postgraduate certificate in performance teaching€¦ · · 2017-08-31postgraduate certificate in...

Postgraduate Certificate in Performance Teaching

Programme & module specifications & assessment criteria for 2017/18

Programme details may change in future academic years, please consult the “Gold copy” for the given year. Any programme, module and assessment criteria amendments will be approved following consultation of the student body through the School’s academic governance committee framework and in-line with the requirements of the School’s Academic Regulatory Framework.

of 31 PGCert in Performance Teaching Gold Copy 2017/18

Contents

PART 1: PROGRAMME SPECIFICATION 3

PART 2: MODULE SPECIFICATIONS

Core Module 1: Specification 13 Elective A – Reflective Practice in Higher Education: Module Specification 19

Elective B – Reflective Practice in Inclusive Learning: Module Specification 24

PART 3: ASSESSMENT CRITERIA 30

PGCert in Performance Teaching Gold Copy 2017/18 of 31

1. Programme Title Postgraduate Certificate in Performance Teaching

2. Programme Accredited by (if applicable)

Postgraduate Certificate Route A leads to recognition by the Higher Education Academy.

3. Final qualification

PGCert in Performance Teaching (Higher Education) PGCert in Performance Teaching (Inclusive Learning)

4. Exit awards n/a 5. Relevant QAA subject benchmarks n/a

6. SITS code PPCERPERTPT1 Part 1 PPCERPERTPT2 Part 2

7. Approved for the year of study 2017/18 8. Programme Leader Creative Learning Programme Leader 9. Pathway Leader (where relevant) n/a

10. Aims of the Programme

This programme aims to: • Support students in developing excellence, criticality and creativity in professional

performance teaching; • Equip graduates with the cognitive, practical and transferable skills and expertise

required to respond to the developing needs of the performing arts professional landscape, nationally and internationally;

• Provide performing arts students with the opportunity to specialize in performance pedagogy, engaging students with a deep level of critical reflection about performance and its theoretical and practical relationship with pedagogy;

• Offer an interdisciplinary perspective on the integration of performance and teaching, drawing on theory and practice from a range of diverse contexts;

• Develop students’ deep understanding of values in education and a high level of insight in students’ personal philosophy of teaching;

• Offer an innovative programme that includes world class teaching, ground-breaking and evidence-led explorations of pedagogy, and opportunities for students to develop a voice as a teaching artist, alongside craft and artistry in performance.

For students who take the ‘Reflective Practice in Higher Education’ elective: • To address key issues of teaching in higher and professional education, particularly those

which participants feel they need to develop further; • To enable participants to meet the HEA UKPSF Descriptor 1 or Descriptor 2.


11. Criteria for admission to the Programme 11.1 Application and selection process Applicants will be asked as part of their written application to outline their experience as a

practitioner and teacher and any specialist areas of interest in the practice or philosophy of teaching that they hope to explore further in the programme. They will need to provide evidence of relevant experience and expertise as well as some awareness of issues and some personal goals in relation to facilitating learning in the performing arts. They will also be required to submit two references with their application.

Selection will be based on the application which will be considered by the Programme

Leader* and one other member of the Programme Team. 11.2 Standard entry requirements: Applicants should normally have obtained an undergraduate degree in music performance,

acting, dance or technical theatre arts or equivalent qualification. An applicant without an undergraduate degree may be eligible for non-standard entry and will be required to supply additional documentation, for example a professional CV and an academic essay.

11.3 English Language requirements:

Applicants who are not native speakers of English should have achieved a minimum overall score of 6.5 in the IELTS Academic Training examination with no individual component score below 6.0 (or equivalent).

11.4 Non-standard entry procedure: direct entrants and transfers

The School’s Admissions Policy makes provision for the consideration of non-standard entrants where applicants do not have formal academic qualifications. Applicants will be considered on an individual basis and will be required to submit a professional CV with their application, additionally they may be required to confirm by way of an essay or similar, their ability to engage with postgraduate level study. However, as the PGCert is only a 60 credit programme with the core module worth over 40 of those credits, it will not be appropriate to accept advanced standing by transfer or AP(E)L as the majority of the modules for an award of the Guildhall School need to be undertaken at the Guildhall School.

PGCert in Performance Teaching Gold Copy 2017/18 of 31

12. Programme outcomes: The programme provides opportunities for students to

develop and demonstrate the following learning outcomes. The curriculum map indicates how modules meet the overall programme learning outcomes. * Indicates transferable skill

A. Technique and knowledge

On successful completion of this programme the student will be able to:

A1 Demonstrate originality and expertise in professional practice in performance teaching;

A2 Engage in mutual learning with colleagues;

A3 Manage independent learning as required for continuing professional development and

reflect critically on individual practice and progression in performance teaching;*

A4 Analyse and critically evaluate complex concepts and ideas at the forefront of current

understandings in performing arts education;*

A5 Synthesise, organise and analyse complex information and ideas with accuracy, efficiency

and appropriate focus;*

A6 Communicate ideas with coherence, clarity and impact to specialist and non-specialist

audiences, using advanced verbal and non-verbal skills, including advanced ICT skills;*

A7 Generate and engage in critical debate, influence the beliefs of others.*

A8 Respond to complex and unpredictable situations with high level decision making,

professionalism, independent thinking and problem solving skills;*

B. Performance and/or creative output

On successful completion of this programme the student will have knowledge and

understanding of:

B1 The theoretical relationship between teaching, learning and performance;

B2 Key concepts in general and discipline-specific theories of teaching, learning, expert

performance and professionalism;

B3 The applications of theoretical frameworks and the implications for teaching and

performance within specific contexts;

B4 Approaches to enhancing their own creative performance pedagogy practice;

B5 The moral and ethical dimensions of performance pedagogy involving children, young

people, adult peers, professional colleagues and/or employers;

B6 Strategies for continually re-assessing professional skills and implementing appropriate

action plans in response to feedback from peers, tutors, students and outside organisations.*


C. Communication and artistic values


understanding of:

C1 Exemplary standards of self-motivation, discipline, initiative and self-awareness;*

C2 The practice and promotion of trust, respect, generosity of spirit and social responsibility.*

C3 How and when to challenge or investigate current practice in order to address pedagogical,

cultural and social issues within specified educational contexts;

C4 Reflection, analysis and critical evaluation of professional values and performance

practice;

C5 New avenues of collaboration and partnerships between colleagues, staff and students,

within the local community and across a wider network of professional associations;

C6 Creative practice, excellence in teaching, teaching artistry, leadership, formal curricula

and/or community provision specific to their own teaching contexts;

C7 The value of arts education in society.

D. Professional protocols


understanding of:

D1 A variety of operational and cultural frameworks within teaching environments;

D2 Effective time-management and personal organisation skills;*

D3 Appropriate preparation for a variety of professional contexts;*

D4 Current concerns and issues in performance pedagogy, as related to legislation,

government agendas, institutional policy, professional codes of practice, curriculum and

assessment issues;

D5 Professional ethical guidelines;

D6: Knowledge and understanding of the UKPSF for teaching and supporting learning in

Higher Education and its implications for practice;

D7: Theoretical knowledge and understanding of concepts and issues involved in learning and

teaching in higher and professional education - within a minimum of two areas of activity

as set out in the UK Professional Standards Framework;

D8: Theoretical knowledge of learning processes - this within a minimum of two areas of

activity as set out in the UK Professional Standards Framework (Associate Fellow) or across

all of the Professional Standards (Fellow of the HEA).

