You are on page 1of 27

Faculty of Arts, Law and Social Sciences Department of Music and Performing Arts

Critical Theory and Performance Practice


AF430003S

Academic Year: 2009-2010 Semester 1

Contents
1. Key Information....................................................................................................................2! 2. Introduction to the Module ...................................................................................................3! 3. Intended Learning Outcomes ..............................................................................................3! 4. Outline Delivery ...................................................................................................................4! 4.1. Seminars and Workshops ............................................................................................ 4! 4.2. Attendance Requirements............................................................................................ 8! 4.3. Attendance for Group and Collaborative Work ............................................................ 8! 5. Assessment .........................................................................................................................9! 5.1 Feedback..................................................................................................................... 11! 6. Assessment Criteria and Marking Standards ....................................................................12! 6.1 Anglia Ruskin University Generic Assessment Criteria............................................... 12! 6.2 Module Specific Assessment Criteria.......................................................................... 12! 7. Assessment Offences ........................................................................................................18! 8. Learning Resources...........................................................................................................19! 8.1. Recommended Texts ................................................................................................. 19! 8.2. Recommended Internet Resources ........................................................................... 23! 9. Module Definition Form......................................................................................................24! 10. Report of Last Delivery of Module ...................................................................................27!

1. Key Information
Module Title: Module Code: Module Leader: Critical Theory and Performance Practice AF430003S Sue Wilson Cambridge, Hel 155 Extension: 0845 196 2034 Email: sue.wilson@anglia.ac.uk

2. Introduction to the Module


This module introduces ideas from critical theory in relation to innovative practices in twentieth-century and contemporary performance. Familiar concepts in mainstream criticism on theatre and performance (such as authorial agency, representation, character, identity, culture and meaning) will be reconsidered in relation to some major strands of critical theory. Theorists and topics may include Roland Barthes distinction of the readerly and the writerly; Jacques Derridas use of recontextualisation and iteration as strategies of deconstruction; Michel Foucaults writings on the archaeology of contemporary modes of thought and Jean Baudrillards concepts of the simulacrum and simulation. Students will be expected to pursue further research independently to supplement their study of the theoretical texts selected for this module. Efficient research methodologies to facilitate this work will be explored. Ideas from critical theory will be deployed in relation to selected twentieth-century and, wherever possible, new live work in dance, live art, physical theatre, and/or devised performance. Indicative areas might include Derridas theory of iteration in relation to work by, for example, Mabou Mines or The Wooster Group. Foucault could be considered in the light of post-humanist work (indicative play-texts or performances may include Mark Ravenhills Faust (Faust is Dead) and the live art of Orlan or Stelarc). Samuel Becketts late plays for television might be rethought in terms of Baudrillards phases of the image; Baudrillards analysis of J.D. Ballards Crash (and its reappearance as a David Cronenberg film) might be a supplementary case study. Students will be assessed through a practical essay, which explores theoretical ideas through practice, and a substantive essay, within which skills in independent research should be demonstrated.

3. Intended Learning Outcomes


Anglia Ruskin modules are taught on the basis of intended learning outcomes and on successful completion of the module, you will be expected to be able to demonstrate you have met those outcomes. On successful completion of this module you will be able to:
Learning Outcomes (threshold standards): On successful completion of this module the student will be expected to be able to: Knowledge and understanding 1. Demonstrate a detailed and systematic understanding of ideas informing selected areas of critical theory; 2. Critically evaluate these ideas in relation to appropriate theoretical and performance texts; 3. Demonstrate independent interpretation of the ideas and materials encountered on the module;

Intellectual, practical, affective and transferable skills

4. Synthesize ideas from critical theory and relevant contemporary performance practices and apply these innovatively within self-managed creative practice and writing; 5. Apply skills in research methodologies to investigate further areas in critical theory and performance practices; 6. Demonstrate clarity and lucidity of argument and expression in the presentation of practical and written essays.

4. Outline Delivery
4.1. Seminars and Workshops
This module is delivered through weekly 3-hour seminars / workshops at 6-9pm on termtime Mondays in Semester 1 at Covent Garden Drama Studio. All the essays and play-texts that are required for weekly preparatory reading are contained in the Study Pack for this module except: Ionesco, E. (1997) The Chairs (1952). Trans. Martin Crimp. London: Faber Pirandello, L. (2003) Six Characters in Search of an Author (1901) London: Nick Hern

Please make sure that you have a copy of both plays. Week 1 ! 21 Sept: Introduction, dictionaries and guides ! We will begin an exploration of the materials of this module by considering competing and incompatible descriptions of the work of Nietzsche, Barthes, Foucault, Baudrillard and Derrida in the fields of critical theory and philosophy; we will use extracts from Macey (2000) The Penguin Dictionary of Critical Theory and Blackburn (1994) The Oxford Dictionary of Philosophy. We will also examine philosophical accounts of idealism using extracts from Berkeleys Treatise Concerning the Principles of Human Knowledge (1710) and Nietzsches early essay On Truth and Lies in an Extra-Moral Sense (1873) (from extracts reproduced in The Portable Nietzsche (1994) trans. Walter Kaufmann) to assess the centrality of language, narrative and metaphor in the philosophical antecedents of critical theory. We will test these initial ideas against the presentation of ideas in physical form in two versions of Samuel Becketts short play Catastrophe. All extracts for this week are in the Study Pack. Student follow-up: Read Barthes (1968) The Death of the Author and Foucault (1969) What is an Author? (in Study Pack). Week 2 ! 28 Sept: The author-function ! We will examine the implications of Barthes The Death of the Author in the production of meaning in writing and whether live performance also loses its origin among a tissue of quotations drawn from the innumerable centres of culture in the same manner. We will consider too Foucaults analysis of the author-function, its dependence upon contingent ideas of individualism and private property, and its use as the principle of thrift in the proliferation of meaning. We will critically assess the application of these ideas to varieties of drama, from the playwrights text to devised and collaborative performance. We will examine shared authorship, the translation of text into performance and the imperative to impose coherence on discontinuous experience. Student follow-up: Next week we will principally focus on Derridas essay The Theater of Cruelty and the Closure of Representation in (1978) Writing and Difference. To aid your understanding of Derridas essay, begin by reading extracts from Artaud (1970) The Theatre and Its Double alongside his Letter to the Chancellors of the European Universities, the 4

