Case Study 3 : Assessing learning and exchanging feedback

Assessments in an age of Generative AI

Contextual Background 

We are currently revalidating the BA Fine Art course at Chelsea, a process where we rewrite the course for the next 10 years. With the rapid development of Generative AI (GenAI) tools, such as Chat GPT, I wonder what assessment models will still be relevant in a decade?

GenAI is increasingly used by the students on the BA FA course to generate their work, which isn’t in and of itself a problem, notwithstanding the huge environmental impact [Bashir et al (2024)]. In the context of climate crisis, the environmental impact does demand an ethical and critical engagement with these tools.

Evaluation 

I try to make these hidden environmental impacts visible by discussing this research in Year meetings. The aim is to support students in making ethical and sustainable decisions in relation to their interactions with GenAI.  I also draw attention to UAL’s clear policy (UAL 2024), which states “You may not use AI to generate your work unaltered that you submit for assessment as if it was your own work” and any use of AI must be cited and labelled as AI generated.

Despite this policy, my team and I regularly have students, especially in the case of essays, claim what we suspect are GenAI authored texts as their own. Tools like TurnItIIn have much more limited effectiveness than they claim [see AlAfnan (2023)].

GenAI content is produced by myriad machine-led decision-making processes that are entirely unknowable on part of the student (or indeed the technologists who created them) [see Beales (2018)]. If the purpose of assessments is to help students to develop an understanding of quality [Sadler (1989)], then the circumventing of the assessment process through the submission of work by GenAI completely defeats the point.

Moving forwards 

I am interested in exploring two avenues in response:

  1.  Integrating self-assessment

Race (2001) proposes a series of questions to support self-assessment which I have included here:

• What do you think is a fair score or grade for the work you have handed in?

• What was the thing you think you did best in this assignment?

• What was the thing that you think you did least well in this assignment?

• What did you find the hardest part of this assignment?

• What was the most important thing you learned in doing this assignment? [Ibid p.15]

These questions elicit higher-level thinking and reflection skills that are situated in the subjective experience of individual students and might help illuminate any academic malpractice in terms of GenAI usage. I am intending to experiment with these as part of our Unit 7 assessments in May 2025.

  • In-person assessment

There has been some discussion of the potential of using more Vivas as assessment points in response to GenAI [Dobson (2023)] but there are complications in the context of widespread social anxiety. In Y2, we are proposing informal in-person assessments and terming these ‘Studio Visits’. Within a ‘Studio Visit’, tutors would visit the student’s studio space to reflect on work in progress as well as finished pieces. This parallels real-world experiences of interested curators or collectors coming to visit an artist in their studio. During the Studio Visit, a conversation would take place between tutor and student which would seek to draw out the 5 areas of the Level 5 UAL marking matrix.

547 words

References 

AlAfnan, M.A. and MohdZuki, S.F. (2023). Do Artificial Intelligence Chatbots Have a Writing Style? An Investigation into the Stylistic Features of ChatGPT-4. Journal of Artificial Intelligence and Technology, 3(3). doi.org/10.37965/jait.2023.0267.

Bashir, N. et al. (2024) ‘The Climate and Sustainability Implications of Generative AI’, An MIT Exploration of Generative AI [Preprint]. doi:10.21428/e4baedd9.9070dfe7.

Beales, Katriona in conversation with William Tunstall-Pedoe (2019), Unintended Consequences? In: Interface Critique Journal 2. Eds. Florian Hadler, Alice Soiné, Daniel Irrgang. DOI: 10.11588/ic.2019.2.66989

Beckingham, S, Lawrence, J, Powell, S, & Hartley, P (eds) 2024, Using Generative AI Effectively in Higher Education : Sustainable and Ethical Practices for Learning, Teaching and Assessment, Taylor & Francis Group, Oxford. Available from: ProQuest Ebook Central. [Accessed 14 March 2025]

Dobson, S. (2023). Why universities should return to oral exams in the AI and ChatGPT era. [online] The Conversation. Available at: https://theconversation.com/why-universities-should-return-to-oral-exams-in-the-ai-and-chatgpt-era-203429. [Accessed 15 March 2025]

Race, Phil (2001) LTSN Generic Centre A Briefing on Self, Peer and Group Assessment

Sadler, D.R. (1989). Formative assessment and the design of instructional systems. Instructional Science, [online] 18(2), pp.119–144. Available at: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/BF00117714.

