Module Title: Critical Media Methods
|Hand-in date and time:
10 December 2020, 6pm
N/A – approx. 10 minutes in length
|This assignment counts for 50% of Module Mark|
|Online submission arrangement via Aula:
Digital submission of presentation file; OR,
Link to online-hosted presentation
|Mark and Feedback date:
Provisional grades and feedback for creative project will be returned by 31 December 2020, 6pm
Mark and Feedback method:
Feedback returned via Aula
You will create a digital creative project, which will demonstrate a detailed understanding of a method/methodology’s use, history, and application. This creative project will take the form of an audio-visual presentation/video.
You will select one method/methodology from those presented in the module to be the basis of your creative project. Your project will then do the following:
· Demonstrate an understanding of how the method/methodology is used
· Demonstrate an understanding of the theory and the history behind the method/methodology
· Demonstrate an understanding of the strengths and weaknesses of the method/methodology, and when it should or should not be used
· Show how the method/methodology would be applied to a selected topic
Your topic for the last element will be selected from the following:
· The nation and media ownership
· Minority voices in media
· Advertising to children
· Media fandom
· Shifts in television viewing practices
· Changes in the film-going experience
· Violence and video games
· Privacy and piracy
· “Ownership” issues in digital music
· Social networking and privacy concerns
The creative project must be audio-visual in some form. The decision of how to present this is up to you. However, you are encouraged to make use of the production skills introduced to you in this module and 183MAPA. You will not be assessed on your technical ability; however, you will be assessed on your ability to make sensible decisions in presenting the material in a way that is accessible, coherent, and engaging.
You will be assessed on:
· Your demonstrated understanding of the chosen method/methodology
· The selection of a topic appropriate to the chosen method/methodology
· Demonstrating your understanding of how the topic could be analysed with the chosen method/methodology
· The clarity, coherence, accessibility, and engaging nature of the video
· The use of appropriate formats and structures to present and communicate your ideas
This assessment serves to demonstrate competence in Learning Outcomes 3 & 4.
If there is anything that you do not understand about this assignment brief once you have read it fully, or you have any concerns about it, please contact the Module Leader immediately. Their name and contact details are at the top of this brief.
Your creative project should be:
· Audio-visual in nature (i.e. it should have both an audio and a visual component)
· Approximately 10 mins in length
You may either upload a file to Aula containing your full project, or host the project on an external site, and upload a link to your project. However, if you do the latter, ensure that the hosting platform is stable, and that the project is visible to anyone with the link.
Some methods/methodologies would allow you to actually apply them to the topic in order to demonstrate their utility. Others require materials/clearance/approaches which are beyond the scope of this assessment. You may choose to actually conduct a piece of research by applying the methodology, OR you may choose to explain how such a piece of research would be conducted, and the materials/clearances/approaches that would be required. Either approach is acceptable, and both will be assessed equally.
Standard academic requirements apply, including a clear narrative (with an introduction and conclusion) and referencing, respecting copyright, not plagiarizing, and generally attributing thoughts and materials to their source of origin apply.
Video assignments are not a simple recording of opinion statements or compilation of existing materials. Rather, they are a demonstration of the ability to critically engage with existing materials, concepts, and ideas, to present reflections, and to expand one’s learning inside and outside of the academic classroom. The format changes from classic academic engagement, the content does not.
The key difference is that video assignments allow a visual dimension of presenting ideas, concepts, and connecting thoughts and materials in different ways; which allows you to extend your comfort zone, thereby learn more effectively, and purposefully engage the media technologies offered by the course.
|Module Learning Outcomes||
Assessed in this assignment?
|LO1||Demonstrate the ability to build a research archive and annotated diary to engage with media methods and methodologies;||No|
|LO2||Define the differences between and evaluate specific values and issues for a variety of research methods;||No|
|LO3||Demonstrate the basic skills and knowledge required to plan research for a digital media, cultural or communications relevant topic;||Yes|
|LO4||Demonstrate skills to investigate one research method in depth via method identified by lecturer||Yes|
|You will find full details of how these Learning Outcomes will be assessed by this assignment in the marking rubric at the end of this brief. You should read this as it explains how submitted work achieves certain grades. It will be useful in preparing your assignment as well as in understanding your feedback.|
Marking Process and Feedback
The poster, presentation, and Q+A will be assessed and given feedback by the teaching team. A selection of these will then be moderated by another staff member, to ensure equity and parity across the groups.
Feedback this will be provided in written or audio form via Aula, by the date listed above.
All grades are provisional until they have been moderated by the external examiner, to ensure parity with other universities across the UK Higher Education sector.
The ethical issues associated with this assignment brief will be covered during the module teaching and are overseen by the module staff team. The work that you will carry out on this module does not require you to obtain individual ethical clearance for your individual project. However, during discussion with your module tutor, if it is felt that individual ethical authorization is needed, you will be advised of the process and the deadline for obtaining it.
If ethical authorization is not obtained by the deadline, you will not be able to proceed with the project. If you do so without clearance, the project will not be accepted for submission, will not be marked and you may face disciplinary penalties.
For full details of the University’s policy on ethics, please click here.
The CU Ethics portal can be found here.
