Maria’s PgCert Blog

Developing and assessing learning outcomes has always been a challenge for academic and teaching practitioners, spanning all disciplines and institutes. At this time, the use of ‘learning outcomes’ as cornerstones for quality learning is not a foreign concept to anyone who works in UK higher education but this was not always the case. The Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education (QAA) was only established in 1997, in an aim to harmonise the standard of higher education and set quality assurance processes for all institutions (QAA, 2024).

Allan Davies tried to assist educators in arts and design who were writing assessment briefs using learning outcomes for the first time, by creating a guide on formulating clear, measurable learning outcomes and assessment criteria, addressing the challenges of articulating abstract concepts like ‘creativity’ and ‘originality’ within competency-based education frameworks (2000). He outlined that some of the key challenges of crafting learning outcomes for arts and design courses were firstly defining abstract concepts, avoiding ambiguity to avoid misunderstanding in expectations, balancing specificity with flexibility – which is seen as a crucial part of learning in arts – and maybe most importantly for the higher education sector as whole, ensuring consistency to maintain standards across institutions.

From my experience and background in science education, I agree with the challenges mentioned and I would add that most of these are challenges faced by educators across science, technology and engineering subjects as well. Concepts used in this subjects are much more well defined and less abstract than in arts, but arguably in an era where higher education is geared towards solving societal issues and providing employability skills to students, creativity, innovation and originality are concepts that are taught in these more ‘technical’ subjects.

A very interesting observation that came out from this report and workshops that followed it up, was that the requirement for learning objectives to be based on ‘measurable’ actions created more challenges than sought to resolve (Davies, 2012). The practitioners argued that the use of terms like ‘explain’, ‘analyse’ etc. are not inherently measurable but depend on the students (and teachers!) understanding of the discipline and whether they are well versed in the specific language of each discipline. This was interesting to me as, as a rule teachers including myself are still encouraged, if not forced, to use specific, measurable and actionable verbs when crafting learning outcomes. This is not to say that we should revert to less specific terminology, but it made me rethink the level-appropriateness of each ‘verb’ used in learning outcomes beyond the usual taxonomies usually used in education – I aim from now to take into consideration the somewhat unique multidisciplinarity of the course I teach in, the educational background and ‘language’ familiarity of the students.

References:

Davies, A. (2012) Learning outcomes and assessment criteria in art and design. What’s the recurring problem? Available at: http://arts.brighton.ac.uk/projects/networks/issue-18-july-2012/learning-outcomes-and-assessment-criteria-in-art-and-design.-whats-the-recurring-problem (Accessed: 09 March 2025).

Davies, A. (2000) Effective Assessment in Art and Design: Writing Learning Outcomes and Assessment Criteria in Art and Design. University of the Arts London. Available at: https://ualresearchonline.arts.ac.uk/id/eprint/629/ (Accessed: 09 March 2025).

QAA (2024) The UK’s expert quality body for tertiary education. Available at: https://www.qaa.ac.uk/about-us# (Accessed: 8 March 2025).

Starting this course is followed by a lot of feelings including anxiety and overwhelm but also excitement and curiosity of the upcoming lectures and readings. As someone who has already engaged in three academic degrees, and is a full-time lecturer, I am very familiar with such feelings but also somewhat experienced in managing them. In contrast with other times, I am now faced with the challenge of balancing full-time employment alongside academic requirements; lecture attendance, assignment submissions etc. Fortunately, there are some workload adjustments to accommodate for the course, but these are rather minimal compared to the overall amount of work that the course requires. Furthermore, besides teaching requirements I am leading on a few research projects, as either the supervisor or as a consultant, which require my ongoing focus and cannot be disseminated or allocated to another member of staff. Thus, starting this course is overwhelming, due to time constraints and the overall increase in workload, which realistically impacts on my general life by minimising the amount of free time to spend outside work.

However, I acknowledge that attending this course is a huge opportunity in terms of expanding my knowledge basis, becoming a better teacher and gaining professional recognition (UAL, 2025; Advance HE, 2023). I have always been a curious individual, reading about all sorts of disciplines and reflecting on systemic and academic ways of operating. I have no doubt that the course will equip me with knowledge and reflexivity to tackle and problem solve future challenges. Based on previous academic courses, but also to follow the advice I give to my students; I acknowledge the need for discipline around assignment submissions. Organisation and time-management will be crucial in balancing between these specific academic requirements alongside my teaching and research related tasks. Hence, I am currently contemplating on employing several strategies such as the Pomodoro technique (Cirillo, 2025), mind-maps and time schedules, to assist and support me stay on track.

