Case Study No. 17 - Vocal Skills: Sonnet project, Central School of Speech and Drama

Elements addressed by study

Special Features: 

Random group selection, as opposed to previous self-selection, group programme mark + feedback + personal Reflective Journal for individual process mark.

Description of Key Aspects:

Historically the groups of two, three or four have been self-selected for this project, but this year groups of twos were selected randomly i.e. names from a hat.  This was at the request of the External Examiner who felt self-selection often ended up with groups of either stronger or weaker students together, with some students being left out in the process and having to work wherever they could be accommodated.  It was also recommended that the group of 16 be divided into couples, as this was tidy. Previous students had felt that groups of 4 were too large.

The material used in the programme is self-selected. As a minimum, the programme must consist of 1 individual sonnet recital per person and 1 group sonnet recital and then it is down to the discretion of the group as to how the rest of the material is balanced between group and individual speaking.  The presentation has to be equivalent to 4-5 minutes per group member.  The process is student led and supported by a Project Journal, detailing aims and objectives, working process and learning outcomes.  Through this, the showing and the short de-briefing session with the group after the performance the individual journey is assessed.  Each group receives a mark for its programme, based on the demonstration in the showing of the students’ abilities to work as an ensemble and the creation and presentation of an interesting and varied programme of sonnets and other material (20%). Each student receives an individual written feedback from staff on the showing as summation of the two terms’ class work and their current vocal performance (30%).  The journal of the individual process receives 50% of the total.

Analysis

The students are mature bringing professional experience in the way of acting or teaching, in the main, and most have experienced working within groups first hand. However their induction to group dynamics is essential and has been regularly looked at. Ongoing practice is that the Course Leader deals with issues that arise from or within the group during his pedagogical seminars and workshops. This is key as these students are leaving the course with a teaching qualification and their individual and personal processes within the group need to be taken into the teaching situation. The Reflective Journal is a tool for assessing the individual journey within this particular collaborative project. It includes documentation of process and development, with particular regard to personal vocal discoveries and development; awareness of and contribution to the group process; preparation and execution of the project, evaluation of the results and implications for further learning arising from these; personal research; and ongoing reflection on developing professional competencies.

The role of the External Examiner in the marking of the Sonnet Project is as a moderator of the profile of marks agreed by the Internal Examiners.  The External Examiner does not contribute to the assessment of individuals.  Thus, if the External thought that the marking of the cohort as a whole was too generous, s/he could recommend to the Examination Board that the overall profile of marks be reduced by a certain percentage.  Similarly, if s/he thought the marking too harsh, the overall profile could be raised.  S/he can also suggest modifications to the format of the Sonnet Project in order to ensure that individuals are treated fairly within the overall assessment - hence the suggestion that people work in pairs, which have been randomly selected.  The External Examiner will see the Project showing, or certainly have access to the video recording of it and will be sent samples of the Reflective Journal that have been first and second marked by internal examiners.

Evaluation:

The result of this random selection has been positive. The collaborative practice has thrown up the usual group issues though in a diluted form, partly due to the selection procedure but also because of the work being done by two people only. The random selection proved challenging for some but relationships outside the course will need to be met with equivalent professional skill and conduct. Fortunately this time round the combinations were workable although within the group one combination would have proved untenable and a strategy for resolving this would have had to be devised. The hat could not have been passed round again – the situation would have had to be carefully negotiated between the tutor and the group itself.  A creative solution to such a situation will depend on the group and the specific context of the collaboration.  

Group behaviour is an issue from time to time most years. This course is a very pressured one and nerves get frayed and tiredness kicks in as the workload and responsibility increases. It can be surprising and unhelpful when ‘storming’ * occurs at the end of the taught class period as there is nowhere for a resolution to take place, as each student’s focus is on her or his Independent Project in the third term.  The student counsellor, whose expertise happens to be group dynamics, has in the past given an induction.

*See Guidelines for Effective Group Behaviour, FDTL Assessing Group Practice