Before I began creating my audio documentary, I looked back on my feedback from my previous audio assignment to reflect on this so I know how to improve my work in the future. For my audio piece last year, I received an A4, which I was very happy with. I also received some very useful constructive criticism, which I will use to hopefully create a higher quality audio piece this year.
“A really good effort that manages to fulfil all the criteria that I asked to students to meet. It is well engineered, thoughtfully constructed and gives a good insight into the society.”
|Technical Competence||A4||No errors technically other than wind noise on the location recording but I have heard that on national radio.|
|Professionalism and Preparation||A4||Podcast shows the preparation put into it and apart from the voxpop reflects everything I taught over the course|
|Design and Development||A3||Material selection and ordering excellent.|
|Analytical Imagination||A4||Managed to combine commercial, intellectual and aesthetic content with a pertinent form|
|Creativity||A3||Full of nice touches which show ambition and demonstrate flair|
Two of the main criticisms were about my voxpops, and not making enough pauses between sentences.
- “Take a beat between each sentence so what you have said can sink in.”
- “The voxpops are not classically correct but you do get a range of responses that sound like you’re getting the views of the public.”
I also forgot to credit after one of my main sections – but this was my main interview – and I also stated that it was an interview, but these mistakes are very easily to avoid this year through being more careful with my script writing.
From this feedback, I also know that I have to create more spacing or pauses between sentences throughout my audio piece, as when I was editing I removed too many of these, making my introduction sound rushed.
In regards to my voxpops, John said that they weren’t focused enough questions, so if I include voxpops in my audio documentary this year, I should ask one question and keep these separate from other voxpops I may include. Another issue with my voxpops was that there was too much wind in the background, so I need to be more aware of this when recording audio on location.
My more successful sections of marking were for my creativity and design and development, a well as my music choices. So, I feel that if I improve my work based on this feedback, while staying as organised with my planning and preparation as I did last year, I should create a very successful audio piece.
For my critical reflection I received a B3, which was lower than my practical audio grade. While I was still fairly pleased with this outcome, I felt that the grade could have been better so that my overall grade would have been a better outcome. To improve on this, I am also reflecting on the feedback for this piece of work.
“A well written account that exhibits descriptive reflection and some dialogic reflection and included a review of other practitioners working on similar projects.”
My feedback stated that I should include more dialogic reflection, so I should say reasons for why things happened, and how they contributed to events. John also mentioned that I need to write a more critical review, evidencing that in different circumstances, some issues would need different solutions. However, my feedback did say that I had good descriptive reflection and I included how I could improve in future projects.
Throughout my previous project, I kept detailed notes with dates and details of events that impacted our work. This was very useful when it came to writing my critical reflection because I could be more precise, and made sure to include key events, so I will continue to do this while I create my audio documentary.
In conclusion, the feedback I received was very helpful for both of the pieces of work for how I can improve my work and grades in the future, and I will be instituting as many of these changes as I can in my work or my audio documentary.