Creating Postgraduate Collaborations › Forums › CPC Supervision Development Course › Module 5 › Session 4: Assessment, Evaluation and The Way Forward
-
AuthorPosts
-
Questions, comments and ideas about the final course assessment.
Remember to click “subscribe” (top right corner) to receive responses to your comments via email.
Hi All
This is just a reminder that those who participate in the course but choose not to do the assignment, you will receive a letter of participation by email.
However, those who successfully complete the assessment will receive a certificate of competency. This is a Rhodes University short course certificate with the logos of all participating institutions. These certificates will be couriered to your university.You can view the recording of the Zoom session on the assessment and look at the PPT that Chrissie used in that session on the Module 5 Session 4 page.
Keep well
CPC teamHello everyone
I have not been able to get the book that contains previous assignments, Is it available somewhere?
Hi Nwabisa,
The download app for that published book of prior assignments is a pain! I asked the publishers to let us link to a pdf of the book and you will now find that it is now hyperlinked on this page:It’s linked both near the top where it says: ‘An example of this is the book produced as a result of an earlier project’ and also later on where it is listed as a recommended reading.
Hope this helps,
SiouxHi Nwabisa,
The download app for that published book of prior assignments is a pain! I asked the publishers to let us link to a pdf of the book and you will now find that it is now hyperlinked on this page:It’s linked both near the top where it says: ‘An example of this is the book produced as a result of an earlier project’ and also later on where it is listed as a recommended reading.
Hope this helps,
SiouxThanks a lot Sioux for the link to the book. It is now downloadable.
Hi All,
I hope you enjoying doing the reading, writing and thinking towards the final course assessment? Don’t forget to use this forum to raise any questions or concerns or to share your ideas.As you might know, this project also offers a number of seminars alongside the supervision development course. You’re all most welcome to join us for the CPC seminar to be held this Thursday (see below) and please do forward this message to anyone who might be interested.
Kind regards,
SiouxYou are invited to attend a seminar on engaged research to be held as follows:
Supervising the engaged thesis – a road less travelled…
Presenter: Professor Vhonani Netshandama, Director of Community Engagement at University of Venda
Thursday 18 June 4pm to 5:30pmRegister in advance for this meeting:
https://zoom.us/meeting/register/tJMpc-utrD0rHtRaOjRCvY4TBjhq5paIb-oC <https://zoom.us/meeting/register/tJMpc-utrD0rHtRaOjRCvY4TBjhq5paIb-oC>After registering, you will receive a confirmation email containing information about joining the meeting.
This seminar is part of the Creating Postgraduate Collaborations <https://postgradcollaborations.com/about-the-project/> project.
This seminar will be of interest to any postgraduate students or supervisors who have an interest in emancipatory research methodologies than lead to engaged research.
Seminar abstract:
Supervising the engaged thesis – a road less travelled…
In recent decades, community engagement has been a growing force in academia and has been increasingly recognized as a realm of academic responsibility within higher education (Boyer, 1990). Yet, despite the almost 20 yearlong global movement toward community-engaged scholarship, supervisors and Masters and PhD students who pursue this work often receive little support or guidance for their endeavors (O’Meara & Jaeger, 2006; Seifer, Blanchard, Jordan, Gelmon & McGinley 2012). Often students and their supervisors determine for themselves how to build partnerships with community members, manage the logistical aspects of community engagement initiatives, and convey the significance of engaged work to colleagues. Doctoral students who choose to adopt a community-engaged approach to their dissertation research often find it difficult to identify a supervisor who understands and endorses this type of work. It is more likely to take longer, the budgetary alignment is often an achilles heel.
