Session/artefact to be observed/reviewed: Interim Review – Afternoon session
Size of student group: 8
Observer: Tim Stephens
Observee: Andrea Francke
Note: This record is solely for exchanging developmental feedback between colleagues. Its reflective aspect informs PgCert and Fellowship assessment, but it is not an official evaluation of teaching and is not intended for other internal or legal applications such as probation or disciplinary action.
Part One
Observee to complete in brief and send to observer prior to the observation or review:
The Situations interim reviews are a specific type of crit that function as a formalized formative assessment preparing the students to Degree Show, the first and only time in which students work is directly assessed.
Interim review sessions are scheduled for all students and happen in the context of Situations, a series of exhibitions focused on developing their installation and realization skills. Situations used to be a quite straight forward in-college show for them to start prepping for the degree show but students’ feedback asked for more directed training and preparation. We have prepared these weeks in collaboration with the build and tech teams.
Situations happens just after the submission of their Unit 9 (dissertations) so many of them haven’t had time to make new work. They are allowed to install old work or work that wasn’t made by them because we focus on the skills and decisions involved in making a work public. After a week of skill sessions, install, crits with external guests, among other events we use the interim review crits as peer-group assessment to explore how we as a group would assess the work they’ve done for Situations. We will focus on the decisions involved in making work public, since this is at the center of all the learning outcomes in this unit and closely relatedly to install decisions.
Because the weeks are organized according to different mediums, the students are randomly allocated to tutors that are not their Tutor Group Leader. I co-run year meetings, the lecture programme and many across year sessions so most students will know me even if I don’t know them. These are very difficult sessions to run and only my second time running them. I know from last year that most tutors find them almost impossible to run because students tend to quickly move towards giving As to everyone. Most tutors last year gave up and run them as regular crits. I’ve planned a different strategy this year to help me stay in track. Although I’ll still focus on decision, intention and what the work is actually doing; I’m going to start the discussion of every work by proposing it is ‘satisfactory’, ‘D’, and then ask the students to point out what evidence we could find that would move upwards or how can we as a group think about different strategies that would develop those learning outcomes.
You will join in the second half of the session, after lunch so I hope we will have developed a productive group dynamic by then. The main issues I would like to get feedback on are:
- How do the students engage with the idea of group-assessment in relation to the learning outcomes. Do they engage with the opportunity or would other form of crit be more useful.
- Group dynamics management. I still find it quite hard to hold space for quieter students that might have serious anxiety issues.
I’ll let the students know about the observation at the beginning of the session in the morning and just before we restart after lunch. I’m hoping that since they are not my students, it will not be too disruptive.
Note:
Learning Outcomes:
Realization: You will apply considered practical and conceptual working methods in the production of a consolidated body of work.
Knowledge: You will evidence an understanding and awareness of the work’s relationship to its public and to a diversity of discourses.
Experimentation: You will understand your practice as the dynamic relationship between artists and audience demonstrating your awareness of the ethical and inclusive considerations of your practice and its actual outward-facing significance, deploying safe methods in the way you make and exhibit.
Communication: You will articulate your practice effectively towards given cultural contexts.
Enquire: You will identify, select and discuss information and evaluate modes of presentation that are productive for the making public of your work.
Part Two
Observer to note down observations, suggestions and questions:
The method I use for everyone’s teaching observations is to try and note the progress of the session – this is really to remind you of the session so you can recall it. I will not cover everything you said in such complex tutorials as these. Then, I comment on any issues arising. I use “ “ to indicate actual speech and [ ] to make comments or describe. T2 is second tutor.
1st Student in the Gallery
[First piece, the monitor low down, in front of bench with fake grass painted white, person with scratches on back, and scrawled statement indecipherable.
[The students are confident and know immediately how to talk about each other’s work. One, with short brown hair, is being very articulate about the scene depicted.
[The low perspective, the subject, what the words sys…’handlebars’
AF: Is it important to you that we know..? [Great question that sets up more possibilities
[Sts talks about this…explains illegibility, happy with the ambiguity
[More vocal student discusses more…no sense of threat to the person depicted…sense of relationship between model and photographer/videographer..is it voyeuristic…sense of protection…’are you comfortable talking about the process’ [This was a very respectful almost model of good practice peer review sensitivity, so however you got to this point, something is working well in the culture of the Crit in this context…
[Artist explains, about actual scratches…using make up…and the illusion…but the process of exploring the painful…
AF: What do you think about this space [you draw attention to the installation
Different relationship with the image, right?