In sum, starting the course evokes a myriad of emotions which I believe is humane and natural. Perhaps there is some fear of the unknown, or even some excitement over it. Previous knowledge guides me in remaining grounded in the present moment and gradually progressing with everything that the future holds.

References:

Advance HE (2023) Associate Fellowship. Available at: https://www.advance-he.ac.uk/fellowship/associate-fellowship (Accessed: 22 February 2025).

Cirillo, F. (2025) The Pomodoro® Technique. Available at: https://www.pomodorotechnique.com/ (Accessed: 25 January 2025).

UAL (2025) PgCert Academic Practice. Available at: https://www.arts.ac.uk/about-ual/teaching-and-learning-exchange/professional-development/pgcert-academic-practice (Accessed: 22 February 2025).

The first reading task I had to complete for this course was a piece by Polly Savage on the history and experiences of Mozambican artists who studied in the USSR in the 1980s (2022). My initial reaction to this was somewhat negative as this is a topic very different to the ones I am used to reading in my academic and teaching practice. However, I am generally a very curious person who likes learning about various things, so once I started reading, I quickly became more and more interested.

The paper used the life, experiences and evolving practice of artist Celestino Matavele (also known as Cejumo) as the focal point but included other examples of artists from the same period who also worked and studied with Cejumo. However, I was more fascinated with the history and social aspect of the circumstances in which the artists found themselves rather than their art practice. The artists moved to a different country, in this case the USSR, to advance their education which was not too dissimilar to myself, as I also moved away from home to pursue higher education. The programme that the artists participated in also reminded me of similar schemes that existed in Cyprus, where I am from, at a similar time, were students could receive scholarships to study mostly STEM and Medicine in the USSR (CIA, 1968; Katsakioris, 2019). In both cases, the programmes and scholarships were expected to replace colonial administrators, teachers and officials in newly created countries.

The artists spoke about their experiences being educated in a foreign country and language, how they sometimes had a hard time understanding the assessment requirements and, being enrolled in an arts programme, how it was hard to embed their personal and artistic viewpoints in their work as they did not always fit the Soviet art movement practices. The artists particularly mentioned a ‘dogma’ that they felt that they had to follow in order to be accepted as successful artists, despite their tutors and the School’s philosophy seemingly being open mindedness and globalisation. While I did not study arts but rather life sciences, which are more objective and most governing theories are accepted globally, I can understand and empathise with the notion of following a country’s ‘dogma’ and I can even see the implications of this in my academic practice. Despite whether I agree with certain practices or not, having been educated and worked in the UK HE system for the entirety of my academic career, I now feel obliged to follow certain practices that are part of the UK ‘educational dogma’. Even before reading this article, I was acutely aware of the difference between educational systems and practices between countries and cultures, and have always tried to keep a dynamic balance in my academic practice, especially when dealing with newcomer international students whom might have previously experienced a completely different approach to learning. This article, while seemingly an analysis of the artists’ practice and influences from a different culture, has helped me consolidate my belief that educational systems should allow students to explore their own identities and provide multiple media to do so – of course, I also understand that there will always be ‘frameworks’ and ‘rules’ to follow, but by allowing students to develop their unique approaches to any discipline, we enrich the collective knowledge with multiple viewpoints and help shape a multidimensional society.

References:

CIA (1968) Assessment of the Soviet program to provide academic training for students from the less developed countries. Washington DC: Central Intelligence Unit, USA. Available at: https://www.cia.gov/readingroom/docs/DOC_0000326290.pdf (Accessed: 22 February 2025).

Katsakioris, C. (2019) ‘The Lumumba University in Moscow: higher education for a Soviet–Third World alliance, 1960–91’, Journal of global history, 14(2), pp. 281–300. doi: 10.1017/S174002281900007X.

Savage, P. (2022) ‘‘The New Life’: Mozambican Art Students in the USSR, and the Aesthetic Epistemologies of Anti‐Colonial Solidarity’, Art history, 45(5), pp. 1078–1100. doi: 10.1111/1467-8365.12692.

