6303 QCA Trimester 1, 2018

Weight: 20%
Visual Arts Research Methods

Assessment Item 2 Due Date:

Context Survey Presentation 3 May 2018 In-Class Presentation

SUBMISSION SCENARIO:

The Context Survey presentation is designed to assist students to outline

You are required to do a 5 minute presentation that
the appropriateness of your selected methodology/ies, and practitioners
demonstrates the following:
relevant to your
Research Project.
1. An ability to identify appropriate methodology and exemplars
as they relate to your project.
Your PowerPoint / Prezi /or web presentation is required to be submitted
2. Ability to critique the issues surrounding the research after the presentation.
methodology/ies.
Allow two weeks for feedback.
3. An ability to positions the visual practitioner/s within an
appropriate research method/s.
BACKGROUND:
4. Clear communication of your argument and appropriate
referencing. This critique focusses on the professional standards evident in your Studio
Work and provides an indication that your studio work, methods and
techniques are suitable for Honours level students.
 COMMENT
Criteria Excellent
COMMENT
Identification of 85 to 100%
Appropriate Research
Methodology/ies and The research
exemplars (30%) methodology/ies is clearly
related and selection of
exemplars is highly
appropriate.
Critique of Research 85 to 100%
Methodology (30%)
Comprehensive and
effective critical reflection
evident. Sophisticated
responses demonstrated.
Critique of Research 85 to 100%
Method/s (30%)
Comprehensive and
effective critical reflection
evident. Sophisticated
responses demonstrated.
Clarity of Presentation 85 to 100%
(10%)
MARK TOTAL: % Highly refined presentation
of project demonstrating
clear understanding of
industry expectation. Very
well resolved. Fluent
response to questions and
feedback.
Very Good
75 to 84%
The research
methodology/ies and
exemplars are well
considered and seeks to
challenge expectations.
75 to 84%
Reasonable display of
critical reflection. Effective
responses.
75 to 84%
Reasonable display of
critical reflection. Effective
responses.
75 to 84%
Overall, the presentation is
communicative, and
engaging. Strong
integration of visual
elements. Well presented.
Meets professional
expectations. Confident
responses to questions and
feedback.
Good
65 to 74%
Project focus sits within
expectations.
65 to 74%
Adequate reflection to
challenges encountered.
Outcomes would improve
with additional
consideration/
experimentation/
research and skill building.
65 to 74%
Adequate reflection to
challenges encountered.
Outcomes would improve
with additional
consideration/
experimentation/
research and skill building.
65 to 74%
Adequate outcome. With
more time and thoughtful
execution, the presentation
could be improved upon.
Acceptable presentation
standard and responses to
question and feedback.
Satisfactory Unsatisfactory
50 to 64% 0 to 49%
Overall the understanding No clear research focus or
of research methodologies development evident.
and its relationship to Lacks depth or
exemplars is rudimentary understanding.
and/or underdeveloped. The work is incoherent.
50 to 64% 0 to 49%
Basic critical reflection. Little or no evidence of
Below expected standard. critical reflection or
Outcomes would improve understanding. Below
with a concerted effort. minimum standard.
50 to 64% 0 to 49%
Basic critical reflection. Little or no evidence of
Below expected standard. critical reflection or
Outcomes would improve understanding. Below
with a concerted effort. minimum standard.
50 to 64% 0 to 49%
The projects demonstrate Below minimum standard.
a basic attempt to Unresolved outcome.
communicate ideas. Components of the work
Underdeveloped overall remain disparate. No
and unprofessional integration to form a
presentation. Poor cohesive body of work.
response to question and Very poor presentation.
feedback. Unclear or vague
responses to question and
feedback.