Extensions and Mitigating Circumstances
We want you to do your best in each assessment. However, we know that sometimes events happen that are either beyond your control or not easy to predict and which mean that you will not be able to submit your coursework by the deadline. If this happens, you can apply for an extension to your deadline according to our regulations. If you need longer than the extension window, you can apply for a deferral, which takes you to the next assessment period. You must apply for an extension or a deferral before the assignment deadline stated on SONIC.
Apply for an extension or deferral at: firstname.lastname@example.org or by speaking in person to a member of the Registry Team.
Find information about the process and what is/is not considered to be an event beyond your control here.
Please note: under no circumstances are module staff allowed to give unofficial extensions.
Late or non-submission
You must make every effort to submit the best work possible prior to the deadline. If your assignment is submitted online please do not leave it until the last minute to submit. Aim to several hours prior the deadline, or earlier, in case you have any problems submitting.
If you fail to submit work for the module or submit an assessed piece of work late without an agreed extension, you will receive a mark of 0% for that piece of work, even if it is only a few minutes late. You will however be eligible for a re-sit attempt at the next available assessment opportunity where, if you pass, your mark will be capped at 40%.
If you fail the resit assignment, or do not hand in any submission, you one further resit attempt at the assignment. After a second failed/non-submitted resit attempt you will have failed the module. This may have an impact on your ability to progress on your course and/or on your final marks for your degree.
If you fail this assignment on the first submission, the resit brief for the module can be found on the module’s Moodle space. Read this brief carefully and book a tutorial with the Module Leader to ensure that you are clear about what you need to do to pass the module at the next resit opportunity.
We expect all students to act with academic integrity, which means that they will study and produce work in an open, honest and responsible manner.
Academic misconduct covers any action by a student to gain unfair advantage (e.g. extra marks) for her/himself, or for another student, in their assessed work. It not only damages your personal reputation, but also the reputation of the entire university, and it will not be tolerated at Coventry University. There are severe penalties for students who are found guilty of academic misconduct ranging from obtaining a mark of 0% for the piece of work concerned, through to exclusion from the University.
Many modules require you to demonstrate knowledge and understanding of the work of others (artists, makers, practitioners, academics, designers, performers, etc.). It is vital that you make it absolutely clear when you are using work from other sources, and that you reference it clearly and correctly. If you are unsure how to reference, please refer to the CU Harvard Referencing Guide here and speak to a tutor on the module immediately.
Support for correct referencing can also be found though the Centre for Academic Writing (CAW).
For full details of what constitutes academic dishonesty and how to avoid it, please see the section in the Faculty Student Handbook, available on your course’s Moodle space.
There are standard University Assessment criteria that you can use to assist with understanding the mark you receive for this assignment. You can find these here.
The criteria that are specific to this assignment are as follows:
|ANSWER RELEVANCE||ARGUMENT & COHERENCE||EVIDENCE||SUMMARY|
|Innovative response, answers the question fully, addressing the learning objectives of the assessment task. Evidence of critical analysis, synthesis and evaluation.
|A clear, consistent in-depth critical and evaluative argument, displaying the ability to develop original ideas from a range of sources. Engagement with theoretical and conceptual analysis.
|Wide range of appropriately supporting evidence provided, going beyond the recommended texts. Correctly referenced.||An outstanding, well-structured and appropriately referenced answer, demonstrating a high degree of understanding and critical analytic skills.|
|A very good attempt to address the objectives of the assessment task with an emphasis on those elements requiring critical review.||A generally clear line of critical and evaluative argument is presented. Relationships between statements and sections are easy to follow, and there is a sound, coherent structure.||A very good range of relevant sources is used in a largely consistent way as supporting evidence. There is use of some sources beyond recommended texts. Correctly referenced in the main.||The answer demonstrates a very good understanding of theories, concepts and issues, with evidence of reading beyond the recommended minimum. Well organised and clearly written.|
|Competently addresses objectives, but may contain errors or omissions and critical discussion of issues may be superficial or limited in places.
|Some critical discussion, but the argument is not always convincing, and the work is descriptive in places, with over-reliance on the work of others.
|A range of relevant sources is used, but the critical evaluation aspect is not fully presented. There is limited use of sources beyond the standard recommended materials. Referencing is not always correctly presented.
|The answer demonstrates a good understanding of some relevant theories, concepts and issues, but there are some errors and irrelevant material included. The structure lacks clarity.|
|Addresses most objectives of the assessment task, with some notable omissions. The structure is unclear in parts, and there is limited analysis.||The work is descriptive with minimal critical discussion and limited theoretical engagement.||A limited range of relevant sources used without appropriate presentation as supporting or conflicting evidence coupled with very limited critical analysis. Referencing has some errors.||Some understanding is demonstrated but is incomplete, and there is evidence of limited research on the topic. Poor structure and presentation, with few and/or poorly presented references.|
|Some deviation from the objectives of the assessment task. May not consistently address the assignment brief. At the lower end fails to answer the question set or address the learning outcomes. There is minimal evidence of analysis or evaluation.||Descriptive with no evidence of theoretical engagement, critical discussion or theoretical engagement. At the lower end displays a minimal level of understanding.||Very limited use and application of relevant sources as supporting evidence. At the lower end demonstrates a lack of real understanding. Poor presentation of references.||Whilst some relevant material is present, the level of understanding is poor with limited evidence of wider reading. Poor structure and poor presentation, including referencing. At the lower end there is evidence of a lack of comprehension, resulting in an assignment that is well below the required standard.