In SA, the assumption was that since the seminal conference of 2006 in Bantry bay, community engaged scholarship would gain the traction, such that by now, there would be a critical mass of supervisors such that the uptake would increase, yet,
I intend initiating a conversation about why we should work hard to improve the uptake and the quality, how to navigate the challenges and contextualising the tensions with the hope of strengthening supervision support and collaboration. I will give a bit of historical background on CE scholarship in globally and in SA, but use UNIVEN (an HDI) as a frame of reference (and my concern that the capacity development is still too slow), assuming that all it is prudent to suggest that HDIs should be contributing more actively in engaged scholarship and capacity development thereof, as there is an inextricable relationship between engagement, emancipatory research methodologies and impactful research…Hi All,
How are the reflective essays going? Supervision is so complicated – it includes the complexities of knowledge creation, with a big dose of power relations and personalities, mixed together with institutional structures, policies and rules… Selecting an aspect or two of this to unravel in a reflective piece is no easy task. But remember you will get feedback on the full draft you submit.
I have had two questions about the assignment in my email box which I thought I’d respond to here:
1) Do I have to include a reference list?
YES! You need to include the full references of all the texts you have explicitly drawn on in crafting your assignment.2) Can I reference zoom sessions or forum messages from this course?
Yes, you certainly can. But you do need to think about what function the reference is playing in your writing. Perhaps you want to reference a forum message or such to demonstrate that supervisors are concerned about a particular issue – in which case the reference to a forum message does the job of supporting your claim very well. But generally speaking, referencing a forum post or a zoom session wouldn’t be particularly powerful.
I guess the bottom line is that we generally reference for one of two reasons – (i) to provide evidence of previous research to support a claim or (ii) to provide evidence of data to show that our claims emerge from our analysis. Of course, it is a bit more complicated than that as we also reference to prevent plagiarism – but this is actually only a small part of why we reference – and the much more compelling and complex reason is, as I said, to provide evidence of claims we’re making.
Let me unpack (i) above a bit more:
By referencing other texts, we connect what we are saying to what others have said. We show how what we are saying is supported by (or contests) what others have said by referencing that prior research. Typically when we’re referencing other sources, we’re doing so to make sure our readers take what we are saying seriously, that is, our references act as evidence for our claims. So we want to make sure our references have power, credibility and weight. The stronger the reference, the more credibility it adds to our claim. Referencing a blog or website to support what we’re claiming will not be nearly as powerful as referencing a peer-reviewed article in a journal recognised by members of the field. There are of course times when we do want to reference blogs or websites and the such and that is perfectly okay – but when we’re referencing to add weight to our claims, then we want to find the strongest weight possible.
This is just one of the reasons why academics telling students not to use wikipedia is misguided. They should use wikipedia. It is one of the most fabulous examples of citizen science on the planet, it embodies a public good, and it provides an accessible entry to complicated concepts and ideas which can help the novice researcher (student) to then read and make sense of the peer-reviewed texts with more confidence. I tell my students to read the Wikipedia entry for any new theory, concept or theorist they come across. Research indicates that the veracity of Wikipedia entries is very high (Just do a search on Google Scholar for ‘Wikipedia reliability’ and you will see it consistently outperforms many encyclopaedias). BUT, should they reference Wikipedia? There’s absolutely no academic ‘rule’ that says they shouldn’t. But they need to understand why they are referencing. If they are inserting a reference to show the conversation in the field that they’re joining and to indicate that their readers should believe their claim, they want to make sure their reference is to the most powerful, widely accepted reference. Because Wikipedia is not double-blind peer-reviewed, it will not be a very powerful reference to use to provide evidence for their claim.
I am sure many of you will be more than familiar with all I am saying above, but sadly many academics treat referencing as a common-sense or technical issue related to referencing styles, rather than helping their students to see the role referencing plays in building research – and how this varies in form and function from field to field (and not only in APA vs Chicago etc).
Hope this rather lengthy discussion is useful.
Do feel free to use this forum to add any questions, comments or concerns.
Kind regards
SiouxPS: I forgot to add, don’t forget the seminar on engaged research this afternoon. All are welcome.
