In this article, the authors explain how they have had to review their teaching practice although it has been successful in the past years, following an appeal logged by students who failed creative design subject. They uncovered that what they thought was good practice was not relevant because of the absence of precise standards related to creative ability and that consequently, the university’s quality assurance prerequisites could not be fulfilled.

This article was particularly relatable to me as I assess the Design and Media pathways in term 1 of the IPF (International Preparation for Fashion) course which I teach. I find it difficult to assess those as they are not my primary teaching subject, which is Business. The article also highlighted one my initial misconception and the authors’ mistake which was I quote: ‘that high grades and awards results tended to go to the works we liked best and low grades and Failed results tended to go to the works liked least’.

It was interesting to read that the words creativity itself was not enough and not related to the idea of creativity in different languages and cultures. Instead, the notion of creativity encompasses several concepts: conceptual ideas, elaboration of schemata that result from ideas and the physical implementation of ideas.

These three simple steps gave me clarity and helped me understand the composition of Design and Media portfolios as they follow this structure and I now understand how the three stages are linked and how to assess these portfolios moving forward.

Cowroy, R. and Williams, A., (2006). Assessing creativity in the creative arts. Art. Design & Communication in Higher Education Volume 5 Number2. Article. English language. doi: 10.1386/adch.5.3.97/1.