[Another student (sitting on floor) speaks about it as a sculptural piece and being close to the screen…’made me question if I was invited into the space or not’ [Again another wonderful peer intervention, sensitive, conscious of context of presentation and engagement…
AF: Haven’t seen people sitting, it’s really interesting..because the wires, a really weird relationship to this as an object [You have a very friendly and natural style, relaxed with students, not ‘superior’ but on their level using accessible language focussed on the experience
[The group discusses the space and position of the screen, wires and what affect it creates
AF: …lots of people…came close [You invite the other tutor to come in..[Great team working
T2: Asking about the experience and whether it is congruent with students expectations ..
[Artist discusses branding…changes, of mind an plan..
T2 people come with their own…explains more
[Vocal student. definite ambiguity to it, knowing your work in the past…there is possibility of kink or BDSM cultures..sexual violence, ambiguity and sexuality is present…have you explored other relationships to pain and mark making on skin..? [A sophisticated question and questioning…
Discussion between students…[interesting when this happens; the crit is ‘activated’ in the group, which is a ‘success’ of the format in your hands, well done
[Artist has not, but finds it interesting as connotations and reading [she is now relaxed and being very vocal and communicative in return
T2, explains the artist’s agency and aim…[ goes on to cite a book on Catherine Opie..perhaps as a teaching team you are very much on the same page here
AF: yeah that’s what I was going to say, because to me this is a such as, and knowing your work, and history, there’s a tradition in feminist art
T2 yeah, yep
AF to do similar work, and there’s something really interesting about this repetition over time and what you were saying..but joining those artists and all of those problems are still the same problem…is that something…did you know that work..?
T2…I did read about Opie’s approach…the enquiry…the method…[talks about the rigour in her work
[Artist talks about her intentions, approach and practices…goes back to the installation theme and context
St voice…
[The white cube space and the pillar, other spaces…
T2 joins in this space discussion…about the ‘domestic’ in the installation..
AF: it does depend on the construction of what is the domestic, it could be intimacy and closeness…[you move over to the work…talk about touch, and proximity; this is a wonderful theoretical intervention where you re-translate what the domestic might be…
“The domestic could be other codes…preparing..,but it’s so violent but doesn’t feel violent it feels caring…
St. relationship of care with model and mark making, set up…
T2 Politics of uncertainty, ambiguity…explains more about discomfort on the bench set up…advises owning the discomfort in the installation…
AF even that they are on the bench…closer…specific relationship…interesting [about the specificities of installation [You are bringing the group’s attention to the mateirlaity of the work, fundamental aspect of the Crit
St..join in…
Artist; also..
Goes back to discussion of the scratched words…
St. What is the position of the viewer… are they witnessing…[great question too
Artist explains and discussion about the vulnerability of the model…
AF: [you bring in another student] Any thoughts…? [you bring in the quiet student to speak…Neatly done, without fuss and direct…
Crit continues.
AF The grading, we are starting with satisfactory…now what evidence is there…[You introduce the strategy, and I see that it does really work as a scaffolded discussion
[Students join in the discussion. This is a great intervention and again activates the Crit as an assessment scenario, it’s a shift in gear, in energy…
[Crit continues -with additional depth – now with the contexts of value/judgement. [However, they are still engaged, moreso
AF: 100% agree with you…[laughter, you managing the discussion of grades with a level of care and consideration
T2 …Las Vagas or South End [talking about ‘realisation’
AF: Do you think we should move it up…[Grade…
What do you feel…other decisions made…would this be something you are happy with… [you (both tutors) dialogue with the artist directly which is good in this context
St discussion on professional gallery contexts
AF [discussion on the work’s relation to sculpture
T2 give yourself time…overt critical attention…be prepared to justify…things you will learn…
St. Did you have to have a conversation about trigger warnings about this..? [Good and direct question back in crit mode, so fairly seamless…after grade discussion which is v. positive outcome in terms of your question as to how this works…i.e. leads to further engagement
Discussion on this as a group, around T2 ‘safe’ …longer discussion at another level, evaluative…
St. very vocal…
AF Interesting what you’re saying, the work holds itself…[Or the model, the way she has a hand on her own shoulder
T2 …
AF …how much you can get from the person filming…
[The discussion naturally concludes and you bring it to an end with time and schedule comments, this is good tutor management, as we move to the new space
2nd Student in new block
AF Shall we have a look first….