UAL (2024). Student guide to generative AI. [online] UAL. Available at: https://www.arts.ac.uk/about-ual/teaching-and-learning-exchange/digital-learning/ai-and-education/student-guide-to-generative-ai.[Accessed 15 March 2025]

Case Study 2 : Planning and teaching for effective learning

Teaching in an Age of Anxiety

Contextual Background
 

Part of the landscape of teaching practice with my cohort of nearly 160 BA Fine Art 2nd Year (2Y) students is anxiety. This impacts on students’ attendance, learning and well-being. As a necessity, strategies for alleviating anxiety need to be integrated into any planning for teaching to be effective.

Evaluation 

Anxiety is of particular concern within H.E. Davies (2025) summarises, “Universities appear to have become especially conducive to anxiety disorders, with full-time students more likely to report them” [ibid p.13]. This is compounded by the fine art context in which teaching is characterized as “a pedagogy of ambiguity where skills are not simply competencies, but the ability to operate in the complexities of uncertainty” [Austerlitz et al (2008) p.125].

There are systemic drivers behind this epidemic of anxiety, but within my role as 2nd Year Leader I need to focus on changes I can affect on a local level. I have focused on my own training and undertaken a Mental Health First Aider course. Whilst useful, the course isn’t H.E. specific and doesn’t take into consideration in-balances of power and the way mechanisms of assessment add stress to student-staff interactions.

One strategy I have tried, is to make myself accessible to students outside of teaching to help alleviate anxiety. For example, I run an Open Office every week at the same time. I offer tea and coffee, snacks and a listening ear. The Open Office has become an effective mechanism for catching a wide range of students’ anxieties before they become overwhelming, enabling me to signpost students to relevant support.

Moving forwards 

3 areas to develop in terms of the culture and ethos of 2Y:

Staying with the Trouble

I need to build a community on 2nd Year that is trying to find ways of locating ourselves within complexity, rather than trying to climb out of it. There is no outside from the complex and multi-layer crises that face these students. As such rather than offer simplistic non-solutions, “…Staying with the trouble requires learning to be truly present, not as a vanishing pivot between awful or edenic pasts and apocalyptic or salvific futures but as mortal critters entwined in myriad unfinished configurations of places, times, matters, meanings.” [Harraway (2016) p.1]

Making Kin

I believe peer support networks are one of the strongest protective factors I can offer my students, and we encourage the students to work collectively e.g. developing collective exhibitions. I can be more intentional about creating social opportunities where the cohort mixes and gets to know each other. This is about embedding small gestures e.g. making sure that every tutor integrate into all their sessions ice-breaker activities. “The task is to make kin in lines of inventive connection.” [Harraway (2016) p.1]

Cultures of Celebration

I want to develop a culture of celebration amongst staff and students, and an obvious opportunity is around the Y2 Exhibitions, particularly the Private View events. Supporting student programmes of performances during these events can add vitality. As Solnit (2016) writes in relation to finding energy to continue climate activism; “Much has changed; much needs to change; being able to celebrate or at least recognize milestones and victories and keep working is what the times require of us.” [ibid p.140]

538 words

References 

Austerlitz, Noam, Blythman, Margo, Grove-White, Annie, Jones, Barbara Anne, Jones, Carol An, Morgan, Sally, Orr, Susan, Shreeve, Alison and Vaughn, Suzi (2008) Mind the gap: expectations, ambiguity and pedagogy within art and design higher education. In: Drew, Linda, (ed.) The Student Experience in Art and Design Higher Education: Drivers for Change. Cambridge, Jill Rogers Associates Limited, pp. 124-148

Davies, W. (2025). Another Age of Anxiety: Psychological Distress and the ‘Asset Economy’. Theory, Culture & Society. doi:https://doi.org/10.1177/02632764251316403.