7/31

13. Programme Structure:

Programme Duration (years) 1 year part-time or 2 years part-time

Mode of Delivery (full/part-time/other) Blended

Total student learning hours 600

% split teaching contact hours: self-directed practice & study

22% contact hours

Core modules: students must take & pass the following: Title Credits Level Core Module 1 Fundamental principles in performance pedagogy Notes: Two terms. Three face-to-face workshops (three days each) plus additional activities offered face-to-face or on-line.

40

7

TOTAL 40

Elective Modules: students must also take and pass one of the following modules: Title Credits Level Elective A: Reflective Practice in Higher Education *Note:Linked with HEA UK Professional Standards Framework

20

7

Elective B: Reflective Practice in Inclusive Learning

20 7

TOTAL 20

14. Teaching & Learning Methodology & Assessment Strategy

The programme is flexible and modular in structure, allowing for the possibility of part time study over one or two years. The programme core module and electives are delivered in intensive face-to-face workshop days followed by interactive online activities. The rationale for this blended mode of delivery is firstly to facilitate the target participant group, which includes early career portfolio performing artists as well as established performing artists who wish to change career focus, coming from a diverse geographical reach. These potential participants require the flexibility to be able to integrate study with family and working lives. Secondly, the blended mode provides a structure within which participants may have the space and opportunity to reflect upon and develop as reflective and creative practitioners within their own contexts, establishing strong theory-practice connections and being supported with peer, mentor and tutor feedback and dialogue. The face-to-face and online sessions on the programme core module and electives require participants to be actively engaged in discussion and reflection on their own and other’s work. Aligned with the programme learning outcomes, whereby participants are supported in their development as critically reflective creative professionals with a high degree of self-regulation,


leadership qualities and commitment to professional protocols and ethics, learning, teaching and assessment activities provide participants with structured opportunities to share understandings, ideas and approaches to the interface between learning, teaching and performance within music and with colleagues from other disciplines. Typical activities include: • Action Learning Sets for reflection and feedback on participants’ own practice, including

analysis of critical incidents and evaluation of performance pedagogy strategies; • Small Group Work / Pair-work: this includes discussion, specific practical activities,

syndicate type groups case studies, problem solving activities; • Some direct lecturing input from tutors; • Plenary discussions / question and answer sessions; • Tutorials: Individual sessions arranged with pedagogy mentor; • Participants’ self-study; • Reflection on prepared readings.

Assessment for learning is seen as an integral part of the learning process and is used formatively throughout the programme. The strategy for assessment of the programme is built on the following principles: • Participants are set clear and focused tasks (as outlined in the programme handbook) with

firm deadlines as stated in the handbook, and with transparent criteria for assessment; • The assessment tasks for Elective A, Reflective Practice in Higher Education, are mapped to

the Higher Education Academy Professional Standards Framework; • The assessment tasks for Elective B, Reflective Practice in Inclusive Learning, are mapped to

principles and guidance for effective professional practice as stipulated by relevant bodies such as In Harmony Sistema England; Sistema Europe; Music Mark (the UK association for Music Education) and Sound Sense (the UK association for Community Musicians, Ofsted (UK Office for Standards in Education, Children’s Services and Skills);

• The assessment for Elective A includes a mapping document where participants have the opportunity to demonstrate how their learning from core Module 1 underpins their engagement with the UKPSF;

• The assessment for Elective B includes a mapping exercise where participants have the opportunity to demonstrate how their learning from core Module 1 underpins their application of relevant professional principles and guidance;

• The assessment tasks overall focus on a variety of skills, including practical, critical reflection and interpersonal, to allow participants to demonstrate their strengths and to reflect the wide range of learning outcomes developed by the programme;

• Informal and formal formative feedback are embedded in the programme and include tutor and mentor feedback as well as giving and receiving peer feedback;

• Participants receive ongoing formative assessment of practical work (e.g. facilitating learning) via regular tutorial contact with pedagogy mentors;

• Participants will receive timely and constructive feedback at draft stages of all assessments;

• Participants receive prompt written feedback about assignments (within two weeks of

9/31

written submission or the completion of the relevant component) recognising and rewarding positive aspects of their work and providing constructive criticism on how improvements could be made in the future.

Formative assessment is a core, embedded feature of this programme which aims to support the development of reflective, self-regulated and creative practice in performance pedagogy. To this end, throughout the programme participants participate in Action Learning Sets where they are guided by pedagogy mentors and develop their skills in giving and responding to peer formative assessment. Participants are furthermore assigned individual pedagogy mentors whose role is to provide formative feedback on practical work in pedagogy contexts. Summative assessments take the form of written work (critical reflections; written observation reports), group and individual presentations; and critiques of recorded examples of teaching or facilitating learning in performance pedagogy contexts. The individual summative assessments have been designed to reflect the learning objectives and core activities in the programme. For example, critical reflection is at the heart of the concept of the ‘reflective practitioner’, and underpins the learning objectives and activities across the programme. Presentation skills, in group and individual formats, are similarly central in professional performance pedagogy practice. The summative presentation assessments will build on work that is undertaken in the workshops and online activities. Finally, critical reflections on observations of others teaching and facilitating learning, as well as critiques of video examples of the student’s own practice in facilitating learning, are at the heart of the professional community of practice that the programme aims to support. 15. Curriculum map relating programme learning outcomes to modules

C

ore

M

od

ule

s

A1

A2

A3

A4

A5

A6

A7

A8

Fundamental Principles in Performance Pedagogy

Elec

tive

s Reflective Practice in Higher Education

Reflective Practice in Inclusive Learning

Core

M

od

ule

s

B1

B2

B3

B4

B5

B6


Elec

tive




Core

M

od

ule

C1

C2

C3

C4

C5

C6

C7


Elec

tive



Core

M

od

ule

D1

D2

D3

D4

D5

D6

D7

D8


Elec

tive



16. Assessment Regulations These regulations are in addition to the general assessment regulations for taught programmes in the Academic regulatory framework covering Board membership, attendance at examinations and submission of coursework (including late penalties), extenuating circumstances, external examiners and academic misconduct. 16.1 Requirements to pass a module In order to pass a module and acquire the associated credit, a student must complete all

the assessment components of the module and achieve an aggregate weighted mark of no less than 50%. The module specification will indicate whether a pass, or minimum mark, is required for a specific component. Where not stated compensation across components will be assumed.

Additionally a pass grade for a module requires a minimum attendance of 80%.

16.2 Resit Provisions (a) Where a student does not meet the overall weighted aggregate and/or fails to meet the

minimum achievement required in a module component, the School Board or Examiners may offer a resit of the failed assessment component (or an equivalent task).

(b) A module component may be resat only once. (c) The School Board of Examiners may, at its discretion, permit a student to resit during the

course of the following year, with or without attendance. (d) A resit fee will be payable (resit fees are published on the School’s website). (e) A student who successfully completes a resit will be awarded the minimum pass mark for

the failed component and this capped mark will be used for the aggregate mark of the module. The only exception to this is for an academic misconduct failure (e.g. plagiarism, collusion) where, even though the module component must be resat and passed, the failed

11/31

mark may be carried forward to the overall module aggregate mark. (f) Where a student fails to meet the requirements of the programme after all valid resit

attempts, the School Board of Examines will require the student to withdraw from the programme.

16.3 Progression to Year 2 For students on the two year pathway, successful completion and passing of the core

module at the end of year one is the pre-requisite for enrolment onto year two.

