This term has come to an end quickly, including the submission for the PG Cert! Last week I have concentrated on completing all assessment portfolio work as well as attending QAR (Quality Audit Review) panel for the school.
I was invited to attend the Course Leader and Programme Director meeting with the QAR panel focusing on the relationship of the School vision to LCF and UAL:
UAL The UAL strategy, Transformative Education for a Creative World (2015 to 2022) focused on four strategic areas that directly connect to the SMC vison and pillars. The UAL strategic areas are (written statement from the Dean Jessica Bugg before the QAR panel meeting):
1. Transformative Education (SMC pillar 2, Develop curriculum relevance, resilience)
2. World-Leading Research and Enterprise (SMC pillar 3, Extend the value of our research and KE with a focus on engagement and impact).
3. Communication & Collaboration (SMC pillar 1, Collaboration, partnership, and communication to build opportunities between communities and disciplines)
4. Building an Inspirational Environment (SMC pillars 1,2,3).
As a course leader I often find myself sandwiched somewhere between the school / UAL agenda and the students demand. We are often asked to change our curriculum or teaching approach with vision from the school, but in my experience, there is very little context to why we are doing this and how it relates to specific courses and their specific needs. The school agenda is often implemented with a broader vision ‘one for all’ and not always as easy to apply in the same way for different courses.
For example, for my course BA (Hons) Hair, make-up and Prosthetics for Performance, we have been pushed by the school agenda to consider sustainability and cost of study as two main focuses with examples how to, that does not work for our course.
Sustainability is of course of great importance but unfortunately in our area, not as easy to apply. Firstly, the specialist materials available in a very niche industry doesn’t offer much sustainable options. Secondly, the niche materials needed for the area, are extremely costly. So, when the school ask to reduce the cost of study, there is not many alternatives and this I feel, is not always considered as we are being asked ‘use cheaper alternatives, recycled materials and work small scale sampling’. We can not use recycled materials in make-up for obvious health and safety reasons. We are working on performers, meaning we can’t work small scale as wigs and prosthetics are made for, and need to fit a person. Applying to a performer is also one of the fundamental skills as students need to have an great understanding of comfort, durability, realistic designs and people skills applying to and dealing with highly demanding performers.
Basically, I agree with the school and UAL vision. However, I do think there is more room to discuss individual course needs and how this vision might look flexible depending on the area of specialism.
Going back to the QAR panel meeting, it was overall a positive dynamic and the questions we were asked was focused on KE and research, assessments and staff wellbeing.