play fragment The Spurt of Blood, The Umbilical Limbo and All Writing is Filth (all in Study Pack). Week 3 ! 5 Oct: Derrida, Artaud and deconstruction ! We will use Derridas essay The Theater of Cruelty and the Closure of Representation to examine whether the intense focus of critical theory on language can be circumvented by Artauds determination to found a theatre based upon a physical sensibility with no language, no words, no mind, nothing. / Nothing, except a fine Nervometer. Derridas essay concludes that There is no theater in the world today which fulfills Artauds desire because in the extent to which he wanted to save the purity of a presence without interior difference and without repetition ... Artaud also desired the impossibility of the theater. We will critically assess Derridas argument about the nature and possibilities of theatre here and track his deconstruction of Artauds writings on theatre and attempts at producing a theatre of cruelty. We will test these arguments and ideas against Artauds fragment A Spurt of Blood and Becketts Not I as adapted for television, similarly designed to work upon the nerves, and not the intelligence, of its audience. Student follow-up: Read Derridas Structure, Sign, and Play in the Discourse of the Human Sciences in (1978) Writing and Difference, his Signature, Event, Context in (1988) Limited Inc and Hearts Desire, part of Caryl Churchills (1997) Blue Heart (all in Study Pack). Week 4 ! 12 Oct: Deconstruction and iteration ! We will trace the logic of deconstruction again in Structure, Sign, and Play, relating its rejection of any full presence to Artauds pursuit of a theatrical experience beyond representation, differences or signs. We will also examine the self-deconstructing paradox of this logic itself, where its own language bears within itself the necessity of its own critique. We will go on to examine how signs without fault, without truth, and without origin ... offered to an active interpretation can be subject to iteration, by a logic that ties repetition to alterity. Derridas sign, which does not exhaust itself in the moment of its inscription, again opposes Artauds contention that what has already been said no longer needs saying; that an expression twice used is of no value since it does not have two lives. We will test Artauds argument against three cases studies: the transmission of scenes from Christopher Marlowes Edward II to Derek Jarmans film version; the transformation of the Naturalism of Ibsens A Dolls House in Mabou Mines Dollhouse and the self-determining iteration of Churchills Blue Heart. Student follow-up: Read Baudrillard, The Precession of Simulacra and On Nihilism from (1994) Simulacra and Simulation, Becketts Quad from (1986) Complete Dramatic Works (in Study Pack) and Ionesco (1997) The Chairs, trans. Martin Crimp. Week 5 ! 19 Oct: Baudrillard: the phases of the image ! We will compare Baudrillards reworking of the edifice of representation via simulation to a pure simulacrum that has no relation to reality whatsoever and what this could mean in performance. We will track this idea of simulation through Baudrillards examples of the hyperreal, the imaginary and their political or practical uses. We will contrast the simulation implied by Ionescos The Chairs with the referential absence cultivated by Becketts adaptation of Quad for television. Student follow-up: Read Baudrillard, The Spirit of Terrorism and Hypotheses on Terrorism from (2002) The Spirit of Terrorism and his The Implosion of Meaning in the Media, Apocalypse Now, Crash and Simulacra and Science Fiction from (1994) Simulacra and Simulation (all in Study Pack). Read Pirandellos play-text Six Characters in Search of an Author (1901) in advance of seeing Headlongs recreation of the scenario as a media-driven confusion of fiction and reality. Performance: We will see Headlongs reworking of Pirandellos Six Characters in Search of an Author at the Cambridge Arts Theatre between Tuesday, 20 Saturday, 24 October 2009.

Performances are daily at 7:45pm with matinees on Thursday, 22 and Saturday 24 October at 2:30pm. Please make every effort to see a performance of the play during this week. See www.cambridgeartstheatre.com for more details. Box office: 01223 503333.

Week 6 ! 26 Oct: Baudrillard: advertising, media and film ! We will examine Baudrillards analysis of the incandescence of the images of terrorism, their symbolic dimension and prior fictive replication in films mirroring exorbitant violence. Conversely, we will explore Baudrillards characterisation of advertising as a discourse that exhausts itself in the act of staging communication, an ironic version of Artauds repudiation of repetition in the theatre of cruelty. We will consider Baudrillards version of a postmodern culture, including, for example, J.G. Ballards Crash as the first great novel of the universe of simulation and the technological and psychedelic fantasy that encompasses Coppolas Apocalypse Now and the war that films itself as it unfolds. We will also consider the iterative logic of Headlongs transformation of Pirandellos Six Characters in Search of an Author into a twenty-first century study of shifting identities and how this might be related to Baudrillards work. Student follow-up: Read extracts from Foucault (1961) Madness and Civilization: A History of Insanity in the Age of Reason, (1970) The Order of Things: An Archaeology of the Human Sciences, (1974) The History of Sexuality, (1975), Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison and Jane Goodall, The Will to Evolve from (2005) Stelarc: The Monograph (all in Study Pack). Week 7 ! 2 Nov: Mutations of the body and the knowing subject ! Following on from the deviant logic of Ballards Crash and Baudrillards analysis of its mortal deconstruction of the body or body confused with technology, we will consider Stelarcs experiments in bodily evolution via technological innovations, the possibilities of the transhuman hybrid and his contention that our philosophy is fundamentally grounded in our physiology. We will compare this argument with Foucaults archaeological exploration of the epistemological space within which conceptual discourse operates, leading to a theory of discursive practice that supersedes the knowing subject. If the archaeology of our thought shows man is an invention of recent date, we will also explore the space opened by this foray into the posthuman. Student follow-up: Read Wisker, Starting Your Postgraduate Research in (2008) The Postgraduate Research Handbook (in Study Pack) Week 8 ! 9 Nov: Review and research topics for the Practical Essay ! We will review the series of theoretical topics introduced by this module and explore how apparently diverse concepts may be related under the rubrics of postmodernism or post-structuralism. We will examine the conceptual and practical demands of the Practical Essay assignment in detail and begin to formulate possible areas for group or individual research. We will try to determine a properly rigorous research methodology to support your work for the Practical Essay by reference to Wisker (2008) The Postgraduate Research Handbook. Student follow-up: Read Research Questions and Hypotheses, Research Methodologies and Research Methods for the Arts and Humanities in Wisker (2008) The Postgraduate Research Handbook (in Study Pack). Think about which theoretical topics interest you and prepare some notes on opportunities for demonstrating your understanding of them within the terms of a Practical Essay. Do you envisage working in a group or presenting a solo piece? How might you present your work using the space and equipment available to you in Covent Garden? If you can outline the area of your research before next weeks workshop, you should contact your module tutor to gain initial approval of your topic. Students who want to pursue group-work or are unsure of which topic to select for their Practical Essay should meet outside class time to compare ideas; a group must be established and a topic selected to work on before next weeks workshop.