16.4 Award regulations 16.4.1(i) A student who, at the end of the programme completes the core module and one

elective for a total of 60 credits will be considered for the award of the PGCert in Performance Teaching.

(ii) The overall result will be calculated on the basis of the aggregate of the module marks

weighted according to their credit value. (iii) The classification shall be determined as follows: With Distinction minimum 70% With Merit minimum 60% Pass minimum 50% 16.4.2 Compensation at module level after second attempt There is no compensation at module level.

16.4.3 Borderline classifications

The School Board of Examiners may consider for the higher degree classification where the aggregate result falls with 0.5 percentage points below the percentage boundaries of the class above (i.e. between 69.5 and 69.9. and 59.5 and 59.9). This is not applicable to the pass/fail boundary.

16.4.4 No lower level qualification is available for this programme. 16.4.5 Fail Withdraw Where a student fails to meet the requirements for the award, the School Board of

Examiners will require the student to withdraw from the programme. 16.5 Period of registration The maximum period of study including any repeat years and/or periods of deferral or

interruption will be 3 years. 16.6 Scheduling of Assessment The assessment schedule for all modules will be published in the Programme Handbook

and distributed to students at the beginning of the academic year.


MODULE SPECIFICATIONS

13/31

1. Module Title Core Module 1: Fundamental principles in performance pedagogy

2. HE Level 7 3. Credit Value 40 4. SITS module code PED4001

5. Location of Delivery Blended mode: Face-to-face workshops at Guildhall School followed by online or face-to-face activities

6a. Module Type Class based teaching 6b. Applicable in the year of study Year 1 7. Module Leader Carlos Lopez-Real 8. Department Music 9. Aims of the Module This module aims to: • Develop students’ expertise and knowledge in principles of pedagogy; • Develop students’ awareness of their own values in education and philosophy of teaching; • Develop students’ critical understanding of the relationship between pedagogical theory

and practice; • Equip students with interdisciplinary understandings of the concept of professionalism and

its applications within their own discipline-specific contexts; • Develop students’ in-depth understanding of institutional, national and international

frameworks for professional practice; • Provide students with frameworks for developing their personal professional practice in

creative and innovative ways.

Indicative content: 1. Introduction to pedagogy

In this topic, participants will be introduced to definitions of pedagogy. Participants will analyse, evaluate and critique the underlying assumptions and objectives that align with approaches to facilitating learning.

2. Values in education Participants will be facilitated in interrogating their own personal values in education generally and arts education more specifically. Competing discourses, such as economic justifications and social justice rationales will be debated.

3. Theories of learning

Participants will be facilitated in analyzing, evaluating and synthesizing the underpinning principles of a range of major psychological and sociological theories of learning, including behaviourist, constructivist, social constructivist, communities of practice and critical pedagogy perspectives. Participants will consider the application of these theoretical


frameworks in relation to their own experiences of learning and teaching in the performing arts.

4. Roles and responsibilities in facilitating learning Participants will consider the roles and responsibilities of the teacher or facilitator in one-to-one and group performing arts contexts. A range of facilitator approaches will be analysed and discussed, including hierarchical, co-operative, and autonomous approaches. Participants will be introduced to the basic principles that distinguish teaching, facilitating, mentoring and coaching approaches.

5. Group dynamics Psychodaynamic and Systems approaches to understanding and responding to group dynamics will be introduced. Participants will be facilitated in applying these understandings to interpreting their own experiences in performing arts education and performance contexts.

6. Reflective practice The concept of reflective practice will be introduced. Models of critical reflection and reflective practice, drawing for example on Kolb, Brookfield and Schön, will be interrogated.

7. Introduction to curriculum issues Participants will be introduced to the concepts of constructive alignment and spiral curriculum, and will be facilitated in considering the application of these concepts in performing arts contexts.

8. Introduction to assessment issues Key assessment terminology will be deconstructed and participants will consider the purpose and consequences of diverse approaches to assessment, in performing arts contexts.

9. Core approaches to discipline-specific and context-specific methods of facilitating learning Participants will consider the underpinning philosophy and principles that relate to a range of discipline-specific and context-specific methods in performance pedagogy. The specific content of this topic will be led by the contexts and specific disciplines of the participants themselves, but will include mainstream approaches such as Dalcroze, Orff, Kodaly, Suzuki.

10. Models of professionalism and professional codes of practice Participants will consider what it means to be a ‘professional’ in the world of performance pedagogy. Definitions of professionalism will be interrogated. Relevant professional codes of practice will be analysed and evaluated. Participants will consider the implications of ‘professionalism’ for their practice as performers and teachers in the performing arts.

15/31

10. Teaching & Assessment Methodology Method of teaching delivery: Face-to-face workshops (3 x 3-day workshops) and interactive online activities, including action learning sets. Students are required to share examples of their teaching practice as part of the action learning sets. This may be during the face-to-face workshops or may be shared online. It is a compulsory (pass/fail) component of the module, and the focus is on formative feedback.

Assessment: The following summative assessments will be assessed against the assessment criteria: • Individual presentation: Reflection on personal principles and values in music, drama or

dance education and performance; (Learning Outcomes: A3, A4, A5, A6, A7, B1, B2, C3, C4, C7, D1, D2, D3, D4, D5)

o The individual presentation will take place during the second set of workshops, in the first term of study.

• Group presentation: Summary of group-work, focusing on group dynamics in peer observation and emergent pedagogical issues; (Learning Outcomes: A2, A4, A5, A6, A7, B1, B2, B3, C2, C3, C4, C7)

o The group presentation will take place during the third set of workshops, in the second term of study.

• Critical Reflection: addressing one of a choice of topics related to module content (3000 words). (Learning Outcomes: A3, A4, A5, A6, A7, B1, B2, B3, C1, C3, C4, C7, D1, D2, D3, D4, D5)

o Participants will have the opportunity to receive formative feedback on one draft of their Critical Reflection; the submission date for the draft will be no later than mid-way through the second term of study and feedback will be received within two weeks of the draft submission date. The final submission date for the Critical Reflection will be six weeks following the end of the core module workshops.

In addition, in order to pass the module participants must fulfil the following: • Completion of minimum of 80% online activities.

o The online activities will prepare participants for the individual and group presentations. There will be opportunities for formative feedback on one draft of each of the presentations.

• Minimum 80% attendance at workshops


11. Learning outcomes: On successful completion of the module students will have achieved various skills and abilities. Please refer to the Programme Specification for descriptions of the skills codes listed below:

A2, A3, A4, A5, A6, A7 B1, B2, B3 C1, C2, C3, C4, C7 D1, D2, D3, D4, D5 12. Module Pattern a) Scheduled Teaching & Learning hours KIS Type Contact Hours Workshops 54 Group tutorial (facilitated online interactive activities) 30 One-to-one /tutorial and feedback 2

b) Assessment

KIS Assessment Component*

Detail (eg component parts, length in time or words)

KIS code

% Weighting % Pass Mark

Written assignment Critical Reflection: addressing one of a choice of topics related to module content (3000 words)

KCW 50 50

Presentation Individual presentation on personal principles and values in music, drama or dance education and performance

KCW 25 50

Coursework Completion of online activities (minimum 80%)

KCW n/a Pass/Fail

Attendance 80% including face to face workshops and online activities

KCW n/a Pass/Fail

Presentation Group presentation Summary of group-work, focusing on group dynamics in peer observation and emerging pedagogical issues

KPE 25 50

17/31

c) Independent Study hours Notional Hours

Personal study 189

Self-directed group study 90

Library-based study 35 d) Total student learning hours for module 400 13. Reading & Resources* see reading list below * Key Readings Heron, J. (1999) Chapter 1: Dimensions and modes of facilitation. In The complete facilitator's handbook (pp 1-17). London: Kogan Page Ltd. Husbands, C. and Pearce, J. (2012) What makes great pedagogy? Nine claims from research. UK: National College for School Leadership. Accessed at: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/329746/what-makes-great-pedagogy-nine-claims-from-research.pdf

Illeris, K. (2004). Transformative learning in the perspective of a comprehensive learning theory. Journal of Transformative Education, 2, 79-89.

