Baccalaureate Interdisciplinary Project

Languages - Exemplar 2

Grade: A

“The impact of foreign film on Scottish audiences and how it shapes their perceptions of other European nations and cultures”

Language Exemplar2 (A Grade)

Internal Verification

This centre has produced the five key pieces of mandatory evidence for this candidate. There are succinct and yet robust assessor comments throughout, which help greatly in and are necessary for both the Internal and External verification processes. As outlined at the Quality Forum, the Internal Verification was carried out in tandem with colleagues in the Science Department who were involved in the presentation of candidates for the Science IP. This collaborative approach was maintained throughout the duration of the project. There was involvement too with SMT/Science staff to arrive at the assessment decision, and there was also evidence of frequent meetings and discussions between the candidate and her mentor. This model as described above is considered to be an example of good practice.

(1)Proposal.

The project outline is a very clear rationale of the stages of how the candidate will go about her IP, the broad contexts she will cover, and the learning environments she will access. The project title “The impact of foreign films on Scottish audiences and how it shapes their perceptions of other nations and cultures” shares the candidate’s career/future interests in languages, her passion for film and her desire to encourage appreciation of other cultures in the community. Her section on skills development shows great maturity of thought and a realistic self-appreciation of her strengths and areas for development. The candidate has also explained the relevance of the broad contexts of Citizenship, Enterprise and Economic Development which the Project will cover.

This proposal comfortably meets all of the criteria for both an A and a C and, as the Assessor says in his comments, the candidate “understands the process well and has chosen a potentially very interesting area for study”.

(2)Plan.

This is a very detailed plan and one which carries on smoothly from the project proposal. This is an example of very good practice with respect to detail in terms of a) timescales, b)objectives, c)resources and research methods, d)presentation and e)contingencies.

The candidate has a particularly short period of time between her starting the project in October and finishing in February (due to her own particular circumstances), but this plan, due to its thoroughness and its detail, will help her achieve her milestones. This will be further helped by the fact that she will be keeping a progress log as well as her “own more detailed analysis of my conduct and success in each stage of the IP: planning, researching, analysing, presenting and evaluating.” She also says, “I will be continually aware of my progress throughout the IP, and take notes of problems I encounter along the way. At the end, I will be able to evaluate my successes and shortcomings.” The candidate is clearly a very focussed and organised person.

Assessor comments here and at other stages are not particularly detailed but the impression is given here-and echoed at the Quality Forum- that this candidate, as the Assessor says “has a very mature and intelligent grasp of both the academic issues here and the dynamic ones” and is capable of working to a great extent independently, even from the earliest stages of the IP. It must be stressed here that not all candidates will be able to do this, particularly at the earlier Project Proposal and Planning stages.

(3) Presentation of Project Findings/Product.

The candidate has again met all the A and C Criteria, while, according to her assessor, “overcoming considerable obstacles with rigour and intelligence.” She gives a very detailed and informative account of the process of the IP, from the planning and data gathering stages as well as the contacts made and the statistics gathered to support an overall conclusion. She is clearly committed to the task and shows evidence of critical thinking, analysis and reflection at key stages, skilful use of resources and effective application of her French and Spanish language skills. As to the presentation itself, the candidate states, “I am really proud of my presentation, as I think not only was it the stage I had the most control over, but also the one that worked out best as a representation of my project overall. I focused more on the planning stages of the IP than the evaluation of results in my presentation, as I believe both are equally important but the way I went about the project demonstrated how I reached my results.”

(4) Evaluation of Project.

The candidate again gives an extremely well detailed assessment of her project. Strengths worth noting are;

  • The candidate’s many and varied contacts to enable her research, and the great number of responses she received to her questionnaire/survey.
  • The setbacks she encountered and how she confidently dealt with alternatives/other options.
  • Her resource planning in terms of people, materials and places
  • Her detailed planning which contributed so much to the success of the project
  • Her use of French and Spanish, in both written and spoken forms, considered integral to this project
  • The candidate’s obvious communication and interpersonal skills
  • Her conclusion that the project could be an ongoing project with interesting suggestions on how it could be carried forward.

(5) Self-evaluation

The candidate again meets all the A and C criteria. She has written an incisive and reflective report on how each of her generic and cognitive skills has developed in the course of the project. She has displayed a confident, conscientious, and committed approach to every aspect of her project and displayed a remarkably mature mindset.

In conclusion, the candidate has delivered a project indicative of a highly competent performance and well deserving of an A award. In the words of her Assessor “… this quite clearly achieves A standard in all the selected areas. Throughout, the candidate has worked independently, responding proactively when meeting considerable obstacles. .. She has come to interesting, tenable conclusions within an appropriate and valid research framework. She has required very little support.”