Contextual Background
As a Digital Fabrication Technician, I heavily depend solely on formative assessments and regular feedback exchanges to facilitate the learning process. For instance, I provide direct feedback to students on their files during drop-in sessions or scheduled one-on-one appointments. However, a significant challenge lies in ensuring that the feedback provided is both clear and comprehensible, thereby ensuring that students grasp the expectations and next steps for improvement.
Evaluation
Currently feedback is given verbally during the process of making. For example, during a one on one session with a student they will propose a project and I will help facilitate the development of the proposal, assessing their understanding of technical software, materials, etc and advise accordingly. Depending on their understanding of technical processes, a different path might be directed to create a desired outcome, for example laser cutting might be more appropriate than 3D printing. While there isn’t a formal feedback structure, it is provided consistently throughout the students’ project development process.
Students who book a one-on-one session must fill out a box on Moodle that briefly explains their proposal so I have a vague understanding of what they want to achieve beforehand.
Moving forwards
After reading ‘Could do Better?’: students’ critique of written feedback’ a point that stuck out to me was that one-on-one feedback was ‘ideal’ but not practical. (Brookes, K 2008) I feel, as a technician, I’m in an interesting position where the feedback I give is primarily one-on-one, direct and instantaneous. Because I don’t do summative assessments I often find students are more often to engage in critique and honesty about the development of their work, as I’m in a position to help facilitate and aid that development. A problem with this is that a small cohort of students will have access to this direct, beneficial feedback while potentially a majority won’t. There’s an imbalance between students I see and those I don’t.
Recently I exhibited some of my own artwork in the Vitrines at Wilson Road to showcase how digital fabrication can be used in a painting context. I created a series of paintings, laser cut frames/stands with engravings and used a plotter with a 3D printed pen holder to automate different marks on the canvas. It’s been successful in bringing new students to engage with the space from painting within the art pathway, which historically uses the creative tech lab less. I took inspiration from reading ‘An a/r/tographic métissage: Storying the self as pedagogic practice’ (Osler et al, 2019) and using the ‘self’ as subject matter to explain how the processes available within the workshop have benefited my own ongoing artistic practice. This has allowed deeper and more interesting discussions with students as we can converse as fellow practitioners, rather than teacher/student: ‘An opportunity for dialogue on equal and inclusive terms develops.’ (Osler, et al, 2019)
Often I find the feedback is most successful when allowing a student to explain their project, showing them useful tools to aid in this and then letting them try it themselves for a while before helping further when they get stuck. ‘It is the person who explains who really deepens their learning, rather than the person being explained to.’ (Race, 2001) This quote was in the context of student peer feedback, but I believe it applies here as my role is to facilitate the development of student work and help them understand the crucial nature of learning how to learn.
Bibliography
Brookes, K (2008) Could do better?: students’ critique of written feedback. Art/Design/Media Subject Centre, University of the West of England, Bristol.
Osler, T., Guillard, I., Garcia-Fialdini, A. and Côté, S. (2019). An a/r/tographic métissage: Storying the self as pedagogic practice. Journal of Writing in Creative Practice, Concordia University, Intellect Ltd
Race, P (2001) Assessment Series No.9 A Briefing on Self, Peer and Group Assessment. The Generic Learning Centre, Learning and Teaching Support Network.