Jaques, D. (2007) Chapter 2: Studies of group behaviour. In Learning in groups: A handbook for face-to-face and online environments (3rd edition) (pp. 22-49). London: Kogan Page. Additional Readings Bailin, S. (1998) Critical thinking and drama education. Research in Drama Education: The Journal of Applied Theatre and Performance, 3(2), 145-153.

Bannon, F. (2008 (13-18 July)). Dance dialogues: Conversations across cultures, artforms and practices. Starting from here: Dance in higher education from the inside out. Paper presented at the World Dance Alliance Global Summit, Brisbane. Accessed at: http://dance.net.au/dancensw/images/stories/autumn_2011/dance-in-higher-education.pdf Berkeley, A. (2005) Phronesis or techne? Theatre studies as moral agency. Research in Drama Education: The Journal of Applied Theatre and Performance, 10(2), 213-227. Cartney, P. & Rouse, A. (2006) The emotional impact of learning in small groups: Highlighting the impact on student progression and retention. Teaching in higher education, 11(1), 79-91. Cockett, S. (1998). Formative assessment in drama. Research in Drama Education: The Journal of Applied Theatre and Performance, 3(2), 248-250.

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/329746/what-makes-great-pedagogy-nine-claims-from-research.pdf

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/329746/what-makes-great-pedagogy-nine-claims-from-research.pdf

http://dance.net.au/dancensw/images/stories/autumn_2011/dance-in-higher-education.pdf

http://dance.net.au/dancensw/images/stories/autumn_2011/dance-in-higher-education.pdf


Creech, A., & Gaunt, H. (2012) The changing face of individual instrumental tuition: Value, purpose and potential. In G. E. McPherson & G. Welch (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of music education: Oxford University Press. Creech, A. (2012). Interpersonal behaviour in one to one instrumental lessons: An observational analysis. British Journal of Music Education, 29(3), 387-407.

Dacre, K., & Bulmer, A. (2009) ‘Into the scene’ and its impact on inclusive performance training. Research in Drama Education: The Journal of Applied Theatre and Performance, 14(1), 133-139. Evetts, J. (2014). The concept of professionalism: Professional work, professional practice and learning. In S. Billett, C. Harteis & H. Gruber (Eds.), International handbook of research in professional and practice-based learning (pp. 29-56): Springer Netherlands.

Garvey, B., Stokes, P. & Megginson, D. (2009) Chapter 6: Conversational learning and chapter 7: Power in coaching and mentoring. In Coaching and mentoring: Theory and practice (pp. 96-108; 111-124). London: Sage. Hunter, D. (1999) Developing peer-learning programmes in music: Group presentations and peer assessment. British Journal of Music Education, 16(1), 51-63.

Lerman, L. (2003). Critical response. Takoma Park, MD 20912: Dance Exchange.

Polifonia. (2010) Instrumental and vocal teacher education: European perspectives: Chapter 2 (the instrumental/vocal teaching profession: Issues of teaching and learning) and chapter 3 (competences and roles in the instrumental/vocal teaching profession): Pp 37-59. http://www.polifonia-tn.org/Content.aspx?id=179 Robson, J. (2006). Chapter 1: Meanings of professionalism. In Teacher professionalism in further and higher education: Challenges to culture and practice (pp. 7-24). London: Routledge.

Tusting, K., & Barton, D. (2006). Models from adult education: A literature review. In Models of adult learning (pp. 21-39). Leicester: National Research and Development Centre for Adult Literacy and Numeracy.

http://www.polifoniatn.org/Content.aspx?id=179

19/31

1. Module Title Elective A: Reflective Practice in Higher Education

2. HE Level 7 3. Credit Value 20 4. SITS module code PED4002 5. Location of Delivery Guildhall School and online

6a. Module Type Class-based teaching: Interactive workshops and online activities; Time in placement

6b. Applicable in the year of study Year 1 or Year 2 7. Module Leader Carlos Lopez-Real 8. Department Music This module is only available to students who currently teach in Higher Education contexts, as this is a prerequisite for meeting the requirements of the UKPSF 9. Aims of the Module This module aims to: • Develop students’ sophisticated understanding of Higher Education music, drama and

dance contexts; • Develop students’ advanced questioning, reflective and analytic approach to the

understanding of major issues in third-level music, drama and dance teaching and learning, coaching and mentoring;

• Develop students’ critical understanding of theoretical frameworks and models for teaching and learning in Higher Education and their application or implications in the performing arts;

• Support students in aligning their practice (including activities, knowledge and professional values) with the Higher Education Academy UK Professional Standards Framework;

• Develop students’ sophisticated understanding of the roles and responsibilities of being a skilled, professional teacher, mentor or coach in Higher Education;

• Enable participants to meet the HEA UKPSF Descriptor 1 or Descriptor 2.

Indicative curriculum content Areas of activity undertaken by teachers and support staff in higher education contexts • Curriculum planning, design • Teaching, facilitating and supporting learning • Assessment • Student support • Design and develop effective learning environments • Continuing professional reflective practice, linking scholarship/artistic excellence with

pedagogy Knowledge needed to carry out those activities at the appropriate level • Discipline-specific expertise • Appropriate pedagogy for Higher Education


• Discipline-specific pedagogy • Learning technologies • Methods for evaluating learning • Quality assurance and quality enhancement

Professional values that individuals performing these activities should exemplify • Respect for individual learners and diverse learning communities • Promote participation in higher education: equality, equity, widening participation • Use evidence-informed approaches in teaching and learning • Understand the wider landscape within which higher education is positioned, including

international contexts 10. Teaching & Assessment Methodology Method of teaching delivery - face-to-face, workshops and online or additional face-to-face activities, shadowing,

supporting or leading teaching and learning in placements

Assessment: Higher Education Portfolio: • Introduction setting out range of activities supporting or leading learning in Higher

Education (500 words); Learning Outcomes A3, D1, D2, D3

• Written records of four observations of others in Higher Education music, drama or dance

context , using observation pro forma (total 1500 words critical reflection, mapping against

UK PSF); (Learning Outcomes : A2, A5, A6, B1, B2, B3, B5, C2, C4, D4, D5, D6, D7, D8)

• Video or documentary evidence of performance pedagogy skills applied in a Higher Education music, drama or dance context (minimum two examples) accompanied by: 1) formative feedback from Pedagogy Mentor, accompanied by action plan in response;

(Learning Outcomes: A1, A3, A8, B6, C1, C6, D2, D3, D5) 2) critical self-reflection mapping against professional standards or fundamental

principles that apply within the specific context (1500 words); (Learning Outcomes: A1, A3, A4, A5, A8, B1, B2, B3, B4, B5, B6, C1, C3, C4, C5, C6, C7, D1, D2, D3, D4, D5, D6, D7, D8)

3) Mapping document showing how learning from core Module 1 aligns with the UKPSF; (Learning Outcomes: A5, B3, C4, C7, D4, D5, D6, D7, D8)

Participants will be entitled to formative feedback on one full draft of their Portfolio. The final submission date for drafts will be no later than mid-way through term of study. The final submission date for the portfolio will be three weeks after the final workshop.