I believe that the greatest achievements and innovations occur when people step-outside the box and have the opportunity, or challenge, to integrate knowledge and experience across multiple disciplines and ways of thinking. Similarly, throughout my academic career I have curiously been following many disciplines and sub-disciplinary conversations, research and topics that inevitably expand my knowledge and thirst for more.

Currently I hold a Lecturer position within a science department of an organisation that traditionally focuses solely on arts and fashion (UAL, 2025b). These are rather contradictory but equally necessary subjects, making their intersubjective importance highly exciting and promising (Okwara and Henrik Pretorius, 2023). On one hand, my core background is in biological sciences and its applied disciplines, which are all disciplines based on finding ‘hard evidence’ and indisputable truths, so oriented in seeking and exploring an objective reality. On the other hand, art and fashion are an exorbitant world of creativity where the subjective opinion is the most dominant way of thinking. Through my role at LCF, I had the opportunity to interact on a daily basis, with multiple areas of art, design and fashion, all of which evoke a sense of freedom where creativity and innovation may prevail.

The integration of the two worlds collides when I attempt to scientifically explore ways to further promote creativity and innovation. Practically, this has been in exploring novel materials, identifying new ways of utilising natural products or researching the biodegradable nature of fashion materials, thus contributing to a more sustainable society. What I enjoy the most from my role at LCF, is the opportunity to engage with a wide array of professionals; researchers, academics and businesses who have the capability to make real-world changes. Due to my background, I feel that I am able to effectively communicate both with academics and experts from various industries, hoping to influence and create novel opportunities for my students and the wider society.

Being a scientist within an arts institute also comes with challenges in terms of attitudes and operations. One of the main challenges for example, is trying to encourage students to seek the objectivity of evidence, something that they will then be assessed on. But the assessment framework I operate within (UAL, 2025a), was created to assess art and design subjects which are, of course, geared more upon personal growth, creativity, innovation and realisation.

Within my role as a teacher and a researcher, I can challenge and thought-provoke my students to propose their own research idea and products. I hope to be a real-life example to my students of how worlds and theoretical backgrounds can integrate for, hopefully, a rewarding outcome.

References:

Okwara, V.U. and Henrik Pretorius, J.P. (2023) ‘The STEAM vs STEM Educational Approach: The Significance of the Application of the Arts in Science Teaching for Learners’ Attitudes Change’, Journal of culture and values in education, 6(2), pp. 18–33. doi: 10.46303/jcve.2023.6.

UAL (2025a) Assessment and marking criteria. Available at: https://www.arts.ac.uk/study-at-ual/course-regulations/assessment (Accessed: 17/03/2025).

UAL (2025b) BSc (Hons) Cosmetic Science. Available at: https://www.arts.ac.uk/subjects/business-and-management-and-science/undergraduate/bsc-hons-cosmetic-science-lcf (Accessed: 17/03/2025).

A key challenge that I am facing is the reliance on a written exam to assess knowledge in the Applied Biology unit I lead on Block 1 of Year 1 of the course. Exams are arguably not one of the most effective methods to assess students’ knowledge (French, Dickerson and Mulder, 2024) but are an established and fairly common way of assessment in most science courses.

On one hand, exams are one of the assessment methods used globally at all levels of education, and for most students in Year1 exams are the most familiar way of assessment; most of us will have had years of written exams in our formative years of education (Point to Point Education, 2018). Despite what pedagogical stance any academic has towards exams, exams will arguably always be something that people will be familiar with and will know what to expect, what is needed from them and how to revise for one. Exams also, in their simplest form, do not require the students to possess any research or enquiry skills – which most students in Block 1 of Year 1 of a university course will not have developed yet – but can rather simply assess knowledge acquisition, if this is required.

On the other hand, for exactly the same reasons, exams are fairly mono-dimensional. For this Applied Biology unit, this is a high stakes assessment as it is holistically assessed with one exam, which puts students under pressure and causes quite a bit of stress.

To mitigate the effects from these challenges, I have included a mock exam within the curriculum that simulates the exact same conditions that the students will be under during the summative exam. This includes the use of the same device (laptop/tablet), in the same rooms, using the same online quiz format and under normal exam regulations. This approach seemed to help minimise stress stemming from unfamiliarity with university processes, and gave the students an opportunity to face emotions provoked by an exam situation and reflect on how to deal with them on the day of the summative exam. Within the curriculum, there are also embedded seminars showing the students how to answer various types of exam questions and what they are required to do (e.g. explain, outline, discuss etc.), which have been effective as shown through the students’ approach and answers in the summative exam.