You are invited to attend a seminar on engaged research to be held as follows:
Supervising the engaged thesis – a road less travelled…
Presenter: Professor Vhonani Netshandama, Director of Community Engagement at University of Venda
Thursday 18 June 4pm to 5:30pmRegister in advance for this meeting:
https://zoom.us/meeting/register/tJMpc-utrD0rHtRaOjRCvY4TBjhq5paIb-oC <https://zoom.us/meeting/register/tJMpc-utrD0rHtRaOjRCvY4TBjhq5paIb-oC>After registering, you will receive a confirmation email containing information about joining the meeting.
This seminar is part of the Creating Postgraduate Collaborations <https://postgradcollaborations.com/about-the-project/> project.
This seminar will be of interest to any postgraduate students or supervisors who have an interest in emancipatory research methodologies than lead to engaged research.
Thank Suoux for the link. Are there any particular formatting issues for the essay like line spacing and font size?
Hullo Mackena. Do we attach annexes as separate documents or they should be combined with the report. I have sent the assignment hoping that i will have an option to attach the annexes. However, such provision is Not there.
Hi All,
The assignment should be uploaded as a single document so you need to insert your appendices to the document. If you have any problems, you can email Professor Chrissie Boughey c.boughey@ru.ac.za as she is overseeing the assessment process.
If you have any technical problems with the upload, please email cpc@postgradcollaborations.com and Nompilo will do her best to assist.
Hope this helps
SiouxNo questions, comments and ideas about the final course assessment.
Thank you for a well mounted course.Hello to you all,
Well done to all who have submitted your assignments! The assessment team are hard at work providing feedback.
We’re hoping a few more of you who have not yet submitted will do so soon.
If you have any problems, you can email Professor Chrissie Boughey c.boughey@ru.ac.za as she is overseeing the assessment process. If you have any technical problems with the upload, please email cpc@postgradcollaborations.com and Nompilo will do her best to assist.
Kind regards to you all
SiouxGood morning CPC Participants
Today we will begin to return the first draft of your assignments with comments intended to allow you to work on a second and final draft. Your assignments will be returned to you via the email address you have given to us.
We are also providing overall feedback on all the assignments – i.e. feedback that discusses what we have learned from the entire group’s work. This feedback is pasted below and has been compiled by Prof Chrissie Boughey.
Go well with your redrafting
Regards
The CPC TeamSome overall feedback from the draft assignments
Altogether about 70 participants submitted draft assignments. Nearly all have been returned now with in-text comments. The purpose in this document is to give some overall feedback to everyone on what we have seen in the assignments to help you with your second and final drafts.
1. Humanising pedagogy
Many of you have picked up on the idea of employing a humanising pedagogy in your supervision but not everyone appears to understand it in the way authors such as Salazar intended.
Drawing on a humanising pedagogy is not only about ‘being nice’ to your students and enquiring about their personal lives, inviting them to discuss their progress over tea and coffee and so on. It’s much more difficult than that. Humanising pedagogy is basically about social justice. About the fact that some people get to do things and others don’t. Some people get to go to university, others don’t. Some people succeed in university others don’t. Some people enjoy university and feel as if they belong and others feel alienated and estranged.
Drawing on the idea of a humanising pedagogy involves acknowledging that the world is not fair, that higher education is not fair and then trying to make things more fair. It involves acknowledging that the things we do as researchers (practices), the ways we behave, the ways we talk, the ways we write are social and cultural. They are not neutral and open to all. Because of this, we can be part of the injustice or we can contribute to justice. Some students, by virtue of their previous experiences in their homes and communities of origin will have had access to certain practices and the values that underpin them. Others, typically those from working class backgrounds where caregivers do not have high levels of education, will not.
I’ll give an example of from the work of one of my own former PhD students, Karen Ellery (and as a former supervisor, I think it’s my responsibility to ‘promote’ her work which is what I am doing here). Karen works in a science programme at Rhodes University that provides access to students who do not meet the University’s usual admission requirements. These students are typically black and working class, some from rural areas.