AF You initiate the questions and engagement…
T2 [signals an interest in one of the four works [Personally, I feel this is a “mistake”, when. A tutor expresses a strong personal preference early on in a Crit, it derails the process of the open criticality and questioning, mainly because the person has more power than others i.e. their opinion “matters”
AF Why this one and not this one…[You tackle this as best you can
T2 Actions and the body…
[At this point the crit continues in the same or similar manner in terms of process but I’m afraid the Crit process feels now, as to have an unworkable bias, or object, in the way of an open and exploratory discussion.
[Artist talks more about her process [quietly
AF you explore the making…[you also seem to me to try and retrieve a few themes
T2 printing press?
Artist…charcoal
AF you press…drawing, [trying to work out the method and its uniqueness
AF It feels like its quite important…this is so much about the body as well…[you bringing in the materiality of the process as also embodied, wonderful interventions in very difficult circumstances showing your great skill and commitment to equality in the process and treating students with equity
[My judgement here is perhaps swayed by my feelings about T2’s approach]
[Discussion continues…about the installation of additional information…
T2…on process, etching, etc.direction..
AF There’s something quite amazing about looking at an object and you have no idea…this is not a drawing…not an etching….not water based.…its very rare…I don’t know how this is made…[This is a very positive and affirmative approach, that works very well, and is also ‘true’ to the work in my opinion
T2 you’ve got a chance to figure it out..
AF Something that is not legible….
T2 sometimes…sometimes…as artists we can lack confidence…”need to step out, good and bold” [misreading body language and NVC, I’m not sure T2’s comments are not a little biased – is there another message her to the student, a type of frustration that she wants her to be more confident in terms of her speaking (in normative judgement)
[My sense is that this work is pushing T2’s boundaries…
T2 [Says a lot of things, quite complex vocabulary]. “can you tolerate my swell of narrative”…”My question comes back to you” .”What was your intention…” [problem inherent in western modalitiy of tutor-student relationship, I am not happy with how this is going!
Artist : silence [long
AF…You started to tell us at the beginning about your intention…about books…[Encouraging and scaffolding, brilliant work I must say, you try and rescue the situation and something of the student’s ‘face’, which is an important concept in East Asian culture.
Artist starts talking about her ideas…[You also get a very positive response which is articulate and shows that your ‘respect’ has worked…
T2…[adds in more “you have this platform” [I might say good cop/bad cop also sometimes happens in 2 tutor crits…
AF: when I make work…people know this…are you comfortable…for people that know this technique…[You try and structure a relational discussion
AF:…this is amazing…black artists create work…and this create transparency….lots of people look through…and they make that choice…[You structure a brilliant intervention around what is perceivable given cultural difference…* I’d like to ask you for this reference! *
“maybe that’s just something for you to think about…” [talking directly to artist
It’s about choice…
Artist: she responds to you and elaborates….
AF: clues…subjectivity…ambiguity…is that more of the direction you…[You are working well, and working quite hard to build communication bridges…
T2…what did you want [problem here is underlined by cultural differences between the ‘you’ ‘I’ and the ‘work’ there is a westernisation in the discourse of T2, i.e. it is very individualistic in its language/assumptions: “does it do what you wanted it to do…” “What do I understand…” “ This isn’t critical just inquiry, I want to understand more…” [My sense is she is really struggling with the work herself…evidenced in the air time not being fully distributed amongst the group of students in the Crit, not student centred…and now having to justify her own position of preference for one particular of the four objects…”not about liking the work…”[!] Having to backtack.
Artist cannot respond to her.
Discussion continues…
AF…interesting…about the……there is. Technique, a choice…its not an accident…[You talk positively about the work’s evident qualities in manufacture
Artist speaks a bit more…
T2 Thank you, that is really…[Appreciative…a kind of resolution occurs between T2 and the Artist, a huge relief, and wekll rescued by T2
T2 Layers, process meaning…[She may well have had some very valid points, but perhaps ‘jumped the gun’, in stating them so soon in the Crit
AF Sometimes things …so interesting…perspective here…not just flat…you go to the work to explore in more detail and speak it out loud…[Great Crit technique of non judgemental description – brilliantly done
… AF…you want to do this…? The grading…[You address this directly to the Artist first, which is a very ethical decision in the circumstances, given her social standing and risk of losing face again
“So, we start with a D satisfactory…….a …strong decision… so go to a C
“The richness of the concepts behind it
[Students…now start to really articulate some valuable qualities of the work] [This again to me, equivalent to a moment in the first tutorial, where the Crit is ‘activated’ by the students. I feel quite emotional. They suddenly now, on your intervention to address the Grade start to vocalise more nuanced thoughts and feelings about the work, your strategy unlocks the creative thinking of the group. And perhaps their sense of equality.