Week 9 ! 16 Nov: Formulating your Practical Essay title and rationale ! We will devote this session to developing research interests into topics for exploration in the Practical Essay and, subsequently, into titles that are sufficiently complex and extensive for enquiry, research and reflection at postgraduate level. This session will allow you time to negotiate topics and titles between the members of a group and finalise a title with your module tutor. Student follow-up: You are required to produce a written rationale for your Practical Essay for submission to your module tutor by Thursday, 19 November 2009. You should consider carefully and clearly state the following: your objectives; the form of the Practical Essay; your research resources; your area of investigation and, most importantly, the outline of your argument. You should also organise rehearsals for the presentation of your Practical Essay, considering your use of lighting and sound plans and any other technological requirements. You must have work-in-progress to show during next weeks session. Week 10 ! 23 Nov: Rehearsals for the Practical Essay ! Each solo performer or group will show their work-in-progress for the Practical Essay, either by presenting a rehearsal or giving an oral presentation on their intentions for staging their topic and their research outcomes so far, as determined by their title. Rationales for each Practical Essay will be reviewed; you should be prepared to explain and defend your intentions. Any cue scripts for lighting and sound MUST be available for checking and all sound CDs or MP3 tracks should be present for testing. Student follow-up: Intensive independent rehearsals for Practical Essays. Week 11 ! 30 November: Presentation of Practical Essays ! Practical Essays will be presented in Covent Garden during class time at 6-9pm on Monday, 30 November. A running-order for presentations will be issued separately. Students are required to attend each others Practical Essays and are invited to ask relevant questions about the performance or research presented in the workshop for Week 12. The assessment session will not end until all set and props used are properly stored or removed, the stage area swept and all costume items accounted for and made ready for return to County Drama Wardrobe or any other supplier. All students must remain present until these tasks are fully completed. Student follow-up: Read Writing a Research Proposal, Carrying Out a Literature Review and Being Organised, Keeping Records, Writing Up, Stage-by-Stage in Wisker (2008) The Postgraduate Research Handbook (in Study Pack). You should produce an initial bibliography of books, journals and any other material that you will need to consult for your research essay by next weeks workshop. You should also aim to formulate a precise title for this essay; please do contact your module tutor to discuss your title during this week if you wish to test out ideas in advance of next weeks final session. Week 12 ! 7 Dec: Formulating your research essay title: negotiations and approval ! The first part of this session will provide a forum for discussing the success, or otherwise, of the Practical Essay presentations. We will reflect on the processes of conceiving, researching and rehearsing the Practical Essay and evaluate its learning outcomes. We will then concentrate on developing a topic and formulating a title for the 5,000-word research essay required for this module. The essay may continue and expand the topic explored in your Practical Essay or you may choose to change your focus to a new aspect of theory studied on this module. We will aim to formulate titles with a clear focus but also adequate scope for a postgraduate research essay for all students. We will review reading lists to ensure that you have clear plans to undertake research of sufficient depth and range to provide material for the construction of a well-informed and coherent argument. We will also 7

examine the conventions that you must follow in your written work as set out in the MPA Writing Guide. Student follow-up: Intensive research for final essay assignment. Please do consult your module tutor by email if you require additional guidance over the Christmas vacation; I will be happy to read essay plans or discuss the direction of a draft essay.

4.2. Attendance Requirements


Students are expected to attend all teaching sessions on the courses for which they have registered. Practical projects, rehearsals and ensemble performances are collaborative in their nature and require full attendance. Students taking practical and performance modules should be aware that at certain times a more intensive commitment is required which must be balanced against other life and work commitments. You will be notified of these extra rehearsals as far in advance as possible. If you need to be away from classes for an extended period, it is very important that you inform your Student Adviser, and that you complete a mitigating circumstances form. Please see the notes on Attendance in the Anglia Ruskin Undergraduate Student Handbook for full University regulations. To be effectively prepared for a teaching session, you should: ! ! ! ! ! have completed all the set reading or other prescribed work as described in the course handbook or as set by your lecturer have your own copy of the required text or other material bring adequate writing materials for taking notes be wearing appropriate clothing, especially for rehearsals and performance workshops arrive mentally and physically prepared for the session

Attending all your classes is very important and one of the best ways to help you succeed in this module. In accordance with the Student Charter, you are expected to arrive on time and take an active part in all your timetabled classes. If you are unable to attend a class for a valid reason (e.g.: illness), please contact your Module Tutor. Anglia Ruskin will closely monitor the attendance of all students and will contact you by email if you have been absent without notice for two weeks. Continued absence can result in the termination of your registration, as you will be considered to have withdrawn from your studies. International students who are non-EEA nationals and in possession of entry clearance/leave to remain as a student (student visa) are required to be in regular attendance at Anglia Ruskin. Failure to do so is considered to be a breach of the immigration regulations. Anglia Ruskin, like all British Universities, is statutorily obliged to inform the Border and Immigration Agency of the Home Office of significant unauthorised absences by any student visa holders.

4.3. Attendance for Group and Collaborative Work


For modules that include collaborative practical work, especially those leading to live performance events, there is an especial necessity for full and punctual attendance. Poor attendance and/or engagement inevitably has a detrimental affect on the work of your fellow students and will hinder their achievement, as well as your own.

If you are unable to attend a particular rehearsal, class or workshop you should inform your Module Leader or the Department Administrator immediately, and in advance of the class wherever possible. All members of staff have voicemail and email. You will then be entered on the register as an explained absence. Failure to do this will mean that you will be marked unexplained absent. Absence for reasons of external work commitments, timetable clashes or time mismanagement will not be accepted. You should be aware that poor attendance and/or lack of commitment will inevitably affect your ability to meet the module learning outcomes to a satisfactory standard, and consequently your mark may be affected.

5. Assessment
[Note: Assessment information is provisional until approved by the External Examiner].

Assessment Assessment Method Practical Essay Essay % contribution to module mark or P/F 30% 70% Learning Outcomes 1-6 1-6

In order to pass this module, students are required to achieve an overall mark of 40%

In addition, students are required to (a) for each element of fine graded assessment listed above, achieve a minimum mark of 30% (or higher - see Module Guide) and (b) pass any pass/fail elements
Module Assessment further details
Method Length/duration Fine graded (FG) or pass/fail (PF) FG Minimum Qualifying Mark
see guidance notes

Comments

Practical Essay

30 minutes maximum, equivalent to 3,000-words (group size will determine an appropriate duration)

30

Practical Essays may be individual or group projects. Students should seek approval for their Practical Essay topic from their module tutor. Tutors will provide some preparation time during timetabled hours but students should also arrange additional rehearsals independently. Students must negotiate their own essay title with their module tutor.

Essay

5,000-words

FG

30

PRACTICAL ESSAY (30% of module mark) Practical Essays will be presented in Covent Garden during class time on Monday, 30 November. The session will run from 6-9pm. A full running-order for performances will be issued separately. Your Practical Essay should be an exploration, in performance, of a specific set of concepts, principles and/or practices. It offers you the opportunity to demonstrate an application of the theoretical materials encountered on this module in practical contexts. A Practical Essay must test ideas in the performance space through staging them. It is not simply a performance; you must have clear objectives and a rationale. You need to consider why you are staging material, how you are going to perform in order to communicate your ideas and what you are going to test in the moment of performance. You must seek approval for your Practical Essay topic from your module tutor before beginning work. When initial approval has been given, you must provide a more detailed written statement of the objectives, aims and rationale of your practical essay. These written statements should be submitted for discussion by Thursday, 19 November 2009. As with a written essay, Practical Essays provide an opportunity to demonstrate your critical engagement with course materials and understanding of the concepts, principles and practices investigated during seminars and workshops. The Practical Essay should also reflect your own independent and original research and ideas, organised into the form of an argument that can be demonstrated in performance. The Practical Essay should exploit its inherent features; you should take advantage of its live, spatial and embodied form. Practical Essays might incorporate exercises, performed pieces, sitespecific locations or environments, available technical resources and/or the presence of an audience. You may choose to communicate relevant arguments and ideas directly through lectures, overhead projections, images, video playback, and so on. For instance, you could introduce the practical work and articulate your aims and rationale directly to your audience. You might organise the Practical Essay as a lecture performance, so that your ideas and theories are interwoven with practical excerpts or interrogations. In summary, the Practical Essay must: make an argument or test a thesis relevant to the module exploit the features of its live, spatial and embodied form include some form of guidance or contextualisation for the audience and assessors involve research.