‌Haraway, D. (2016). Staying with the Trouble: Making Kin in the Chthulucene. Durham: Duke University Press.

Solnit, R. (2016). Hope in the Dark : Untold histories, Wild Possibilities. Edinburgh: Canongate Books.

Case Study 1 : Know and Respond to Your Students’ Diverse Needs

Supporting Students with Autism Assistance dogs

Contextual Background

We have around 160 students in 2nd Year on the BA Fine Art at Chelsea. Many of these students are neurodiverse, as am I, and some have additional needs. I want to focus this case study on supporting students with Autism Assistance dogs.

Evaluation 

Autism Assistance dogs are specifically trained to support people with Autism. The type of support the dog offers varies according to the specific needs of the person they are trained to support, but can include things like medication reminders, interrupting self-harm, and deep pressure therapy to help emotional regulation (Short, ND). All Assistance dogs are welcomed on site at UAL as part of the university’s obligations under the Equalities Act 2010 (UAL 2023). Supporting students to attend college with their Assistance Dog is a reasonable adjustment and a key part of my role as Year Leader in providing an inclusive environment for Neurodiverse and Disabled students.

Moving forwards 

I have observed first-hand how Assistance Dogs can help students negotiate high levels of social anxiety [see Majka (2023)] and navigate challenges in engaging with social situations which would otherwise cause high levels of stress. This has made a profound difference to some students lives so I am committed to making it as easy as possible for students working with assistance dogs to be integrated into the course.

Specifically, within the context of the BA Fine Art I will make sure that any student with an assistance dog is in a centrally located part of the studios, close to lifts and on a lower floor for ease of access for both students and assistance dogs. I have prioritised finding students with Assistance Dogs quieter areas of the studios, for example in the corner, and together with the student agreed set working days when most other students are not in to ensure a quieter working environment.

Assistance dogs are not pets and when they are wearing their official ‘bib’ are in work mode – solely focused on supporting their individual. I will brief the rest of the student body in part of a Year meeting on how to interact with Assistance Dogs, to not pet them or distract them and to focus on communicating with the individual student. I will follow up this briefing with the same information in an email to the whole student cohort.

I am also aware of some of the cultural sensitivities around dogs. For example, dogs can be understood as ‘haram’ within Islam [Nia (2022)]. I will also introduce this as a concept to the students’ with Assistance Dogs so that they are also aware of potential different attitudes towards dogs within the student body. 

In a broader sense, I would like to work towards integrating a hybrid approach that understands engagement rather than in-person participation as attendance. As a student comments in ‘Three months to make a difference’ (2020), in support of hybrid models of engagement, any attendance online or in person should be understood as attendance. This is a different approach to the current UAL attendance policy which stress in-person attendance on-site, but this needs to change to be more fully inclusive.

514 words

References

Note: there is limited published research about this within HE.  

‌‘Health and Safety Guidance: Assistance dogs on site’ UAL policy (2023) https://www.arts.ac.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0025/414682/Assistance-Dogs-on-Site-H-and-S-Guidance-July-2023-v3.pdf [Accessed 28 Feb. 2025].

Short, Abigail ‘Dog’s special skills’ (ND) Autism Dogs CIC. [online] Available at: https://www.autismdogs.co.uk/our-service/special-skills [Accessed 28 Feb. 2025].

Majka, Georgia Jean, (2023)  “NEURODIVERGENT COLLEGE STUDENTS AND THERAPY DOGS IN HIGHER EDUCATION” (2023). Theses and Dissertations. 3127. https://rdw.rowan.edu/etd/3127

Nia (2022). Are Dogs Really Haram in Islam? – Muslim Girl. [online] Muslim Girl. Available at: https://muslimgirl.com/are-dogs-really-haram-in-islam/ [Accessed 18 Mar. 2025].

‘Three Months To Make A Difference – Key areas of challenge for disabled students requiring urgent action from institutions and policy makers in HE’ (2020) Published by Advance HE on behalf of the Disabled Students’ Commission, an initiative funded by the Office for Students. (n.d.). Available at: https://www.advance-he.ac.uk/knowledge-hub/three-months-make-difference [Accessed 28 Feb. 2025].