Group Size
?
1.) Small group (teams of 4-6)
2.) Individual Task
3.) Large Group
4.) Any
Large Group
Learning Environment
?
1.) Lecture Theatre
2.) Presentation Space
3.) Carousel Tables (small working group)
4.) Any
5.) Outside
6.) Special
Special
QAA Enterprise Theme(s)
?
1.) Creativity and Innovation
2.) Opportunity recognition, creation and evaluation
3.) Decision making supported by critical analysis and judgement
4.) Implementation of ideas through leadership and management
5.) Reflection and Action
6.) Interpersonal Skills
7.) Communication and Strategy
2Opportunity recognition‚ creation and evaluation
3Decision making supported by critical analysis and judgement
Objective:
Introduction
Activity
This activity is undertaken in semester 1 of a second year course of study (15 weeks – 2.5 hour sessions with anticipated 2.5 hours private study per week) and runs across all Visual Communication and Design courses. Each course’s relevance is ensured as the framework can be adapted to specific study areas and alumni inform the actual project – so as to ensure relevance and to maintain student motivation (See: Continuous Conceptual Review Model). The sample offered here is for two cohorts (approximately 50 students) from the film and media production courses and from the Advertising and Brand Management course – who will subsequently engage in an interdisciplinary module.
The following provides an outline of the activity as delivered to these disciplines, and was first introduced in 1995 following alumni feedback on the value of their educational experiences. Other disciplines use their own alumni and realistic contexts.
Week 1.
Students expect the lecturer to lead the class, but an unannounced stranger is brought in (alumni - in person or via skype) who asks the group about their career aspirations and challenges their understanding of the world of work. He or she explains their busy lifestyle and asks them to quickly help him or her with a problem they have – how to visualise a brand for a new academy of creativity, but explain that they have to go and leave them to it. Normally 90-95 per cent of responses include a light bulb.
Week 2.
Student’s have been discussing the individual and although not told, want to question the alumni about their work (curiosity based learning). The alumni, still in a rush, starts to explain that the headmaster for this new school will be Sir Humphrey Davy… then the connection is lost. Quick internet searches reveal that this is a historical project, as Sir Humphry Davy lived in 1778 – 1829 and that his work preceded the invention of the light bulb. Past work is discarded (with occasional moans and groans) and new research starts into historical images that represented creativity - prior to the invention of the light bulb. New / alternative ideas start to emerge.
Towards the end of the session the alumni reconnects / re-enters the room and takes questions about their work as a freelance storyboard writer for major TV companies. Scripts are discussed and student interest gained – a promise to see a script is made by the alumni.
Week 3.
An outline of a TV script is presented to students by the alumni. They or another alumni start to explain how camera angles and specialist instructions such as close ups or super close ups need to be incorporated in the storyboards. Examples from well know TV programmes or Films are shown when possible. With support from the alumni, students attempt to develop a storyboard through acting out the script and noting important aspects such as emotional engagement. Identification of the brand is central to the story line.
Week 4.
The alumni explains that he or she has just met the producer, who is happy for them to see other scripts for later episodes. Episode two has the main character Davy waking up in the future and looking at a barren landscape, one which is littered with light bulbs - which is now a thing of the past. The alumni explains that their brand has to survive the passage of time and that it has to be recognisable in the year 2020. Research into potential future understanding of creativity commences and students envisage / storyboard a potential future scenario based on the script.
Week 5.
The alumni / staff set up an opportunity for the students to pitch their ideas to the alumni. They have an hour to prepare a presentation and are requested to discuss and argue a minimum of three ideas. This was unexpected. After 20 -25 minutes the alumni asks them to limit their presentation to one or two minutes, so that he / she can hear them all. Students are asked at random to present. Time may run out and alumni ask students to make a PDF version to email (via staff).
Week 6.
The alumni explains the future direction of the time travelling Davy, and introduces the idea that he may meet aliens in his travels. Some students have already discovered Davy claimed this through their research. The task now is to create a pitch as to why aliens would find the brand design that they are developing to be credible.
Weeks 7 – 9
Students develop their storyboards and at least 3 brand ideas in the sessions. More in depth research is undertaken and initial concepts re-evaluated and iteratively developed. Arguments for the solutions are mapped and explained as reflective mind maps – so as to illustrate the thinking journey.
Week 10.