You are required to produce a rationale for your Practical Essay (by Thursday, 19 November 2009) which clearly defines: your objectives the form of the Practical Essay your research resources your area of investigation an outline of your argument.

10

RESEARCH ESSAY (70% of module mark) There are no set titles for this essay. You are required to formulate a topic related to any of the theoretical materials encountered on this module and negotiate your own title with your module tutor. You should ensure that you begin this process immediately following the completion of the Practical Essay presentations (although you may, of course, discuss what your focus might be earlier in the course too). The workshop in Week 12 will be used to negotiate the precise wording of your title. You must ensure that you have the approval of your module tutor before embarking on your research. Your title will be assessed according to the following criteria: is the title academically viable, that is, sufficiently challenging for postgraduate research but not so ambitious as to be impossible to encompass within a 5,000-word essay? is the title worded with sufficient precision to outline your area of investigation clearly? does the title adequately relate to the materials of this module? is there sufficient material available for the essay envisaged to be researched in depth?

The essay must be no longer than 5,000-words (there is a 10% penalty for exceeding this limit). You should ensure that you follow the conventions outlined in the MPA Writing Guide for all referencing and bibliographical apparatus. The essay must be submitted to the i-Centre by 5pm on Monday, 4 January 2010.

5.1 Feedback
You are entitled to written feedback on your performance for all your assessed work. For all assessment tasks which are not examinations, this is provided by a member of academic staff completing the assignment coversheet on which your mark and feedback will relate to the achievement of the modules intended learning outcomes and the assessment criteria you were given for the task when it was first issued. Anglia Ruskin is committed to providing you with feedback on all assessed work within 20 working days of the submission deadline or the date of an examination. This is extended to 30 days for feedback for a Major Project module (please note that working days excludes those days when Anglia Ruskin University is officially closed; e.g.: between Christmas and New Year). At the main Anglia Ruskin University campuses, each Faculty will publish details of the arrangement for the return of your assessed work (e.g.: a marked essay or case study etc.). Any work which is not collected by you from the Faculty within this timeframe is returned to the iCentres from where you can subsequently collect it. The iCentres retain student work for a specified period prior to its disposal. To assure ourselves that our marking processes are comparable with other universities in the UK, Anglia Ruskin provides samples of student assessed work to external examiners as a routine part of our marking processes. External examiners are experienced academic staff from other universities who scrutinise your work and provide Anglia Ruskin academic staff with feedback and advice. Many of Anglia Ruskins staff act as external examiners at other universities. On occasion, you will receive feedback and marks for pieces of work that you completed in the earlier stages of the module. We provide you with this feedback as part of the learning 11

experience and to help you prepare for other assessment tasks that you have still to complete. It is important to note that, in these cases, the marks for these pieces of work are unconfirmed as the processes described above for the use of external examiners will not have been completed. This means that, potentially, marks can change, in either direction! Marks for modules and individual pieces of work become confirmed on the Dates for the Official Publication of Results, which can be checked at www.anglia.ac.uk/results.

6. Assessment Criteria and Marking Standards


6.1 Anglia Ruskin University Generic Assessment Criteria
Please consult your student pathway handbook for details about Anglia Ruskins generic assessment criteria and policy. This information can also be found under the Student section of ANET.

6.2 Module Specific Assessment Criteria


In addition to Anglia Ruskins generic assessment criteria, your work will also be marked against module-specific assessment criteria. Assessment tasks for this module will be marked against the marking criteria for Practical Essay and Written Work, as below: Assessment Criteria Practical Essay: Distinction [80%-100%] This work is characterised by an outstanding degree of independent research and distinctive originality. Work of this standard is in full command of its topic and capable of overturning orthodox positions or received opinion with strikingly new analyses or innovative creation. Upper first-class work is rare and exceptional; it will be a sustained demonstration of intellectual rigour, technical excellence, creative and imaginative flair and the highest standards of achievement and research proper to the field of study. Work at this level is comparable to existing exemplars of the repertoire or displays outstanding originality. Work of this standard far exceeds module learning outcomes and will display some or all of the following characteristics: Outstanding practice that displays exceptional levels of creativity, imagination, intelligence, and originality Independent and expert development of innovative research strategies in order to present a convincing argument in practice A commanding understanding of practice-as-research, considering style, context, form and interpretation evident in practical work produced Sharp focus on the full implications of the material under investigation, with a sophisticated and comprehensive awareness of associated issues Command of relevant theory, critical and/or artistic context, evident in an exceptionally original and thought-provoking piece of practice Exemplary observation of all deadlines and demonstration of the highest level of professional discipline ______________________________________________________________________ Distinction [70%-79%] Such work is characterised by independent learning and freshness of approach. Work of this standard fully explores the topic and is not afraid to challenge orthodox positions or received 12

opinion where relevant. The work is outstanding and displays a selection or combination of the qualities of intellectual rigour, technical excellence, creative and imaginative flair and very high standards of achievement and research proper to the field of study. Work at this level displays a sophisticated level of engagement with the material and substantial attainment and expansion of pathway and module learning outcomes. Work at this level will display some or all of the following characteristics: Excellent practice that consistently displays advanced levels of creativity, imagination, intelligence, and originality Confident development of appropriate research strategies in order to present a convincing argument in practice
A deep understanding of practice-as-research, considering style, context, form and

interpretation evident in practical work produced Focus on the full implications of the material under investigation, with a critical awareness of associated issues Wide knowledge of relevant theory, critical and/or artistic context, evident in an innovative, thought-provoking and engaging piece of practice Conscientious observation of all deadlines and a high level of professional discipline

Merit [60%-69%] Work in this class demonstrates some of the qualities that define Distinction level work but not in as sustained a manner. A Merit mark denotes very good work, but it is not intellectually, practically or creatively outstanding. An abstract or generalised piece of work must be of very high quality to gain a Merit mark. Work at this level will display clear engagement with course aims and substantial attainment of learning outcomes and will display some or all of the following characteristics: Good practice that displays sound levels of creativity, imagination and intelligence Development of suitable research strategies in order to present a well-developed argument in practice A good understanding of practice-as-research, considering style, context, form and interpretation evident in practical work produced An accurate and sustained focus on the main implications of the material under investigation, with an awareness of associated issues Good knowledge of relevant theory, critical and/or artistic context, evident in an engaging piece of practice Observation of all main deadlines and a good level of professional discipline. ______________________________________________________________________ Pass [50%-59%] Work in this class is of average to good, and not merely passing, standard. Work at this level will display acceptable engagement with course aims and satisfactory attainment of learning outcomes, and will display some or all of the following characteristics: Satisfactory practice that displays an adequate level of presentation skills 13

Development of some standard research strategies in order to present an argument in practice Satisfactory understanding of practice-as-research, considering style, context, form and interpretation evident in practical work produced A partial focus on the main implications of the material under investigation, omitting some key points Adequate knowledge of relevant theory, critical and/or artistic context, although the practical essay displays a partial absence of this knowledge translated into practice Satisfactory observation of most deadlines and an adequate level of professional discipline. ______________________________________________________________________ Pass [40%-49%] This work is of passing Honours standard and should not be confused with failed work. There is little engagement with course aims and limited attainment of learning outcomes. Work at this level will display some, or all, of the characteristics listed here: Undeveloped practice that displays limited presentation skills Limited development of the research strategies necessary to present an argument in practice Incomplete and/or inconsistent understanding of practice-as-research, showing little consideration of style, context, form and interpretation in the practical essay produced A lack of focus on the material under investigation, omitting key points Limited knowledge of relevant theory, critical and/or artistic context, evident in the practice produced Some deadlines missed and sometimes unreliable in engagement, concentration and/or discipline. _____________________________________________________________________ Fail [30%-39%] Although inadequate at degree level, work within the mark range of 30%-39% qualifies as a marginal Fail. Work at this level displays little or no engagement with course aims and failure to attain most learning outcomes. The 30%-39% range is used carefully to indicate the extent of the failure and the works closeness to being of passing quality. In some circumstances, compensation rules may apply (i.e. resubmission of work or retaking the module may not be obligatory). Failed work at this level will show some, or all, of the weaknesses listed here: Weak practice that falls short of negotiating the course requirements adequately Very little awareness of the research strategies necessary to create and present an argument in practice Negligible understanding of practice-as-research, showing no consideration of style, context, form and interpretation in the practical essay produced A failure to focus on the material under investigation Poor knowledge of relevant theory, critical and/or artistic context, evident in the practice produced Deadlines missed and frequent unreliability in attendance and/or engagement. 14

______________________________________________________________________ Fail [0%-29%] Work within the range 0%-29% is very weak and clearly fails to reach degree standard. Typically, course aims are ignored and no attempt is made to attain any learning outcomes. A mark of 0% will usually denote a failure to submit work at all. Work within this range cannot be compensated. Depending on individual circumstances and the requirements of the module, failed work at this level must either be resubmitted or the module retaken. Failed work at this level will show some, or all, of the serious weaknesses listed here: Poor and/or incompetent practice that shows no evidence of engaging with the course requirements No awareness of the research strategies necessary to create and present an argument in practice No understanding of practice-as-research, showing neglect of style, context, form or interpretation evident in the practical essay produced Disregard of the material under investigation No knowledge of relevant theory, critical and/or artistic context, evident in the practice produced Consistent indifference to deadlines, perfunctory attendance and/or engagement. Undisciplined and unprofessional. Assessment Criteria Written Work Distinction [80%-100%] This work is characterised by an outstanding degree of independent research and distinctive originality. Work of this standard is in full command of its topic and capable of overturning orthodox positions or received opinion with strikingly new analyses or innovative creation. Upper first-class work is rare and exceptional; it will be a sustained demonstration of intellectual rigour, technical excellence, creative and imaginative flair and the highest standards of achievement and research proper to the field of study. Work at this level is comparable to existing exemplars of the repertoire or displays outstanding originality. Work of this standard far exceeds module learning outcomes and will display some or all of the following characteristics: Compelling analysis demonstrating complete command of the topic Outstanding originality, capable of overturning received opinion, where relevant Sharp focus on the full implications of the question asked, with a sophisticated and comprehensive awareness of associated problematic issues Effectively structured and convincing argument Command of relevant theory and/or critical context, fully supported with detailed evidence properly referenced Persuasive and highly articulate use of written English. ______________________________________________________________________ Distinction [70%-79%] This is characterised by independent learning and freshness of approach. Work of this standard fully explores the topic and is not afraid to challenge orthodox positions or received opinion where relevant. The work is outstanding and displays a selection or combination of 15

the qualities of intellectual rigour, technical excellence, creative and imaginative flair and very high standards of achievement and research proper to the field of study. Work at this level displays a sophisticated level of engagement with the material and substantial attainment and expansion of pathway and module learning outcomes. Work at this level will display some or all of the following characteristics: A penetrating level of analysis fluently at ease with the topic Originality of approach and the ability to challenge received opinions, where relevant Focus on the full implications of the question asked and an intelligent awareness of associated problematic issues Careful organisation and cogent, progressive argument Wide knowledge of relevant theory and/or critical context, well supported by detailed evidence properly referenced Clear, articulate and effective use of written English. ______________________________________________________________________ Merit [60%-69%] Work in this class demonstrates some of the qualities that define work in the category of Distinction but not in as sustained a manner. A Merit denotes very good work, but it is not intellectually, practically or creatively outstanding. An abstract or generalised piece of work must be of very high quality to gain a Merit mark. Work at this level will display clear engagement with course aims and substantial attainment of learning outcomes and will display some or all of the following characteristics: Good powers of analysis, systematically deployed A thorough and intelligent treatment of the topic An accurate and sustained focus on the main implications of the question Clear organisation and a well-developed argument Good knowledge of relevant theory and/or critical context, supported with evidence, adequately referenced Literate, clear use of written English ______________________________________________________________________ Pass [50%-59%] Work in this class is of average to good, and not merely passing, standard. Work at this level will display acceptable engagement with course aims and satisfactory attainment of learning outcomes, and will display some or all of the following characteristics: Reasonable powers of analysis, but sometimes over-generalised or unfocused A sound treatment of the topic, but omitting some key points A partial answer to the question An argument advanced, but largely derived from secondary sources Adequate knowledge of relevant theory and/or critical context, although supporting evidence offered is insufficiently detailed and/or inconsistently referenced Satisfactory, but sometimes imprecise, use of written English. ______________________________________________________________________ Pass [40%-49%] Although weak, this is of passing standard and should not be confused with failed work. There is little engagement with course aims and limited attainment of learning outcomes. Work at this level will display some, or all, of the characteristics listed here: 16

Limited powers of intellectual analysis An inadequate focus on the topic, omitting many key points An evasive or poorly directed address to the question An underdeveloped argument, with a heavy reliance on paraphrase or summary Limited knowledge of relevant theory and/or critical context, with assertions insufficiently substantiated by evidence Pedestrian, repetitious or inaccurate use of written English ______________________________________________________________________ Fail [30%-39%] Although inadequate at postgraduate level, work within the mark range of 30%-39% qualifies as a marginal Fail. Work at this level displays little or no engagement with course aims and failure to attain most learning outcomes. The 30%-39% range is used carefully to indicate the extent of the failure and the works closeness to being of passing quality. In some circumstances, compensation rules may apply (i.e. resubmission of work or retaking the module may not be obligatory). Work at this level will display some, or all, of the characteristics listed here: Negligible or feeble powers of critical analysis A lack of focus on the question asked, omitting most key points A failure to answer or misunderstanding of the question Little developed argument, marred by fallacies and/or confused organisation Poor knowledge of relevant theory and/or critical context, with unsupported and/or dubious assertions Ineffective use of written English, with many errors in syntax, spelling, word choice and punctuation. ______________________________________________________________________ Fail [0%-29%] Work within the range 0%-29% is very weak and clearly fails to reach passing standard. Typically, course aims are ignored and no attempt is made to attain any learning outcomes. A mark of 0% will usually denote a failure to submit work at all. Work within this range cannot be compensated. Depending on individual circumstances and the requirements of the module, failed work at this level must either be resubmitted or the module retaken. Failed work at this level will show some, or all, of the serious weaknesses listed here: No evidence of critical analysis Disregard of the question asked, omitting all key points No attempt made to answer the question and/or extensive misunderstanding of its implications No argument advanced. The majority of the work will be illogical, incoherent and confused No knowledge of relevant theory and/or critical context, with inaccurate assertions Poor use of written English, with incoherent syntax, extensive spelling mistakes, confused work choices and incorrect punctuation.

17

7. Assessment Offences
You are reminded that any work that you submit must be your own. All suspected assessment offences will be investigated and can result in severe penalties. Please note that it is your responsibility to consult the relevant sections of the Academic Regulations (section 10 see www.anglia.ac.uk/academicregs) and the Student Handbook. When you are preparing your work for submission, it is important that you understand the various academic conventions that you are expected to follow in order to make sure that you do not leave yourself open to accusations of plagiarism (eg: the correct use of referencing, citations, footnotes etc.) and that your work maintains its academic integrity. Plagiarism is theft and constitutes the presentation of anothers work as your own in order to gain an unfair advantage. You will receive advice and guidance on how to avoid plagiarism and other elements of poor academic practice during the early stages of your studies at Anglia Ruskin. A Guide to Academic Integrity and Good Academic Practice A primary purpose of a University education is to instil in each student an understanding of, and a capacity for scholarship, independent judgment, academic rigour, and intellectual honesty. It is the joint responsibility of university teachers, support staff and students to work together to foster these ends through relationships which encourage freedom of inquiry, demonstrate personal and professional integrity, and foster mutual respect. Good academic practice refers to the process of completing your academic work independently, honestly and in an appropriate academic style, using good referencing and acknowledging all of your sources. To demonstrate good academic practice you must:

develop your own independent evaluation of academic issues; draw upon research from academics in your field of study; discuss and evaluate existing concepts and theories; demonstrate your understanding of the key literature; develop your own arguments.

To support your own good academic practice you will need to develop:

study and information skills (eg. reading, note-taking, research etc); skills of critical enquiry and evaluation (eg. taking a balanced opinion, using reasoning and argument); appropriate academic writing skills (eg. for essays, reports, dissertations etc); referencing skills; examination techniques (eg. preparation and timing etc).

Achieving good academic practice is not as complicated as it may appear. In a nutshell, you need to:

know the rules; make sure you reference all sources.

18

Poor academic practice or academic dishonesty (plagiarism, cheating, fraud etc.) is sometimes caused by insecurity as to what is expected and what is allowed. If you are in any doubt you should talk to a librarian and/or your module or personal tutor. Our Expectations of Students The Student Charter (http://web.anglia.ac.uk/anet/students/pdfs/ 11473_Charter_16ppA5.pdf) requires you to be aware of the academic rules relating to your studies, p9). We expect you to agree that you will: i) ensure that you are familiar with the academic conventions regarding the citing (acknowledgement, referencing) of the work of others (see, for assistance, http://libweb.anglia.ac.uk/referencing/referencing.htm); ii) only hand in your own original work for assessment; iii) correctly reference all the sources for the information you have included in your work; iv) identify information you have downloaded from the internet; v) never use another students work as if it were your own work; vi) never use someone elses artwork, pictures or graphics (including graphs, spreadsheets etc. and information from the internet) as if they were made by you; vii) never let other students use or copy from your work; viii) work through PILOT, the online tutorial available on the University library website (http://libweb.anglia.ac.uk/pilot/). PILOT addresses a number of study skills which will help you develop good academic practice.

8. Learning Resources
8.1. Recommended Texts
Artaud, A. (1968) Collected Works (1956). Volume 1. Trans. V. Corti. London: Calder and Boyars !!!! (1970) The Theatre and Its Double. Trans. V. Corti. London: Calder and Boyars !!!! (2004) Artaud on Theatre. Eds. C. Schumacher with B. Singleton. Chicago: I.R. Dee Auslander, P. (1997) From Acting to Performance: Essays in Modernism and Postmodernism. London: Routledge !!!! (2008) Theory for Performance Studies: A Students Guide. London: Routledge Ballard, J. G. (1995) Crash (1973). London: Vintage Barry, P. (1995) Beginning Theory: An Introduction to Literary and Cultural Theory. Manchester: Manchester University Press Barthes, R. (1973) Mythologies. London: Paladin !!!! (1988) The Death of the Author (1968) in Modern Criticism and Theory: A Reader. Ed. D. Lodge. London: Longman Baudrillard, J. (1987) Forget Foucault (1977). London: Semiotext(e) !!!! (1988) America (1986). Trans. C. Turner. London: Verso !!!! (1988) Selected Writings. Ed. Mark Poster. London: Polity Press !!!! (1990) Fatal Strategies (1983). Trans. P. Beitchman and W. G. J. Niesluchowski. London: Semiotext(e) !!!! (1994) Simulacra and Simulation (1981). Trans. S. F. Glaser. Michigan: University of Michigan Press 19

!!!! (1995) The Gulf War Did Not Take Place (1991). Trans. P. Patton. Bloomington: Indiana University Press !!!! (2003) The Spirit of Terrorism (2002). Trans. C. Turner. London: Verso Beckett, S. (1996) The Complete Dramatic Works. London: Faber Belsey, C. (2002) Poststructuralism: A Very Short Introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press Birringer, J. (1993) Theatre, Theory, Postmodernism. Indiana: Indiana University Press Blackburn, S. (1994) The Oxford Dictionary of Philosophy. Oxford: Oxford University Press Brewer, L. (1987) Animations: Trilogy for Mabou Mines. New York: Theatre Communications Group Broadhurst, S. (1999) Liminal Acts: A Critical Overview of Contemporary Performance and Theory. London: Cassell !!!! and J. Machon (2006) Eds. Performance and Technology: Practices of Virtual Embodiment and Interactivity. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan !!!! (2007) Digital Practices: Aesthetic and Neuroesthetic Approaches to Performance and Technology. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan Buse, P. (2001) Drama + Theory: Critical Approaches to Modern British Drama. Manchester: Manchester University Press Butler, R. (1999) Jean Baudrillard: The Defence of the Real. London: Sage Churchill, C. (1997) Blue Heart. London: Nick Hern Cronenberg, D. (1997) Crash: Screenplay. London: Faber Derrida, J. (1978) Writing and Difference (1967). Trans. A. Bass. London: Routledge !!!! (1988) Limited Inc. Northwestern University Press !!!! and Paule Thvenin (1998) The Secret Art of Antonin Artaud (1986). Trans. M. A. Caws. Cambridge, MA.: The MIT Press Dooley, M. and L. Kavanagh (2007) The Philosophy of Derrida. Chesham: Acumen Durand R. and E. Heartney (2004) Orlan: Carnal Art. Paris: Flammarion Eagleton, T. (1996) The Illusions of Postmodernism. London: Blackwell Easthope. A. and K. McGowan (2004) Eds. A Critical and Cultural Theory Reader. 2nd Edition. Maidenhead: Open University Press Esslin, M. (1976) Artaud. London: Fontana Fortier, M. (1997) Theatre / Theory: An Introduction. London: Routledge 20

Foucault, M. (1970) The Order of Things: An Archaeology of the Human Sciences (1966). London: Routledge !!!! (1977) Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison (1975). Trans. A. Sheridan. London: Penguin !!!! (1988) What is an Author? (1969) in Modern Criticism and Theory: A Reader. Ed. D. Lodge. London: Longman !!!! (1990) The History of Sexuality: An Introduction (1976). Vol. 1. Trans. R. Hurley. London: Penguin !!!! (1991) The Foucault Reader: An Introduction to Foucaults Thought. Ed. P. Rabinow. London: Penguin !!!! (2001) Madness and Civilisation: A History of Insanity in the Age of Reason (1961). Trans. R. Howard. London: Routledge Freeman, J. (2007) New Performance / New Writing. London: Palgrave Fuchs, E. (1996) The Death of Character: Perspectives on Theater After Modernism . Indiana: Indiana University Press Gabbard, D. and A. Beaulieu (2006) Eds. Michel Foucault and Power Today: International Multidisciplinary Studies in the History of the Present. Oxford: Lexington Books Gane, M. (1993) Ed. Baudrillard Live: Selected Interviews. London: Routledge Goodman, L. and J. De Gay (2000) The Routledge Reader in Politics and Performance. New York: Routledge Grace, V. (2000) Baudrillard's Challenge: A Feminist Reading. London: Routledge Hadfield, A., P. Boxall, L. Smith and C. Surprenant (2008) Eds. The Years Work in Critical and Cultural Theory: Covering Work Published in 2006. Vol. 16. Oxford: OUP for the English Association Hill, R. K. (2007) Nietzsche: A Guide for the Perplexed. London: Continuum Horrocks, C. and Z. Jevtic (1996) Baudrillard for Beginners. Cambridge: Icon Ionesco, E. (1997) The Chairs (1958). Trans. M. Crimp. London: Faber Jameson, F. (1991) Postmodernism or, The Cultural Logic of Late Capitalism. London: Verso Kelleher J. and N. Ridout, Eds. (2006) Contemporary Theatres in Europe. London: Routledge Kershaw, B. (1999) The Radical in Performance: Between Brecht and Baudrillard. London: Routledge Leach, R. (2004) Makers of Modern Theatre: An Introduction. London: Routledge Lehmann, H.T. (2006) Postdramatic Theatre. London: Routledge 21

Lyotard, J-F. (1984) The Postmodern Condition: A Report on Knowledge. Manchester: Manchester University Press Macey, D. (1993) The Lives of Michel Foucault. London: Hutchinson !!!! (2000) The Penguin Dictionary of Critical Theory. London: Penguin Mills, S. (2003) Michel Foucault. London: Routledge Nietzsche, F. (1994) The Portable Nietzsche. Trans. W. Kaufmann. London: Viking Norris, C. (1991) Whats Wrong with Postmodern?: Critical Theory and the Ends of Philosophy. London: Prentice-Hall !!!! (2002) Deconstruction: Theory and Practice. 3rd Edition. London: Routledge Phelan, P. (1993) Unmarked: The Politics of Performance. London: Routledge Pirandello, L. (2003) Six Characters in Search of an Author (1901) London: Nick Hern OFarrell, C. (2005) Michel Foucault. London: Sage Quick, A. (2007) The Wooster Group Workbook. London: Routledge Ravenhill, M. (1997) Faust (Faust is Dead). London: Methuen Robinson, D. (1999) Nietzsche and Postmodernism. London: Icon Rodgers, N. and M. Thompson (2005) Philosophers Behaving Badly. London: Peter Owen Scheer, E. (2000) 100 Years of Cruelty: Essays on Artaud. Sydney: Artspace Simons, J. (2004) Ed. Contemporary Critical Theorists: From Lacan to Said. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press Smith, M. (2005) Ed. Stelarc: The Monograph. Massachusetts: The MIT Press Taylor, D. and K. Vintges (2004) Feminism and the Final Foucault. Urbana: University of Illinois Press Whitmore, J. (1994) Directing Postmodern Theatre: Shaping Signification in Performance. Michigan: University of Michigan Wisker, G. (2008) The Postgraduate Research Handbook. Second Edition. Basingstoke: Palgrave Wolfreys, J. (2007) Derrida: A Guide for the Perplexed. London: Continuum

22

8.2. Recommended Internet Resources


http://plato.stanford.edu [highly recommended Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy] http://www.antoninartaud.org/home.html [Artaud bibliographies, audio and links] http://englishscholar.com/baudrillard.htm [Baudrillard excerpts and bibliographies] http://www.ubishops.ca/BaudrillardStudies/ [online access to the International Journal of Baudrillard Studies] http://www.geocities.com/thenietzschechannel [online access to Nietzsches major works, notes and letters] http://www.hydra.umn.edu/derrida [Derrida bibliographies, excerpts, audio, video, news] http://www.michel-foucault.com [Foucault bibliographies, links, excerpts, key concepts] http://www.foucault.info/documents [Foucault excepts, interviews, conference transcripts] http://www.csun.edu/~hfspc002/foucault.home.html [online discussion pages]

23

9. Module Definition Form


Module Definition Form (MDF) Module Code: AF430003S
1. Module Title: maximum 100 characters

Version: 1

Date amended: 06/03/2008

Critical Theory and Performance Practice 2a. Module Leader: Sue Wilson 3a. Level: see guidance notes 4 4a. Credits: see guidance notes 30 5. Restrictions None None None None 2b. Department: Music and Performing Arts 2c. Faculty: Arts, Law and Social Sciences

3b. Module Type: see guidance notes Standard 4b. Study Hours: see guidance notes 300

Pre-requisites: Co-requisites: Exclusions: Pathways to which this module is restricted:

LEARNING, TEACHING AND ASSESSMENT INFORMATION


6a. Module Description: 200 300 words This module introduces ideas from critical theory in relation to the innovative practices in twentieth-century and contemporary performance. Familiar concepts in mainstream criticism on theatre and performance (such as authorial agency, representation, character, identity, culture and meaning) will be reconsidered in relation to some major strands of critical theory. Theorists and topics may include Roland Barthes distinction of the readerly and the writerly; Jacques Derridas use of recontextualisation and iteration as strategies of deconstruction; Michel Foucaults writings on the archaeology of contemporary modes of thought and Jean Baudrillards concepts of the simulacrum and simulation. Students will be expected to pursue further research independently to supplement their study of the theoretical texts selected for this module. Efficient research methodologies to facilitate this work will be explored. Ideas from critical theory will be deployed in relation to selected twentieth-century and, wherever possible, new live work in dance, live art, physical theatre, and/or devised performance. Theories to be considered might include Jacques Derrida, who might be studied alongside iterative dramatic works (indicative examples may include Mabou Mines or The Wooster Group). Foucault could be considered in the light of post-humanist work (indicative play-texts or performances may include Mark Ravenhills Faust (Faust is Dead) and the live art of Orlan or Stelarc). Samuel Becketts late plays for television might be rethought in terms of Baudrillards phases of the image; Baudrillards analysis of J.D. Ballards Crash (and its reappearance as a David Cronenberg film) might be a supplementary case study. Students will be assessed through a practical essay, which explores theoretical ideas through practice, and a substantive essay, within which skills in independent research should be demonstrated.

