Search

In her article 'Vital methodologies: Live methods, mobile art and research-creation' (2015), Mimi Sheller posits the question: 'How can "outcome" capture process?' I take this quote as my starting point in this article but, losing the 'how', I ask the different question: 'Can outcome capture process?' This question is important for students taking or contemplating taking a Ph.D. by arts practice and their supervisors and assessors, as the answer might be 'yes' for a traditional Ph.D. by thesis, but 'no' for practice as research (PaR). I argue that in PaR knowledge production is to be found in the process, rather than in the end result of making, and that knowledge production might therefore be more readily demonstrated in PaR without recourse to explanatory written texts, if Ph.D. assessment considered process equally with or, in some cases, instead of outcome. I also argue that the repetitive, physically arduous and often time-consuming nature of many animation processes amplify the relevance of this question for those involved or interested in animation PaR. In addition to 'practice as research' there are many other titles in circulation, such as 'creative arts research', 'performance research' and 'research creation'. The differences are not merely nominal but can indicate theoretical differences, for instance, Candy and Edmonds adopt the term 'practice based', arguing that the term 'practice as research' 'unhelpfully conflates the two'. I have adopted Robin Nelson's abbreviation, PaR, for brevity in this document. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Professional body accreditation must better communicate its value to higher education institutions, industry and society as a whole. Tom Crick, James H. Davenport, Paul Hanna, Alastair Irons, Sally Pearce and Tom Prickett explore the value of - and future enhancements to - BCS accreditation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We report the successful introduction of student focus groups (SFGs) as an element of our School of Pharmacy quality management programme. Student focus groups feature focused discussion, problem-solving and brainstorming, which allow students at each level of the Master of Pharmacy (MPharm) degree to contribute opinion, commentary, ideas and solutions to the School of Pharmacy (the School) and, in so doing, enhance their own and their colleagues' education. Focus group outputs are formally reported to the MPharm Course Board and the focus group facilitator closes the reporting loop by reporting Course Board decisions back to the SFG. The group facilitator moderates meetings, and is a member of the teaching staff who has a pre-existing professional relationship with the group. The School demonstrably benefits from SFG inputs, while the group members benefit by gaining transferable skills. Group members also gain the opportunity to contribute to the School quality management and assessment process. Qualitative and quantitative evaluations are included which indicate that such groups provide a valuable contribution to the quality management programme of the School. The variety of ways in which the group members and the whole student body benefit are described. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]