Separately, our current format of exams (online quiz taken under invigilation on campus), as with all exams, does not allow for comprehensive feedback to be given to the student. Many of the questions used are machine-markable (MCQs, drag and drop, diagram labelling etc.), and the rest are medium-form essay type questions. For the former, there is minimal feedback that can be provided besides whether and where a student made mistakes. For the latter, I strive to provide at least a few sentences of feedback on where the student could add more detail. Contrary to different types of assessment, whether they are oral or written, there is not enough ‘space’ for feedback on writing skills, thinking, rationale etc., but rather feedback is focused on ‘right or wrong’ answers. To mitigate this, I also create space in the form of a discussion session for students to look at their exam papers and discuss their feedback with the marker (myself in this case!), which has been found to be most valuable for the students (Harris, 2017).

The assessment method for this unit is not something that I can currently change, hence all practices have been geared towards minimising the challenges from an exam type assessment. Student feedback has so far been positive when asked about the exam workshop effectiveness to minimise their stress and familiarise them with the exam process. Nevertheless, I recognise and agree with the notion that traditional exams are not the best tool to assess a person’s abilities and knowledge, and this has informed my selection of assessment types in other units where I have more control and agency on the final decision.

References:

French, S., Dickerson, A. and Mulder, R.A. (2024) ‘A review of the benefits and drawbacks of high-stakes final examinations in higher education’, Higher education, 88(3), pp. 893–918. doi: 10.1007/s10734-023-01148-z.

Harris, N. (2017) Six steps to improving your examination feedback. Available at: https://www.cardiff.ac.uk/learning-hub/view/six-steps-to-improving-your-examination-feedback (Accessed: 11/03/2025).

Point to Point Education (2018) The UK’s Exam System Explained. Available at: https://www.pointtopointeducation.co.uk/blog/uks-exam-system-explained/ (Accessed: 11/03/2025).

Students joining the integrated MSc Cosmetic Science course need to have at least one Science A-level or equivalent. In line with the needs of the course, students begin their course with Applied Biology (which I lead) and Applied Chemistry. Consequentially, about 50% of the Year 1 cohort will have basic knowledge of either of the two subjects, with only a small percentage having taken both subjects at a ‘high school’ equivalent level. At the same time, about 55-65% of the cohort each year is made of native English speakers (primarily Home status) with the other 35-45% being non-native English speakers (UAL Central Planning Unit, 2024).

These pose a two-pronged challenge for me and the unit I lead at this level; half of the students do not have a basic background in the subject of Biology and/or a big majority of the cohort might have the necessary knowledge but in a different language. Generally, STEM subjects are based in the universal understanding and use of a very specific and highly technical terminology which means that a lot of our students have the additional ‘task’ of learning a new vocabulary, along with adjusting to higher education, in order to be able to participate in taught classes and engage with readings.

To meet the needs of students I have redeveloped the curriculum to firstly include a series of sessions at the beginning of the unit where the basic concepts and terminology of Biology are taught, and secondly the students were actively encouraged through guided online tools to create a shared glossary of terms that would be useful for the entirety of their course.

The creation of a shared glossary did not seem to be a task which the students were willing to complete especially when it was not part of a timetabled session, but the majority would add entries if the activity was embedded in lecture slides or similar. This might have been due to a few reasons; the students might have not realised the value of the exercise, they might not have been comfortable to post in a public forum even if anonymously, they might have not been used to a collaborative curriculum, but also it might have been an issue from my site such as not having explained the exercise and its purpose well. Afterall, perceived importance of learning was found to positively influence the relationship between participation intention and outcomes in online discussion forums (Yang et al., 2007). Nevertheless, to help the students become comfortable with the glossary exercise, I switched my approach to a simpler method and asked students to create a document on their devices which would act as their own personal glossary of terms hence removing the public aspect of the exercise and giving the students agency on what words they thought would be most useful for them to include. At every session, and while delivering content, every time a new or more technical word came up, I would pause the lesson and suggest that they could take a minute to add the term on their glossaries. This approach seemed to be more acceptable and used more often, than the first iteration with the public tool. In the future, I will emphasise the importance of this activity on the students’ learning to increase participation intention. In the interest of accessibility, both modes of this exercise (online forum and personal documentation) could be used from now on, depending on what each individual student believes is more beneficial to them.