“I feel there are other thing that need to be considered….[A Student starts with this amazing line…
AF …you clarify
“I do think that there is something…[and this one
“Not being afraid…existing in the lightness of the space
“Feel its very fragile…the wall is empty at the same time…printed on paper obviously…
“Weight and weightlessness
…[referring back to the mounting and install discussion earlier…
“I’m curious that….feel very [etc. excellently done by the Students!
AF So, it’s a B?
Few more comments…
AF you agree…? [with the artist, wonderfully sensitive…and excellent conclusion to the drama of the Crit. This was a tremendous recouperation of educational value. Excellently done.
Summary and Key Points
That was quite an emotional experience for me to observe how you implemented the Crit and its culture, as well as its values, so beautifully and brilliantly. I am very impressed. There were some tricky moments in the second half that you steered around, and navigated with great skill. I was holding my breath!
Values, keeping student esteem and the Artist’s well being in mind. This was accomplished in both cases, very differently.
Attention to the materiality of the work, attended to throughout.
Try looking at the Crit literature, Orr and Shreeve on Art School Evaluation and their bibliography for starters to articulate your efforts in shared terms, which you may know already.
I have commented on issues throughout in square brackets, are there any issues you see arising from these comments.
You might want to address concepts/practices such as groupwork and group dynamics, the notion of ‘face’ and types of shame/esteem in E. Asian culture, centring the “work” not the “individual”; the role of ambiguity, the way we can speak about violence in a neutral way (which again you managed to do), the positive use of self and peer evaluation (I will share an article for reference, and its bibliography).
Your role – great facilitation skills. The use of positivity and positive affirming words and tones (you signal enthusiasm very clearly).
Tips for development; not sure I have any immediate suggestions apart from the ones on Crit and authentic assessment.
If you wanted to review tutor relations, and discuss the Crit format with T2, it may or may not be appropriate, nor easy, that might be something… Opening a discussion on E Asian student crit participation…who knows, may lead to an interesting discussion.
For dramatic value, this was a wonderful experience to witness! and I’m deeply grateful and appreciative for the support, encouragement and insights you give to your students – thank you and very well done.
Part Three
Observee to reflect on the observer’s comments and describe how they will act on the feedback exchanged:
Tim’s feedback was such an emotional and rewarding experience to read. I didn’t realize how stressful it would feel to have someone observing me in a crit. Having a much more senior member of staff joining the crit at the last minute was quite a challenge in that sense because it’s different to try to be purposefully as much invisible as possible as a learning infrastructure when someone next to you is invested in performing authority.
As I think I’ve mentioned before, I have a lot of issues with art-school crits and it’s not something I feel very confident about. I’ve had horrible experiences in crits during my own education and I know many artists who had the same experiences. When I did my PGDip and BA at Chelsea there was a clear distinction between a certain type of British white male middle class student that was rewarded for “generously solving” other student’s work by pointing out of their failures, and all the other students who inhabited minoritized intersectional identities. Now that I’m older, I’ve realized how unhelpful that dynamic was to everyone in the room and I really try to create a different type of learning environment while also being aware that it might not look like I’m performing knowledge or authority in a way that reassure students and other members of staff that learning is happening.
I’ll look at all the references and try to use this experience as a push to become more confident in my take on the crit and maybe I’ll find a way to start looking forward to them.
My reference about invisibility and transparency is from the third chapter of Tina Post’s Deadpan Aesthetics, The Opacity Gradient. It’s an incredible book on Black Art aesthetics.
I also just found an amazing book on the role of tactility and reproduction methods in Chinese art that I think will help that student articulate and contextualize their work: Networks of Touch: A tactile history of Chinese Art, 1790-1840 by Michael J. Hatch. https://newbooksnetwork.com/networks-of-touch To me, this is one of the most enjoyable aspects of these crits, I get to work with students I don’t know and that means we can push each other outside of the comfortable boundaries of our knowledge. There is something incredibly enjoyable about encountering work that is beyond the current limits of your capacity to think and understand work. I hope the students experience these crits as a nurturing of that enjoyment. That they don’t need to “solve” things or make them into art that they can understand and then judge, but that together was get used to the discomfort, pleasure and potentials of not-knowing.