- Title
- The knowledge-knower structures used in the assessment of graphic design practical work in a multi-campus context
- Creator
- Giloi, Susan Louise
- Date Issued
- 2016
- Date
- 2016
- Type
- Thesis
- Type
- Doctoral
- Type
- PhD
- Identifier
- vital:1336
- Identifier
- http://hdl.handle.net/10962/d1021310
- Description
- This case study explicates the knowledge-knower structures that are valued in the assessment of Graphic Design (GD) practical work in a multi-campus Private Higher Education (PHE) context. Assessment, which provides the measure for student success and progression, plays a significant role in Higher Education (HE). It is acknowledged that, in addition to increased pressure on educators to deliver high pass and throughput rates, there is often scrutiny of their assessment practice to ensure that it is fair, reliable, valid and transparent. The aspects of reliability and validity are particularly significant in for-profit private higher education institutions, where a strong focus on efficiency may result in added scrutiny of assessment practices. Although the assessment of GD practical work exemplifies these pressures and objectives, its characteristics and practices set it apart from many of the more standard forms of assessment found in HE. Not only is GD practical work predominantly visual rather than text-based, but complex achievements and tacit knowledge are assessed. This form of assessment traditionally relies on panel or group marking by connoisseurs who consider what is commonly termed ‘person’, ‘process’ and ‘product’ when making value judgements. Therefore, in GD assessment knowledge, the design product, the graphic designer and what the graphic designer does may all be valued. GD assessment, where outcomes are not easily stated, relies on the tacit expertise of assessors and can often be perceived to be subjective and unreliable. It therefore sits uncomfortably with results-driven HE and institutional priorities. In light of this context and the complex and social nature of GD assessment, a critical realist approach provided the guiding metatheory for this case study. Critical realism considers the unseen but real mechanisms that exist and interact within a context to create a phenomenon such as an assessment practice. In this case study the knowledge-structuring theories of Basil Bernstein and Karl Maton were used to uncover these mechanisms. Bernstein and Maton propose that new knowledge, the curriculum and pedagogy, which includes assessment, communicate the valued disciplinary knowledge and who controls these communications. For this study the institutional documents and voices of assessors provided insight into the GD assessment practice; data was generated through a lecturer survey, the study guides and assessor conversations at both the formative and summative assessment stages. Given the significance of both knowledge and expertise in GD, Specialisation, one of the Legitimation Code Theory (LCT) dimensions, provided the conceptual tool whereby the generated data were analysed and categorised, and the underlying valued knowledge-knower structures, or specialisation codes, were identified. The identified specialisation codes revealed a number of code clashes, matches and shifts, which highlighted instances of mixed or conflicting communication regarding what was valued and used in GD assessment. These clashes, matches and shifts have significant implications for curriculum design, pedagogy and assessment. As a result the findings may have relevance for students, lecturers and assessors who work in practice-based fields which require the assessment of complex achievements and rely on a specialised gaze to judge standards. Informed by the findings of this study, I argue that there is a fundamental conflict between what is valued within the broader national South African Higher Education system and Private Higher Education institutional context, and the nature of GD assessment. The broader structures, guided by a techno-rationalist approach to assessment and the pressures of massification, success, compliance and institutional efficiencies, value explicitly-stated outcomes and criteria, propositional knowledge and a positivist ideal of one correct mark for any one assessment, while the GD assessment practice values the more social and tacit elements of procedural knowledge and a specialist knower as evidenced in a largely tacit GD gaze that assessors possess and students aim to develop. The uncovering of the knowledge-knower structures used in GD assessment has the potential to make the assessed gaze more explicit to lecturers, assessors and ultimately to students. My findings offer a deeper understanding of the assessment of knower code disciplines which require a specialist gaze for the judgement of student work, and the pressures experienced in this type of assessment in a HE context.
- Format
- 293 leaves
- Format
- Publisher
- Rhodes University
- Publisher
- Faculty of Education, Centre for Higher Education Research, Teaching and Learning (CHERTL)
- Language
- English
- Rights
- Giloi, Susan Louise
- Hits: 1082
- Visitors: 1054
- Downloads: 136
Collections
RU Centre for Higher Education Research, Teaching and Learning (CHERTL)
| Thumbnail | File | Description | Size | Format | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| View Details Download | SOURCEPDF | 7 MB | Adobe Acrobat PDF | View Details Download |