In her study, Karen saw that her students typically did not understand the values of accuracy, precision and overall organisation in their study as scientists. In laboratories, scientists have to be very accurate and precise as they observe and measure. One decimal point can make an enormous difference to an experiment or an observation. Karen’s students were employing more of a ‘hit and miss’ approach. This also came through in the way they kept lecture notes. Rather than organising notes methodically in a file subject by subject, they were all jumbled up. Scientists need to keep lab books in which results and processes are recorded rigorously. Their practice of keeping notes did not bode well for what they would need to do in the labs.
Karen understood that the fact that students did not appear to draw on values like precision and accuracy had a lot to do with their lives before they came to university. At home there had been no need to be accurate and precise and the schools they went to were also very disorganised. Sometimes classes happened, sometimes they didn’t so it was little wonder that students didn’t understand that, once they arrived at the university, the scheduled class would always happen unless there was an absolute disaster. This accounted for their frequent absences from class and their failure to hand things in on time.
Karen’s approach to understanding her students was to acknowledge them as ‘social beings’ – to understand that they were coming from one way of life, valuable in its own right, to a new way. She did not simply tell them that they had to be accurate and precise, rather her approach was to explain why knowledge production in science is dependent on these values. She was thus explaining the ‘method’ of science to them and providing what South African author Wally Morrow (1993) terms ‘epistemological access’ – or access to the values underpinning what can count as knowledge and how it can be known.
The natural sciences in their current form are dominant but there are other ways of understanding the world. A botanist once told me that traditional healers in the northern part of KwaZulu Natal in South Africa can treat high blood pressure using herbs found in their local environments very successfully. However, their understanding of the notion of ‘blood pressure’ differed to that found in western medicine as they did not acknowledge the existence of the heart as a pump. She knew this as she had been present when beasts had been slain and had asked about the function of the heart as the animal was butchered. So, a totally different understanding of the way the human body worked appeared to be operating and this underpinned a set of practices involving using herbs to treat disease. A humanising pedgagogy would accept this different view of physiology as valid but different to the dominant view. Academics using a humanising pedagogy would understand why some students did not understand what they were trying to teach possibly because they were drawing on a completely different world view and way of being in the world. The point would be that the alternative view would always be valued and, at another level, efforts would be made to include this as ‘academic’. In South Africa, this sort of thinking is underpinning calls for the curriculum at our universities to be ‘decolonised’.
A humanizing pedagogy thus entails trying to make sense of all the ways of being in the world and trying to supervise in ways that make the more hidden aspects of our disciplines explicit. A humanizing pedagogy entails not taking the principles and writing practices of our disciplines for granted but rather striving to make them evident to our students.
If you have addressed humanising pedagogy in your assignment, please think deeply about what we have said in this feedback and, possibly, go on to read people like Salazar and Gee (cited in the Powerpoint slides) to deepen your understanding.
2. Focus
In the instructions for the assignment, we said you could focus on one issue raised in the course and reflect on your own experience as a supervisor or student to explore it.In some assignments, it is quite difficult to see what this one issue is as they read as a kind of ‘stream of consciousness’ where CPC participants just let their thoughts flow. Reflective writing does require you to explore your consciousness but this does not mean that the writing is without structure. If you have decided to focus on one issue, think about your writing and ask yourself the following questions:
• What is the issue I am exploring? (If you can’t name it, it is unlikely your readers will be able to either!)
• Can I identify the points I want to make about the issue?
• How have I organised those points so that they make sense?Reflective writing will be new to many of you. Please don’t be despondent at what we are saying in this point. Remember, you have only submitted a draft so far and you have the opportunity to redraft it in the light of constructive feedback. Perhaps it would also be useful to think about your experience of getting feedback in the light of how your own students might feel when you comment on their writing.
3. Making links
Although we suggested you should focus on one issue in your assignment, this does not mean that the rest of the course can go unnoticed. Often it is possible to bring in other aspects of the course in relation to what you are saying about your focus. We have often indicated where you could do this.Good luck with your redrafting. Remember that the research shows us that writing is a tool for learning – that you only learn as you write. Take the opportunity to redraft your work as a real learning opportunity.
-
AuthorPosts
- The topic ‘Session 4: Assessment, Evaluation and The Way Forward’ is closed to new replies.