In addition to the final Portfolio, in order to pass the module participants must fulfil the following: • Minimum of 80% online activities completed. • Minimum 80% attendance at workshops

21/31

11. Learning outcomes: On successful completion of the module students will have achieved various skills and abilities. Please refer to the Programme Specification for descriptions of the skills codes listed below: A1, A2, A3, A4, A5, A6, A7, A8 B1, B2, B3, B4, B5, B6 C1, C2, C3, C4, C5, C6, C7 D1, D2, D3, D4, D5, D6, D7, D8 12. Module Pattern a) Scheduled Teaching & Learning hours KIS Type Contact Hours Seminar 24 One- to –one class/tutorial 1 Placement(s): Supporting, shadowing, leading teaching and learning in context

20

b) Assessment



KIS code % Weighting % Pass Mark

Portfolio HE Portfolio KCW 100 50 Coursework 80% online activities KCW n/a Pass/Fail Attendance 80% KCW n/a Pass/Fail c) Independent Study hours Notional Hours Independent study 155 d) Total student learning hours for module 200 13. Reading & Resources*See reading list below * Key Readings

Fitzmaurice, M. (2008) Voices from within: teaching in higher education as a moral practice, Teaching in Higher Education, 13(3), 341-352.

Light, G. and Cox, R. (2001) Learning and Teaching in Higher Education: the reflective professional (Chapters 4 and 12), London, Sage.

Additional reading: Higher Education

Biggs, J. (2003) Teaching for Quality Learning at University. 2nd ed. Buckingham: The Society for Research into Higher Education & Open University Press.

Brockbank, A, and McGill, A. (2006) Facilitating Reflective Learning through Mentoring and Coaching. London: Kogan Page.


Brockbank, A, and McGill, A. (2007) Facilitating Reflective Learning in Higher Education (second edition). Maidenhead: McGraw Hill.

Buckridge, M. (2008) Teaching portfolios: their role in teaching and learning policy. International Journal for Academic Development, 13(2), 117-127.

Coffield, F. and Edward, S. (2009) Rolling out 'good', 'best' and 'excellent' practice. What next? Perfect practice? British Educational Research Journal, 35, 371-390.

Fry, H., Ketteridge, S. and Marshall, S. (2005) A Handbook of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, London, Kogan Page. (2nd Edition).Chapter 17.

Jones, E. (2010) Personal theory and reflection in a professional practice portfolio. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 35, 699-710.

Morley, C. (2007) Engaging practitioners with critical reflection: issues and dilemmas. Reflective Practice 8(1), 61-74.

Ramsden, P. (2003) Learning to Teach in Higher Education, 2nd Edition London, Routledge. Chapters 11 and 12.

Schön, D. A. (1983) The Reflective Practitioner: how professionals think in action. Ashgate: Aldershot.

Skelton, A. (2009) A 'teaching excellence' for the times we live in? Teaching in Higher Education, 14(1), 107-112.

Trigwell, K. (2001) Judging university teaching, The International Journal for Academic Development, 6(1), 65-73.

Tripp, D. (1993) Critical Incidents in Teaching: Developing Professional Judgement. London: Routledge.

Performing Arts in Higher Education Bryan, C. (2012) Preparing for a portfolio career in performing arts. Lancaster: Higher Education Academy: Arts and Humanities. http://www.heacademy.ac.uk/assets/documents/disciplines/ddm/HEADDM-Bryan(2012)Portfolio-Career-Report.pdf Burns, S. (2007). Mapping dance: Entrepreneurship and professional practice in dance higher education (No. ISBN: 978-1-905788-28-6). Lancaster: Higher Education Academy: Subject Centre for Dance, Drama and Music, supported by the National Council for Graduate Entrepreneurship. Accessed at: http://www.heacademy.ac.uk/assets/documents/subjects/palatine/Mapping-Dance.pdf

http://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/routledg/rija/2001/00000006/00000001/art00007

http://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/routledg/rija/2001/00000006/00000001/art00007

http://www.heacademy.ac.uk/assets/documents/disciplines/ddm/HEADDM-Bryan(2012)Portfolio-Career-Report.pdf

http://www.heacademy.ac.uk/assets/documents/disciplines/ddm/HEADDM-Bryan(2012)Portfolio-Career-Report.pdf

http://www.heacademy.ac.uk/assets/documents/subjects/palatine/Mapping-Dance.pdf

23/31

Collens, P., & Creech, A. (2013). Intersubjectivity in collaborative learning in one-to-one contexts. In H. Gaunt & H. Westerlund (Eds.), Collaborative learning in higher music education: Why, what and how? (pp. 151-164). London: Ashgate.

Creech, A., Lopez-Real, C., Paterson, K., & Sherry, R. (2013). Creative assessment of creativity in musical performance. In P. Burnard (Ed.), Developing creativities in higher music education: International perspectives and practices (pp. 318-329). Abingdon, Oxford: Routledge.

Farthing, A. (2012). Mapping technical theatre arts training. Lancaster: Higher Education Academy. http://www.heacademy.ac.uk/assets/documents/disciplines/ddm/HEADDM-Farthing(2012)MappingTechTheatreTraining.pdf [Accessed 8 April 2013] Gaunt, H. (2008). One-to-one tuition in a conservatoire the perceptions in instrumental and vocal teachers. Psychology of Music, 36(2), 215-245.

Gaunt, H., Creech, A., Long, M., & Hallam, S. (2012). Supporting conservatoire students towards professional integration: One-to-one tuition and the potential of mentoring. Music Education Research, 14(1), 25.

Gaunt, H., & Westerlund, H. (2013). Collaborative learning in higher music education: What, why and how? Abingdon: Ashgate.

Hanken, I. M., & Long, M. (2012) Masterclasses - what do they offer? Oslo: Norwegian Academy of Music. http://brage.bibsys.no/nmh/retrieve/568/Hanken_Long_2012.pdf Kempe, A. (2012) Self, role and character: Developing a professional identity as a drama teacher. Teacher Development, 16(4), 523-536.

Lavender, L. (1996) Dancers talking dance: Critical evaluation in the choreography class. Champaign: Human Kinetics.

Lerman, L . (2003) Critical response. Takoma Park, MD 20912: Dance Exchange. Renshaw, P. (2011) Working together: An enquiry into creative collaborative learning across the Barbican–Guildhall campus. London: Barbican Centre and Guildhall School of Music & Drama. Sextou, P. (2011) The pedagogy of drama supervision in Higher Education. Brookes e-journal of learning and teaching, 3(1). http://bejlt.brookes.ac.uk/article/the_pedagogy_of_drama_supervision_in_higher_education/ Sloboda, J. (2011). What do musicians and actors learn by working together? “the last five years”: A case study (No. Research Working Paper 11/01 April 2011). London: Guildhall School of Music & Drama. http://www.gsmd.ac.uk/fileadmin/user_upload/files/Research/TheLast5YearsRW.pdf

http://www.heacademy.ac.uk/assets/documents/disciplines/ddm/HEADDM-Farthing(2012)MappingTechTheatreTraining.pdf

http://www.heacademy.ac.uk/assets/documents/disciplines/ddm/HEADDM-Farthing(2012)MappingTechTheatreTraining.pdf

http://brage.bibsys.no/nmh/retrieve/568/Hanken_Long_2012.pdf

http://bejlt.brookes.ac.uk/article/the_pedagogy_of_drama_supervision_in_higher_education/

http://www.gsmd.ac.uk/fileadmin/user_upload/files/Research/TheLast5YearsRW.pdf


1. Module Title Elective B: Reflective Practice in Inclusive Learning

2. HE Level 7 3. Credit Value 20 4. SITS module code PED4003 5. Location of Delivery Guildhall School and online

6a. Module Type Class-based teaching: Interactive workshops and online activities; Time in placement

6b. Applicable in the year of study Year 1 or Year 2 7. Module Leader Carlos Lopez-Real 8. Department Music 9. Aims of the Module This module aims to: • Develop participants’ sophisticated understanding of the social and artistic values that

characterise Inclusive Learning music, drama or dance education contexts; • Develop participants’ advanced questioning, reflective and analytic approach to the

understanding of major issues in leadership, teaching and learning, coaching and mentoring within Inclusive Learning music, drama or dance education contexts;

• Develop participants’ critical understanding of theoretical frameworks and models for teaching and learning and their application or implications in Inclusive Learning music, drama or dance education contexts;

• Develop participants’ sophisticated understanding of the roles and responsibilities of being a professional and effective leader within Inclusive Learning music, drama or dance education contexts.

Indicative curriculum content • Areas of activity undertaken by teachers and support staff in Inclusive Learning music,

drama or dance education contexts • Curriculum planning • Teaching, facilitating and supporting learning • Assessment • Holistic student support – social pedagogy • Develop effective learning environments • Continuing professional reflective practice

• Knowledge needed to carry out those activities at the appropriate level

• Discipline-specific expertise for music, drama or dance education • Appropriate pedagogy; e.g. peer learning and teaching; social pedagogy; spiral

curriculum; differentiation; discipline-specific pedagogy • Partnership working • Learning technologies • Methods for evaluating learning • Quality assurance and quality enhancement

25/31

• Professional values that individuals performing these activities should exemplify • Respect for individual learners and diverse learning communities • Promote participation: equality, equity, widening participation • Use evidence-informed approaches in teaching and learning • Understanding of the wider landscape within which Inclusive Learning performing

arts education is positioned, including international contexts • Fundamental principles underpinning performing arts education for social change

10. Teaching & Assessment Methodology Method of teaching delivery

Face-to-face, workshops and online activities, shadowing or teaching in placements in

appropriate contexts.

Assessment:

Inclusive Learning Portfolio:

• Introduction setting out range of activities supporting, facilitating or leading learning in an Inclusive Learning context (500 words); (Learning Outcomes: D1, D2, D3)

• Written records of four observations of others in an Inclusive Learning context , using observation pro forma (total 1500 words critical reflection); (Learning Outcomes: A2, A5, A6, B1, B2, B3, B5, C2, C4, D4, D5)

• Video or documentary evidence of performance pedagogy skills applied in the Inclusive Learning context (minimum two examples) accompanied by: 1) formative feedback from Pedagogy Mentor, accompanied by action plan in response;

(Learning Outcomes: A1, A3, A8, B6, C1, C6, D2, D3, D5) 2) critical self-reflection mapping against professional standards or fundamental

principles that apply within the Inclusive Learning context (1500 words); (Learning Outcomes:A1, A3, A4, A5, A8, B1, B2, B3, B4, B5, B6, C1, C3, C4, C5, C6, C7, D1, D2, D3, D4, D5)

3) Mapping document showing how learning from core Module 1 aligns with relevant professional guidance and principles. (Learning Outcomes: A5, B3, C4, C7, D4, D5)

Participants will be entitled to formative feedback on one full draft of their Portfolio. The final

submission date for drafts will be no later than mid-way through term of study. The final submission date for the portfolio will be three weeks after the final workshop.

In addition to the final Portfolio, in order to pass the module participants must fulfil the

following:

• Completion of minimum of 80% online activities.

• Minimum 80% attendance at workshops


11. Learning outcomes: On successful completion of the module students will have achieved various skills and abilities. Please refer to the Programme Specification for descriptions of the skills codes listed below: A1, A2, A3, A4, A5, A6, A7, A8 B1, B2, B3, B4, B5, B6, C1, C2, C3, C4, C5, C6, D1, D2, D3, D4, D5 12. Module Pattern a) Scheduled Teaching & Learning hours KIS Type Contact Hours Seminar 24 One- to –one class/tutorial 1 Placement(s) 20 b) Assessment



KIS code % Weighting % Pass Mark

Portfolio Inclusive learning portfolio

KCW 100 50

Coursework 80% online activities KCW n/a Pass/Fail Attendance 80% KCW n/a Pass/Fail c) Independent Study hours Notional Hours Independent study 155 d) Total student learning hours for module 200 13. Reading & Resources* see reading list below * Key Readings Hallam, S., & Creech, A. (Eds.). (2010). Music education in the 21st century in the United Kingdom: Achievements, analysis and aspirations. London: Institute of Education, London.

Jellison, J. A. (2012). Inclusive music classrooms and programmes. In G. McPherson & G. Welch (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of music education (Vol. 2, pp. 65-80). New York: Oxford University Press.

Additional reading: Inclusive Learning

Blatchford, P., Kutnick, P., Baines, E., & Galton, M. (2003). Toward a social pedagogy of classroom group work. International Journal of Educational Research, 39(1-2), 153-172.

27/31

Jellison, J. A., & Draper, E. A. (2015). Music research in inclusive school settings: 1975 to 2013. Journal of Research in Music Education, 62(4), 325-331.

Kyriacou, C. (2009). The five dimensions of social pedagogy within schools. Pastoral Care in Education, 27(2), 101-108.

Ragnarsdottir, H., & Schmidt, C. (2014). Learning spaces for social justice. London: Trentham Books, Institute of Education Press.

Burnard, P., Dillon, S., Rusinek, G., & Saether, E. (2008). Inclusive pedagogies in music education: A comparative study of music teachers' perspectives from four countries. International Journal of Music Education, 26(2), 109-126.

Schultz Jorgensen, P. (2004). Children's participation in a democratic learning environment. In J. MacBeath & L. Moos (Eds.), Democratic learning (pp. 113-131). London: Routledge Falmer.

Additional reading: Instrumental and vocal teaching and learning

Abeles, H. (2004). The effect of three orchestra/school partnerships on students' interest in instrumental music instruction. Journal of Research in Music Education, 52(3), 248.

Allsup, R. E. (2003). Mutual learning and democratic action in instrumental music education. Journal of Research in Music Education, 51, 24-37.

Butler, A., Lind, V. L., & McKoy, C. L. (2007). Equity and access in music education: Conceptualizing culture as barriers to and supports for music learning. Music Education Research, 9(2), 241-253.

Colprit, E. J. (2000). Observation and analysis of Suzuki string teaching. Journal of Research in Music Education, 48(3), 206-221.

Creech, A. (2009). The role of the family in supporting learning. In S. Hallam, I. Cross & M. Thaut (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of music psychology (pp. 295-306). Oxford: OUP.

Creech, A. (2009). Teacher-parent-pupil trios: A typology of interpersonal interaction in the context of learning a musical instrument. Musicae Scientiae, XIII(2), 163-182.

Creech, A. (2012). Interpersonal behaviour in one to one instrumental lessons: An observational analysis. British Journal of Music Education, 29(3), 387-407.

