Name: William Haubrich
Course:  MUZ1397H - Foundation Practical Studies - Trombone
Faculty: Humanities
Level: Undergraduate
Category: Holding pattern/Difficulties
One sentence summary: Assessments were not as effective and required more time as well as equipment in ERT. We tried to keep things as normal as possible, but used video recordings instead of live performances. Using Vula was helpful, but live assessments are preferable.

Context: This is a practical studies course at the College of Music. Each student has a 1-hour, one-on-one session per week. Students need to attend 80% of these classes to pass the course. 

Purpose: Assessments are summative, with a final exam worth 50%, and a midterm exam worth 30%. Technical tests count 10%. Students are assessed in terms of their technical skill, as demonstrated by a video recorded performance. 

Process: As a result of ERT, some elements of the normal assessment were not possible, e.g. sight reading, so that fell away. Students were allowed to edit their recordings and do multiple takes. Initially, students sent their video recording via WeTransfer, but later on they uploaded their recordings on Vula. The quality of the recording limits our ability to assess the student. Compared to live assessments, the process in ERT is more cumbersome, less effective and more time consuming.

Outcomes/ Lessons learned: Using Vula instead of WeTransfer was very helpful. I tried to keep things as normal as possible, which meant I didn’t reduce the workload. This gave students the opportunity to try and triumph in the situation, despite a little struggle.

Recommendations:  For music, live assessments are definitely preferable.