Creative / artistic performance

What can we assess through performance?

Generally speaking, when using a performance as a method of assessment you are most likely aiming to assess a product rather than a process. However, depending on the disciplinary context, intended learning outcomes and professional requirements you might also be interested in assessing the process undertaken to produce the performance. In some cases your students might be required to submit a reflective journal or account as well as the actual performance; the weight allocated to such reflection will depend on their weighting against the learning outcomes.

The performance itself can offer evidence of:

research undertaken on a specific topic or period
knowledge and understanding
technical skills
ideas development
creativity and originality
planning and budgeting skills
presentation and communication skills
rehearsal and refinement
ability to effectively allocate and carry out roles and responsibilities as part of an ensemble
ability to meet the demands of the brief
specific skills and techniques applied / demonstrated during the performance

What alternative assessment methods could I choose?

< Back to Assessment Methods selector

Design

Here are some questions to consider when planning to assess performance:

How clear are the learning outcomes and how will you ensure that the students understand them?
Is the brief constructively aligned to the outcomes?
Can the stakes be lowered?
- is it possible to observe performance on several occasions both to ensure consistency of performance and to make the assessment more fair?
- if multiple, low-stake assessments can be made, how will you keep records for externals?
If you have to use ‘standard’ university of departmental criteria, are there ways in which you can re-interpret these in order to give clearer guidance to the students?
Are the criteria that you plan to use objective enough?
- how will you assess learning outcomes relating to experiential categories such as imagination and creativity?
- will you be responsible for designing the assessment criteria and the marking scheme or will you negotiate these with the students?
- how are you going to ensure that all those assessing and being assessed have understood the assessment criteria and the marking scheme?
What opportunities for formative feedback leading up to the performance are you going to provide?
- could a process of formative discussion help resolve issues of originality?
Will students have the opportunity to watch/listen to their own performance to evaluate themselves and learn from it?
- what guidance and support will you offer to ensure students are not over-critical of themselves?
Who will be assessing the performance?
- if there is a panel of assessors how will you inform the students of the make-up of the panel?
- in a performance it is (almost) impossible to conduct blind marking, or anonymous marking; it is therefore particularly important to be vigilant about potential bias. How will you do this?
- if as a tutor you are also one of the assessors, how are you going to reduce the halo effect by which judgement (positive or negative) is influenced by previous knowledge of the student?
- could an audience contribute to the assessment, if so, how and when?
What technical support, if any, is needed?
What health and safety precautions are necessary?
- do you (or the students) need to carry out a risk assessment?

Lastly when thinking about designing assignments, it is worth taking a moment to reflect on how we define creativity [an essential component of this type of assessment] and how our expectations might vary across the years of the degree programme. We do not claim that the ideas given here are ideal; they are merely used to start discussion and thinking and we recognise that definition will vary across disciplines. The underpinning point is that if we cannot define it, then how can we recognise it / assess it? Anderson et al(2001) say “putting elements together to form a novel, coherent whole or make an original product” Which raises the question about original, which we will consider again in the section on integrity.

In terms of development over time, Shaw and Stoney (1995) suggest:

level 4 - identify and appreciate novel / original aspects of and perspectives on the subject
level 5 - ability to begin to express personal view / perspectives in relation to knowledge, issues and solutions within the subject, that are founded in / stemming from authoritative sources
level 6 - begin to identify new perspectives in, and modifications to, existing knowledge structures, new areas for investigation, new problems for solution, transfer of knowledge / solutions into new contexts.

Whilst Higher Education Credit Initiative Wales (1996) talk about synthesis / creativity as:

level 4 - can collect / collate and categorise ideas and information in a predictable and standard format:
level 5 - can reformat a range of ideas / information towards a given purpose
level 6 - within minimum guidance can transform abstract data and concepts towards a given purpose and can design novel solutions
level 7 - can autonomously synthesise information / ideas and create responses to problems that expand or redefine existing knowledge and/or to develop new approaches in new situations.

The important point here is: what is your expectation?

Diversity and Inclusion Academic Integrity

Student and staff experience

Benefits

Students can find this type of assessment motivating because it requires their agency and physical involvement in the task. However, these types of tasks can also cause performance anxiety for some students and it is important to ensure that during their course of study they have the opportunity to build their confidence in a safe, inclusive and supportive environment. To alleviate feelings of anxiety it might also be useful to combine such tasks with some element of reflection (either written or oral) during which the student gets the opportunity to examine their learning from the experience of preparing for the performance.

Challenges

Because in these cases the assessed "product" is transient, for purposes of moderation and external validation it is often necessary to record the event (audio or video). These recordings can also be very useful in providing feedback to students. Pickford and Brown (2006, p91) also point to issues of fairness and reliability in the assessment of performances due mostly to the tensions between accuracy of interpretation versus creativity. Given all the potential variables in assessing performances it is critical to develop clear assessment criteria that relate to the learning outcomes; however, it is worth noting that in the field of creative arts there is often a need to recognise unintended outcomes which are not reflected in the assessment framework.

Depending on the type of performance there might be a cost linked to its production and / or presentation; it is therefore important for departments to ensure there are sufficient resources available and that these are equally accessible and made available to all students.

If you are assessing group work it is also challenging to assess individual performance in a group or integrated production; role allocation can sometimes be helpful in establishing individual input, especially if multiple assessments can be made over time and roles can be rotated.

Workload

The assessment of performances can be time consuming both for staff and students.

As a member of staff you will most likely need to retain evidence of achievement for quality assurance and moderation purposes; consider how to best record, store and retrieve evidence before you start. If you are using a panel of assessors you will also need to work with fellow assessors to clarify and articulate benchmarks and standards for achievement.

Students will need to commit sufficient time to prepare for and perform the assessment as appropriate for the percentage of marks associated with it and the number of credits for module.

References

Anderson, L. W. and Krathwohl, D. R., et al (Eds.) (2001). A Taxonomy for Learning, Teaching, and Assessing: A Revision of Bloom’s Taxonomy of Educational Objectives. Allyn & Bacon. Boston, MA (Pearson Education Group).

Higher Education Credit Initiative Wales (1996). Welsh Higher Education Credit Framework. Handbook. March 1996. Generic Level descriptors, 10.

Pickford, R & Brown, S. (2006). Assessing Skills and Practice. Key Guides for Effective Teaching in Higher Education. Routledge Falmer.

Shaw, M. and Stoney, M. C. (1995). Assuring quality and standards in a large modular scheme. Innovation & Learning in Education 1 (2).

Useful resources

Brauer, R., Ormiston, J., & Beausaert, S. (2024). Creativity-Fostering Teacher Behaviors in Higher Education: A Transdisciplinary Systematic Literature Review. Review of Educational Research.Link opens in a new window