Creech, A., & Gaunt, H. (2012). The changing face of individual instrumental tuition: Value, purpose and potential. In G. E. Mcpherson & G. Welch (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of music education: Oxford University Press.


Creech, A., González-Moreno, P., Lorenzino, L., & Waitman, G. (2013). El sistema and sistema-inspired programmes: A literature review. London: Institute of Education, for Sistema Global. Available at http://sistemaglobal.org/litreview/.

Creech, A., Gonzalez, P., Lorenzino, L., & Waitman, G. (2015). Case study: Lost – or found? – in translation: The globalization of venezuela’s el sistema. In S. Clift & P. Camic (Eds.), Oxford textbook of creative arts, health and wellbeing (pp. Chapter 24). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Elliott, D. J., & Silverman, M. (2015). Music matters (Second ed.). New York: Oxford University Press.

Hallam, S. (1998). Instrumental teaching. Oxford: Heinemann.

Hallam, S. (2006). Music psychology in education. London: Institute of Education, University of London.

Hallam, S. (2015). The power of music. London: UCL Institute of Education for the Music Education Council.

Jorgensen, E. (2011). Pictures of music education. Bloomington, Indiana: Indiana University Press.

McPherson, G. (Ed.). (2006). The child as musician: A handbook of musical development. New York: Oxford University Press.

Moscardini, L., Barron, D. S., & Wilson, A. (2013). Who gets to play? Investigating equity in musical instrument instruction in Scottish primary schools. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 17(6), 646.

O’Neill, S. A. (2012). Becoming a music learner: Towards a theory of transformative music engagement. In G. E. McPherson & G. Welch (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of music education (vol. 1) (pp. 163-186). New York: Oxford University Press.

Polifonia. (2010). Instrumental and vocal teacher education: European perspectives: Chapter 2 (the instrumental/vocal teaching profession: Issues of teaching and learning) and chapter 3 (competences and roles in the instrumental/vocal teaching profession): Pp 37-59. Retrieved 2 January, 2012, from http://www.polifonia-tn.org/Content.aspx?id=179

Additional reading: Careers in instrumental and vocal teaching Bennett, D., & Stanberg, A. (2006). Musicians as teachers: Developing a positive view through collaborative learning partnerships. International Journal of Music Education, 24(3), 219-230.

Bridgstock, R. (2007). Success in the protean career: A predictive study of professional artists and tertiary arts graduates. Unpublished PhD, Queensland University of Technology, Queensland.

29/31

Creech, A. (2015). Chapter 21: Understanding professionalism: Transitions and the contemporary professional musician. In I. Papageorgi & G. Welch (Eds.), Advanced musical performance: Investigations in higher education learning. Farnham, Surrey: Ashgate.

Creech, A., Papageorgi, I., Haddon, L., Potter, J., Morton, F., Duffy, C., et al. (2008). From music student to professional: The process of transition. British Journal of Music Education, 25(3), 315-331.

Lennon, M., & Reed, G. (2012). Instrumental and vocal teacher education: Competences, roles and curricula. Music Education Research, 14(3), 285-308.


PART 3: ASSESSMENT CRITERIA Postgraduate Certificate in Performance Teaching

Und

ergra

dua

te Technique and knowledge

- Command of craft - Embodiment of learning - Accuracy of skills - Breadth and depth of understanding

and reference points

Performance and/or creative output - Imagination and insight - Response to context - Expression with range and artistic instinct - Choice of material or repertoire

Communication and artistic values - Commitment to artistic exploration through technical, intellectual,

creative and emotional processes - Connection with presence to audience - Resilience and courage to take risks, improvise and problem solve - Openness and empathy in working with others

Professional protocols - Preparation - Punctuality, attendance and personal organisation - Attention to communication styles including

performance and rehearsal etiquette, and academic conventions

- Ethics in respect of equality and rights

Additio

nal

Post

gra

d-

uate

- Mastery and integration of the above Originality and individuality - Independence, vision and rigorous developmental self-critique Leadership and being a role-model

Distinc. 90+ Work displaying genuine mastery and integration of artistic and pedagogical insight, command of complex ideas, innovative practice, leadership, and outstanding communicative conviction

Distinc. 80+89

An exceptionally compelling level The work demonstrates an exceptional breadth and depth in critical engagement with relevant literature and an exceptional capacity to engage with the principles and applications of performance pedagogy. The work demonstrates exceptionally robust and accurate evaluation of ideas about theory and practice. There is an exceptional level of clarity and insight with regards to recent relevant developments in the field of performance pedagogy, including in local, national and international contexts.

An exceptionally compelling level The work shows an exceptional depth of critical analysis and originality in integration and application of theoretical understanding to performance pedagogy practice. An exceptional level of critical reflection, involving outstanding analysis, evaluation and synthesis of appropriate material, is demonstrated. The work acknowledges consistently an impressive range of ideas from reading and other sources using appropriate referencing.

An exceptionally compelling level The work demonstrates an exceptional commitment to artistic exploration in a teaching context, embedding an expert range of technical, intellectual, creative and emotional approaches to performance pedagogy. The candidate connects with an exceptional level of ‘presence’ with students. Consistently, the candidate demonstrates exceptional resilience in the face of unpredictable events and critical incidents and shows a very high level of courage to take risks, improvise and problem solve in performance pedagogy contexts. The candidate demonstrates an exceptional level of openness and empathy in working with students and with peers in team-teaching contexts. Independence, vision and rigorous developmental self-critique in performance pedagogy contexts are all very well-developed.

An exceptionally compelling level The work demonstrates an exceptional awareness of professional protocols and ethics across national and international contexts and a very highly developed ability to engage in reflective and ongoing learning. The work shows evidence of exceptional levels of preparation. Consistently, the candidate is punctual and attendance is entirely reliable. The candidate shows very high levels of personal organisation. Exceptional attention is paid to appropriate performance pedagogy etiquette, in accordance with professional protocols and ethical standards. The work demonstrates exceptional levels of insight with regards equality, inclusion and diversity issues. The work demonstrates exceptional leadership qualities, including communication, initiative and vision.

Distinc. 70-79

An excellent level The work demonstrates wide ranging critical engagement with relevant literature and an excellent capacity to engage with the principles and application of performance pedagogy. The work demonstrates robust and accurate evaluation of ideas about theory and practice. There is a high level of clarity and insight with regards to recent relevant developments in the field of performance pedagogy, including in local, national and international contexts.

An excellent level The work shows an impressive level of originality and an excellent depth of critical analysis in relation to the interpretation and application of established practice and theory in performance pedagogy. An excellent level of critical reflection, involving a high level of analysis, evaluation and synthesis of appropriate material, is demonstrated. The work acknowledges consistently an impressive range of ideas from reading and other sources using appropriate referencing.

An excellent level The work demonstrates an excellent commitment to artistic exploration in a teaching context, drawing upon a well-developed range of technical, intellectual, creative and emotional approaches to performance pedagogy. The candidate connects with a high level of ‘presence’ with students. Consistently, the candidate demonstrates resilience in the face of unpredictable events and critical incidents and shows courage to take risks, improvise and problem solve in performance pedagogy contexts. The candidate demonstrates an excellent level of openness and empathy in working with students and with peers in team-teaching contexts. Independence, vision and rigorous developmental self-critique in performance pedagogy contexts are all well-developed.