With 2 or more alumni present or available via Skype, students are asked to consider how this kind of work could be best assessed and who should assess it? Using a proforma, students suggest how their could be meaningfully evaluated. Through discussion, research, and assisted by appropriate lines of questioning by the educator and alumni, the idea of flexibility, adaptability and the requirement for multiple solutions emerge. Students come to realise that their response to change is a key factor and that when faced with incomplete data (QAA, 23 states “students can be required to work with incomplete information or information that is incrementally offered after a review of their initial findings”). As multiple and responsive outcomes are the most important aspect, the theory of divergent production is introduced, i.e. more solution developing capabilities, many alternative solutions that respond to change, plus the value of distinctiveness of ideas (similar solutions being less creative than distinctly different ones).
Week 11 – 13
Students develop their ideas further, in the knowledge that the alumni will be commenting and advising the educator, and that they will be assessed on the distinctiveness of a range of ideas that relate to the assignment given to them by the alumni. These will be evidenced by charts that illustrate the critical elements of their research and how the research informed their solutions. In simple terms, the more divergent the thinking the more complex the charts, hence students can easily recognize the range of solution development that has taken place in a clear and transparent manner.
Week 14 – 15
Pitches take place and the alumni adds their thoughts and comments. Assessment is based on the range of alternative ideas, the divergence of alternative ideas and their ability to be used flexibly in the scenarios described in the scripts supplied by the alumni.
Note: later, in the next semester’s module, the process continues and approximately 5 weeks into the projects each class will be provided with a theory session on brain functionality and how these kinds of activities enhance ‘aha’ moments of creative discovery (See: Penaluna, A., Penaluna, K and Diego, I. (2014) The role of education in enterprising creativity. In Sternberg R and Krauss, G. (2014) Handbook of Research on Entrepreneurship and Creativity. Cheltenham / Massachusetts: Edward Elgar). Thus practice informs personal theory development and theory follows practice, “reflective practice enables students to ‘join the dots’ of past experiences and perceptions” (QAA, 14).
Impact:
The assignment is constructively aligned (Biggs, 2003) as it enables students to demonstrate their skills and responses in meaningful and relevant (to their studies) scenarios that engage true to life experiences of alumni – who are partners in the process / most of whom have now experienced it for themselves in their own education and are familiar with the concepts.
Of interest is that the assessment strategy is often new conceptually and structurally, but through debate and discussion (week 10) the students feel engaged and very aware of the goals – which are not as they first perceived.
The assignment also leads into later QAA areas, for example they learn to “robustly justify their decision making processes” (QAA, 17) and includes “pitches to peers and expert advisors” (QAA, 23) that involves “feedback from different viewpoints” (QAA, 26).
Moreover, aspects of decision making supported by critical analysis and judgement (QAA, 19) can be evidenced in this and later assignments based on the same approach. Specifically, the assignment discussed here adopts the following QAA (19) guidance on delivery approaches:
Learner outcome:
The impact of engaging alumni with students is immeasurable and has impacted across the course. Seeking views from Alumni, their response to this approach was incredibly strong (as this ‘flash survey’(2015) below shows).
When asked about support (or otherwise) for learning environments where the working environment was simulated in their studies (through incomplete information, shifting deadlines and reference to newsworthy events that would impact on their solutions / fit within their personally identified problems to solve (briefs)) Alumni overwhelmingly confirmed its importance.
Question: Before students work with real clients, & to help get them, lecturers should simulate reality & change deadlines / add info to projects as they go along. (E.g. Partial assignments are issued & newsworthy events make it more real).
|
Question |
Strongly Disagree |
Disagree |
Not Sure |
Agree |
Strongly Agree |
|
4.Changing deadlines and adding new information as projects evolve |
0% (0) |
2.04% (1) |
6.12% (3) |
42.86% (21) |
48.98% (24) |
Perhaps the most marked response is the alumni support for an educational experience where change occurs and situations of ambiguity and risk require them to develop resilience and flexible responses - so as to prepare them for the real world beyond graduation. This 91.84% (45) support rate aligns with the QAA (2012, 23-24) guidance views that:
Knowledge that is continuously being 'harvested' during a project or assignment may bring new dimensions into play at any time, and both the student and the educator must be flexible and adaptable to changing scenarios…Enterprise and entrepreneurship are dynamic and changing. Ambiguity and risk are difficult to evaluate in predictable and forcastable schedules. Shifts and changes by the educator can be effective ways to assess flexibility and adaptability.
The findings are also a good fit to The Wilson Review of Business-University Collaboration recommendations (2012, 50), which state that:
Enterprise skills require responsiveness to unexpected pressures and tasks; they require reaction to changing circumstances and disruptive interventions. These attributes are contrary to the established framework of assessment processes. Enterprise skills do not presently lend themselves to formal assessment methods.
Resources:
References:
