 |
 |
Hi Christine et al, At LSBU I ran a presentation-only accredited scheme - limited resources meant we didn't have capacity to mark portfolios or watch asynchronous presentations. The format sounds much like Christine is proposing. A half-hour presentation to a panel of Senior/Principal Fellows (2 + a chair), a private panel discussion followed by about a quarter of an hour's conversation arising from the claim. We had, early on, a nervous claimant who.reax every word from their PowerPoint, so can say with some certainly that half an hour = +-3500 words. We used a map of the sub-dimensions of the UKPSF to notate where claimants met the requirements. Hope that helps 😊, Kind regards Ruth On 3 Mar 2017 5:28 p.m., "Jason Davies" <[log in to unmask]> wrote: Dear Christine and everyone As Nicole just mentioned, we have a multimedia option (not a live presentation) in UCL Arena. This replaces part of the application, specifically the case studies that form the largest part of the application (at least in word-count). The rationale is that it's fairer to people whose fields and expertise are less textual. Applicants are given a fairly free rein and have been known to include short interviews with students. If you're thinking about assessing, I'd throw these thoughts in: - you can get a really interesting kind of engagement this way. However, it's not as easy to work with for either applicants or assessors as it might first appear: For applicants: - the standards for video production are tricky. Video editing is extremely time-expensive. You might want to get round this by saying eg it should be a 15-minute talking head or slides/graphics with voiceover, or some kind of 'live shot' that won't have them up all night editing to get it right. - shots of students active are great but you need permission - audibility is actually more important than picture quality For assessors - it's very difficult to scan back over a video in the way you can text to double-check if they meet the descriptors. This means you have to take a lot of notes as you go along -- it's quite an intensive activity - you can get errors eg in playback that you are not sure are in the original (eg stuttering) - until you've done a few, it's hard to tell what works. In haste, those are the issues that come to mind. I'd always have it as an option rather than mandated, and keep the bar low or they'll spend ten times as long as is needed. Hope this helps, interested in others' thoughts too. Jason On 3 Mar 2017, at 14:16, Christine Smith wrote: My question to you, good colleagues, is to ask if you have done something similar and any guidance you might offer. I'd be more than happy to collate responses to share with others. -- Dr Jason P Davies Interim Director, UCL Arena <https://www.ucl.ac.uk/teaching-learning/professional-development> UCL Arena Centre for Research-Based Education <http://www.ucl.ac.uk/teaching-learning/about-us/arena-centre> (formerly CALT) 10th Floor, 1-19 Torrington Place, London, WC1E 7HB @JasonPtrDavies <https://twitter.com/JasonPtrDavies> Visit the UCL Teaching and Learning Portal <http://www.ucl.ac.uk/teaching-learning> <https://www.ucl.ac.uk/teaching-learning/professional-development>