentences such as: “Mixtapes were also aware of their audience (a friend, a lover!) and this perhaps also allows students to prepare for life outside of school where all their acts of professional creation will be more audience focussed and driven” (p.17), are particularly persuasive.

5. Identification of an audience for the pedagogic plan of action (response to the issue or problem) and use of the appropriate register in communicating with that audience. It is important that you are able to demonstrate clear and effective communication with your intended target audience. (10%)

The audience is identified at staff/colleagues, although if a success, then this could also be used by teachers of other subjects. The discussion also highlights how the ‘mixtape’ could aid in university applications, etc.

Summary

This discussion is never less than lively and engaging, despite the occasional lapses into subjectivity. The problem is thoroughly researched and the findings are beautifully presented. The conclusions from these are then used to develop a pedagogic response, which seems effect and in tune with its audience. The project is honest about its limits and is realistic in its intentions. The (seemingly) side-issue of General Studies, and then getting the students to sit the last exam, was a great idea, which further support this project’s central concerns.

There are some issues: the abstract is essentially an introduction and the use (and reflection on) action research does fall off the agenda resulting in a ‘methods heavy, methodology light’ project. However, otherwise, this is a very successful project.

Moderator comments (Julian McDougall): I agree that this is a strong submission and the pedagogic response is well judged (the exploration of curation and habitus is really interesting) but the issues around the action research methodology prevent the higher classification.

First marker’s signature:

Moderator signature:

Date: 25th August 2016

5.9.16

Percentage mark awarded:

67%