24

6b. Outline Content: Introduction to critical theory, for example, the work of Barthes, Derrida, Foucault and Baudrillard The development of an understanding of innovations in twentieth-century and contemporary performance practices in terms of ideas from critical theory The development of independent research skills to be deployed in a self-managed practical essay and a substantial written essay 6c. Key Texts/Literature: Barthes, R. (1973) Mythologies. London: Paladin Baudrillard, J. (1994) Simulacra and Simulation. Michigan: University of Michigan Press ---- (2003) The Spirit of Terrorism. London: Verso Beckett, S. (1996) The Complete Dramatic Works. London: Faber Cronenberg, D. (1997) Crash: Screenplay. London: Faber Derrida, J. (1988) Limited Inc. Northwestern University Press Durand R. and E. Heartney (2004) Orlan: Carnal Art. Paris: Flammarion Foucault, M. (1970) The Order of Things: An Archaeology of the Human Sciences. London: Routledge Freeman, J. (2007) New Performance / New Writing. London: Palgrave Lehmann, H.T. (2006) Postdramatic Theatre. London: Routledge Quick, A. (2007) The Wooster Group Workbook. London: Routledge Ravenhill, M. (1997) Faust (Faust is Dead). London: Methuen Smith, M. Ed. (2005) Stelarc: The Monograph. Massachusetts: The MIT Press Wisker, G. (2001) The Postgraduate Research Handbook. Basingstoke: Palgrave 6d. Specialist Learning Resources: Drama studio, multimedia equipment, DVD and networked computer projection with specialised technical support. 7. Learning Outcomes (threshold standards): On successful completion of this module the student will be expected to be able to: Knowledge and understanding 1. Demonstrate a detailed and systematic understanding of ideas informing selected areas of critical theory; 2. Critically evaluate these ideas in relation to appropriate theoretical and performance texts; 3. Demonstrate independent interpretation of the ideas and materials encountered on the module; Intellectual, practical, affective and transferable skills 4. Synthesize ideas from critical theory and relevant contemporary performance practices and apply these innovatively within self-managed creative practice and writing; 5. Apply skills in research methodologies to investigate further areas in critical theory and performance practices; 6. Demonstrate clarity and lucidity of argument and expression in the presentation of practical and written essays. 8. Learning Activities Learning Activities Lectures: Other teacher managed learning: Student managed learning: TOTAL Hours 0 36 264 300 Learning Outcomes 1-4 1-6 Details of duration, frequency and other comments

25

9.

Module Assessment
Method Learning Outcomes 1-6 % Weighting & Fine Grade (FG) or pass/fail (PF) F/G 30% Qualifying Mark
see guidance notes

Length/duration and other comments Practical Essays may be individual or group projects. Students should seek approval for their Practical Essay topic from their module tutor. Tutors will provide some preparation time during timetabled hours but students should also arrange additional rehearsals independently. 30 minutes maximum, equivalent to 3,000-words (group size will determine an appropriate duration). Students may negotiate their own essay title with their module tutor. 5,000-words.

Practical Essay

30%

Essay

1-6

F/G 70%

30%

In order to pass this module, students are required to achieve an overall mark of 40%. In addition, students are required to: (a) achieve the qualifying mark for each element of fine graded assessment as specified above (b) pass any pass/fail elements

OTHER TECHNICAL DETAILS


10. Delivery of the Module Please delete as appropriate
This module is delivered over a single semester Yes or No? Y Indicate which by deleting as appropriate Semester 1 Semester 2 Delivery 1

11. Subject: see guidance notes

26

10. Report of Last Delivery of Module


MODULE REPORT FORM

Module Code and Title: AF430003S - Critical Theory and Performance Practices Anglia Ruskin Department: Music and Performing Arts

Location(s) of Delivery: Cambridge Academic Year: 2008-09 Enrolment Numbers (at each location): 14 Module Leader & Tutor: Sue Wilson
Student Achievement Student achievement on this module was pleasing in the Practical Essay assessment, although necessary revisions and adjustments to live pieces were rather last-minute. However, several students clearly stepped up to MA level work with sophistication beyond what had been expected in their undergraduate studies. Some pieces of written work were extremely advanced in their analysis of complex subjects, but there was also one Fail mark here (although a good Practical Essay mark saved this student from failure on the module overall). There was one First Class mark on this module, eight equivalent to 2:1, three equivalent to 2:2 and two at Third Class level. The mean mark was 56.6%. Feedback from Students The overall satisfaction score for this module was 86%. Lowest survey scores, each of 79%, were received for Library materials were current and relevant, Web and other resources were available to me for this module and I could relate the assessment to the learning outcomes of the module (although 90% of respondents felt that The learning outcomes of the module were clear). In written comments, there was one objection to the Practical Essay as an assessment form, one request for a later assessment date, one (pleasing) request for additional reading and one comment that this module broadened my horizons. Module Leader/Tutors Reflection on Delivery of the Module, including Response to Feedback from Students This was a challenging module with large doses of critical theory essential to its delivery. Students are right to request more library resources in this area, particularly to aid their research at MA level. Additional material will be sought and included in reading lists. Further reliable websites will be included in the Module Guide (a student recommendation of the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy website is well made and will be incorporated). The Practical Essay did provide a live performance element to the assessment of a theoretically based module and so will be retained in view of the Drama background of most students on the Contemporary Theatre MA. The submission date for written work was the latest possible for the marking of work to be completed prior to the January 2008 DAP (the dates of DAPs do cause some difficulty in setting suitable assessment times for MA work). Developments during the current year or planned for next year Practical Essay preparations should be completed more fully during class hours in the next delivery of this module, with written plans and contextualisations to be submitted earlier. Students will also be encouraged to begin their research for the essay element at an earlier point, with the submission date fixed as late as possible in January. External Examiners Comments The external examiner had some concerns about the equity of marks for practical work as viewed on DVD; however, students had been encouraged to exploit the live elements of a Practical Essay and some results of this were not easily perceptible on a DVD record. The External agreed all the marks, stating that I was happy with the marks I saw. The guidelines for these essays in the course outline are not very detailed, and although the general learning outcomes do make reasonably clear what is expected, I would suggest that a more detailed essay brief might be helpful. Some of the essay titles looked curiously like exam questions, rather than self-determined essay titles. This will be reviewed for the next delivery.

Semester/Trimester: 1

27

You might also like