The arrangement I previously discussed with Sian (at least partly at her suggestion) was to invite participants to bring two multimodal assessment artefacts to the interview. One would be a strong one, another would be less effective. At least I think it was. Or maybe I would identify the strong one from the course gallery and invite the participant to select one that they felt was less strong.
Instead I wonder I should select two different assessment for use across interviews. These needn't be a pre-determined good and bad, but simply two examples that use different assemblages of mode within the representation of ideas.
My thinking here is that it might be interesting to get different tutor perspectives on how they would approach the two different artifacts. It might make for useful comparison in attitudes between different tutors. I wonder whether it might help to identify some common patterns - or contrasting positions - that would be interesting to consider in relation to the literature on the subject.
In addition, the idea that I should determine what is a strong/weak assignment is something I find problematic. Much better, I think, that I ask participants how thet respond to the different artifacts rather than attempting to make my own value judgements on them in advance.
I think it would be interesting to see how the participants would approach two assignments that are quite different in form from an assessment perspective.
And from a pragmatic perspective, this would make my job a bit easier as I wouldn't have to attempt to mark the assignments in advance, as I proposed.
I'll need to put this to Sian.