An excellent level The work demonstrates excellent awareness of professional protocols and ethics and a highly developed ability to engage in reflective understanding and ongoing learning. The work shows evidence of excellent levels of preparation. Consistently, the candidate is punctual and well-organised and attendance is reliable. Commendable attention is paid to appropriate performance pedagogy etiquette, in accordance with professional protocols and ethical standards. The work demonstrates very good levels of insight with regards equality, inclusion and diversity issues. The work demonstrates well-developed leadership qualities, including communication, initiative and vision.

31/31

Merit 60-69

A good level The work demonstrates a good level of critical engagement with relevant literature and a considerable capacity to engage with the principles and applications of performance pedagogy, including accurate evaluation of ideas about theory and practice. The work is clear and accurate with regards to recent relevant developments in the field of performance pedagogy, including in local, national and international contexts.

A good level The work demonstrates a good level of originality and a sound depth of critical analysis in relation to the interpretation and application of established practice and theory in performance pedagogy. A good level of critical reflection, involving competent analysis, evaluation and synthesis of appropriate material, is demonstrated. The work acknowledges consistently a wide range of ideas from reading and other sources using appropriate referencing.

A good level The work demonstrates a good commitment to artistic exploration in a teaching context, evidencing a competent range of technical, intellectual, creative and emotional approaches to performance pedagogy. The candidate connects with a good level of ‘presence’ with students. For the most part, the candidate demonstrates resilience in the face of unpredictable events and critical incidents and shows courage to take risks, improvise and problem solve in performance pedagogy contexts. The candidate demonstrates a good level of openness and empathy in working with students and with peers in team-teaching contexts. Independence, vision and rigorous developmental self-critique in performance pedagogy contexts are all competent.

A good level The work demonstrates a good awareness of professional protocols and ethics and a well-developed ability to engage in reflective understanding and ongoing learning. The work shows evidence of good preparation. Punctuality, attendance and personal organisation are reliable. The candidate shows reasonably good levels of personal organisation. Attention is paid to appropriate performance pedagogy etiquette, in accordance with professional protocols and ethical standards. The work demonstrates competent understanding with regards equality, inclusion and diversity issues. The work demonstrates competent and developing leadership qualities, including communication, initiative and vision.

Pass 50-59

A satisfactory level The work demonstrates a satisfactory level of critical engagement with relevant literature and satisfactory capacity to engage with the principles and applications of performance pedagogy, including an accurate account of ideas about theory and practice. The work is accurate with regards to recent relevant developments in the field of performance pedagogy, including in local, national and international contexts.

A satisfactory level The work demonstrates a reasonably satisfactory level of independent thought and a competent ability to integrate and apply theoretical understanding to performance pedagogy practice. A satisfactory level of critical reflection, involving some analysis, evaluation and synthesis of appropriate material, is demonstrated. The work acknowledges consistently a satisfactory range of ideas from reading and other sources using appropriate referencing.

A satisfactory level The work demonstrates a satisfactory commitment to artistic exploration in a teaching context, with evidence of a developing range of technical, intellectual, creative and emotional approaches to performance pedagogy. The candidate connects with a satisfactory level of ‘presence’ with students. At times, the candidate demonstrates resilience in the face of unpredictable events and critical incidents and shows courage to take risks, improvise and problem solve in performance pedagogy contexts. The candidate demonstrates a developing level of openness and empathy in working with students and with peers in team-teaching contexts. Independence, vision and rigorous developmental self-critique in performance pedagogy contexts are all developing well.

A satisfactory level The work demonstrates a satisfactory awareness of professional protocols and ethics and a competent ability to engage in reflective understanding and ongoing learning. The work shows evidence of some preparation. Punctuality, attendance and personal organisation are reliable, for the most part. The candidate shows acceptable levels of personal organisation. Some attention is paid to appropriate performance pedagogy etiquette, in accordance with professional protocols and ethical standards. The work demonstrates basic and developing understanding with regards equality, inclusion and diversity issues. The work demonstrates basic and developing leadership qualities, including communication, initiative and vision.

Fail

40-49

A generally unreliable level The work demonstrates a basic and limited critical engagement with relevant literature and a limited capacity to engage with the principles and applications of performance pedagogy. There is some very basic discussion of ideas about theory and practice. The work is limited, and may be inaccurate, with regards to recent relevant developments in the field of performance pedagogy.

A generally unreliable level The work shows little independent thought and a limited ability to integrate and apply theoretical understanding to performance pedagogy practice. There is limited evidence of critical reflection, with little analysis, evaluation or synthesis of appropriate material. The work acknowledges some basic ideas from reading and other sources, but sources are not referenced with a consistent system of referencing.

A generally unreliable level The work demonstrates an inconsistent commitment to artistic exploration in a teaching context. There is limited evidence of relevant background knowledge and reflections lack sophistication and focus. The range of technical, intellectual, creative and emotional approaches to performance pedagogy is not well-developed. The candidate’s connection with ‘presence’ with students is unreliable. The candidate demonstrates limited resilience in the face of unpredictable events and critical incidents and shows limited courage to take risks, improvise and problem solve in performance pedagogy contexts. The candidate demonstrates little awareness of openness and empathy in working with students and with peers in team-teaching contexts. Independence, vision and rigorous developmental self-critique in performance pedagogy contexts are basic.

A generally unreliable level The work demonstrates a basic awareness of professional protocols and ethics and a basic but limited ability to engage in reflective understanding and ongoing learning. The work shows limited evidence of preparation. Punctuality, attendance and personal organisation are unreliable. Limited attention is paid to appropriate performance pedagogy etiquette, in accordance with professional protocols and ethical standards. The work demonstrates limited understanding with regards equality, inclusion and diversity issues. The work demonstrates limited leadership qualities, including communication, initiative and vision.

Fail 0-39

An unsatisfactory level The work demonstrates little critical engagement with relevant literature and insufficient capacity to engage with the principles and applications of performance pedagogy. There is very limited discussion of ideas about theory and practice. The work does not demonstrate knowledge of recent relevant developments in the field of performance pedagogy.

An unsatisfactory level The work shows insufficient independent thought and an inconsistent ability to integrate and apply theoretical understanding to performance pedagogy practice. There is very little evidence of critical reflection supported by any analysis, evaluation or synthesis of appropriate material. Ideas from reading and other sources are acknowledged to an insufficient degree.

An unsatisfactory level The work demonstrates insufficient commitment to artistic exploration in a teaching context. The range of technical, intellectual, creative and emotional approaches to performance pedagogy is very limited. The candidate’s connection with ‘presence’ with students is not in evidence. The candidate demonstrates insufficient resilience in the face of unpredictable events and critical incidents and shows very limited courage to take risks, improvise and problem solve in performance pedagogy contexts. The candidate very limited openness and empathy in working with students and with peers in team-teaching contexts. Independence, vision and rigorous developmental self-critique in performance pedagogy contexts are all insufficient, being limited, unreliable and inconsistent.

An unsatisfactory level The work demonstrates that the candidate has very limited awareness of professional protocols and ethics and very limited commitment to reflective understanding and ongoing learning. The work shows insufficient evidence of preparation. Punctuality, attendance and personal organisation are unreliable. Insufficient attention is paid to appropriate performance pedagogy etiquette, in accordance with professional protocols and ethical standards. The work shows very limited understanding with regards equality, inclusion and diversity issues. Evidence of leadership qualities, including communication, initiative and vision, is insufficient.

postgraduate certificate in performance teaching€¦ · · 2017-08-31postgraduate certificate in...

Documents