References:

UAL Central Planning Unit (2024) Student Profiles: Characteristics. Available at: https://dashboards.arts.ac.uk/dashboard/ActiveDashboards/DashboardPage.aspx?dashboardid=5c6bb274-7645-4500-bb75-7e334f68ff24&dashcontextid=638681486282992055 (Accessed: 10/03/2025).

Yang, X., Li, Y., Tan, C. and Teo, H. (2007) ‘Students’ participation intention in an online discussion forum: Why is computer-mediated interaction attractive?’, Information & management, 44(5), pp. 456–466. doi: 10.1016/j.im.2007.04.003.

For the microteaching session I chose to work on the theme of Cosmetic Product Claims, an area of legislation that I teach and use in extend in my academic practice. I thought that this would provide very good information that most people encounter on their everyday lives but are not familiar with, hence a great opportunity for my colleagues in the microteaching session to learn something new that they can use to make informed decision in their purchases as consumers.

The session began with an outline of topics to be covered and an activity where participants had to select a personal care product that they use in their lives. They then determined whether it was a cosmetic or a medicine using a breakdown of the legal definition of each category. Next, regulations about cosmetic product claims were explained, including common criteria and claim classifications (CTPA, 2025). Participants were then asked to analyse their chosen product’s claims and share their findings. The session continued with the importance of substantiating claims with evidence and appropriate methods for doing so. It concluded with examples of the level of evidence required for different claims to be accepted. The participants were quite engaged with the activities and were happy to share their findings with the rest of the class (Figure 1).

I chose to use a real-life example of a product, as opposed to a mock up, to give the participants choice over what product to use for this exercise as I felt that it would make the session more relatable and would invoke a sense of ‘adventure’, almost as if they were trying to follow the clues towards a treasure. The approach of object-based learning (OBL) stems from the use of museum artefacts and has been widely used in academia, particularly in Arts & Design, as the use of a physical object can be a source of ‘unique and effective learning experiences’ (Hardie, 2015). To my experience, OBL is less explicitly and less often used in Science & Engineering subjects, but rather the notion of hands-on learning is embedded in curricula through the use of labs and experimentation, which by nature require the use of physical materials and scientific instruments to assist with learning (Leonardi et al., 2024).

The feedback from the participant colleagues after the session was positive and mostly highlighted the real-life application of their newly acquired knowledge (Figure 2). There were conflicting comments on the positives of having a choice on what product to hold but also on the reassurance that answering questions about a common object between all participants gives. Participants also commented on my ability to deliver a complex technical topic in an approachable way for an audience without any prior knowledge in the topic.

I was not particularly anxious prior to the microteaching session but the positive feedback on my approachable teaching was a relief. Throughout my education and career, I have always moved within and between disciplines and areas of interest. As a result, I have often had to adjust my language and terminology I used, to ensure that what I was trying to convey was easily understandable to a wide range of audiences. At the back of this, I have always had some insecurity to the fact that I am not a ‘true’ expert on a highly specific topic, as most academics are. This exercise has shown me that the skills I acquired by constantly engaging with different disciplines, have bettered my teaching practice and help me meet my students at any level they are at.

References:

CTPA (2025) Cosmetic Product Claims. Available at: https://www.ctpa.org.uk/resources-claims (Accessed: 10/02/2025).

Hardie, K. (2015) Wow: The power of objects in object-based learning and teaching. York: Higher Education Academy. Available at: https://www.advance-he.ac.uk/knowledge-hub/wow-power-objects-object-based-learning-and-teaching (Accessed: 10/02/2025).

Leonardi, A.M., Carli, M., Ciroi, S., Marcon, F., Pantano, O., Talas, S. and Zagallo, M. (2024) ‘Teaching Physics through Astronomy: an object-based approach’, Journal of physics. Conference series, 2750(1), pp. 12044. doi: 10.1088/1742-6596/2750/1/012044.

Awaiting colleague’s final reflection/Part 3 – colleague is working towards an extended deadline due to ECs

UPDATE with colleague’s part

Part 3:
I acknowledge the positive review of practice by Maria Charalampous and will continue to merge theoretical models with industry examples. In my classes I aim to create a safe learning space where students feel comfortable to engage even if they are unsure.