Cultural and Historical Context 2 1033MAPA
Write an essay of 1500 words in answer to one of the three essay questions listed below. As the learning outcomes include research and academic writing skills, you will need to complete research and provide academic references to support your claims; a minimum of three academic sources is expected to be referenced, though more are welcome. At least two of these sources should be ones you found on your own (e.g. not sources that have been supplied to you on moodle).
Discuss the characteristics and developments of modernism and post-modernism in relation to two or more practitioners or groups of practitioners who have been the subject of our classes. How do you see these practitioners as fitting within modern or postmodernism and why?
Compare and contrast the ideas, ideologies and strategies that defined the practices of Judson Dance Theater in the US, and British New Dance in the UK.
- A) Discuss the key qualities and characteristics of two artists from the list below in relation to the idea of ‘innovation & change’ in dance practice: did their practices constitute a form of innovation and change within in a historical and a contemporary context of dance? Provide evidence for your answer.
B) Discuss a specific work by one of the following artists, and how that work reflects the artists’ practice and the cultural and historical context it was created within. What social, political, cultural, etc. movements does it reflect or challenge, and how? What cultural or historical impact has the work had?
- Yvonne Rainer
- Joan Skinner
- Anna Halprin
- Steve Paxton
- Gaby Agis
- Fergus Early
- Merce Cunningham
- Emilyn Claid
- Michael Clark
- Lea Anderson
- Karole Armitage
- Jérôme Bel
- Xavier le Roy
- Jonathan Burrows
Submission date: 30th April 2018
Please submit your essay electronically via Turnitin on Moodle.
For advice on how to do this please visit: http://cuonlinemoodlehelp.wordpress.com/turnitin/
The link to submit your essay via Turnitin can be found on the moodle page for this module.
Turnitin provides the opportunity to scan your essay for plagiarism before submission. You can do this by submitting a draft version of your essay on the Turnitin link marked “DRAFT” on the moodle page for this module, before the final submission date.
Submission of your final essay should be done via the Turnitin link marked “FINAL SUBMISSION” on the moodle page for this module. Turnitin will be able to receive your final essay until 23.55 on 30th April 2018. Once submitted via this link your submission is final and cannot be changed.
Written Submission Guidelines:
If you require support for researching, please make sure you are attending the essay tutorials on 26th March, making use of the library’s subject resources pages, and/or making an appointment with the subject librarian.
Your essay should adhere to the Coventry University written submission guidelines including use of Harvard Referencing. You can find these guidelines on Moodle, or via the student portal on the University website.
Harvard Referencing support can be found at http://www.coventry.ac.uk/study-at-coventry/student-support/academic-support/centre-for-academic-writing/support-for-students/academic-writing-resources/cu-harvard-reference-style-guide/
The Centre for Academic Writing can be accessed at http://www.coventry.ac.uk/study-at-coventry/student-support/academic-support/centre-for-academic-writing/support-for-students/undergraduate-support/
Additional guidance on essay writing can be found in your study skills handbook by Stella Cotterell.
Please remember extension applications must be made before the submission date
Late Submission and Non Submission:
If you hand work in late, (ie. beyond the submission date), you will receive a
mark of Zero. There is no grace period for late hand-ins. So, if you are unwell,
or things happen that make it hard to do your work properly or on time you
should talk to staff in Reception about getting an extension – evidence for
which will have to be provided. Students not submitting course work for
assessment will not be offered an automatic re-sit opportunity.
Intended Module Learning Outcomes:
The intended learning outcomes are that on completion of this module the student should be able to:
LO1. Identify and situate within the wider sociocultural context the defining and distinguishing characteristics of dance performance within a specific historical time-frame.
LO2. Undertake research and synthesise information from a range of sources to structure and present ideas.
LO3. Communicate ideas, in writing, following prescribed systems and procedures as appropriate.
LO4. Show a working understanding and level of skill accredited to academic prose that is visible through proper methods of referencing, quotation and use of grammar and English language.
You will be assessed through two coursework assignments in this module:
CW1 (40%): Presentation of Historical Repertory, Friday 16th February 2018
CW2 (60%): 1,500 word essay, due 30th April 2018
You will be assessed in accordance with Coventry University FAH Assessment Criteria for Writing-Based Submissions.
1033 MAPA – Semester 2 – Cultural and Historical Contexts
Assessor: Becca Weber
Module Tutors: Becca Weber, Yael Owen-McKenna
|Assessment Criteria forPresentation||0-39Fail||40-49Weak||50-59Satis-factory||60-69Good||70-79Very
|Essay evidences an understanding of the wider sociocultural context and the defining and distinguishing characteristics of dance practice within a specific historical time-frame. Essay presents clear comprehension of relevant theories, concepts, and issues.
|Essay incorporates research and synthesises information from a range of academic sources to structure, support, and present ideas. Essay includes independent critical engagement with sources and originality of conception or analysis.|
|Essay communicates ideas, in writing, following prescribed systems and procedures as appropriate. Writing is well organised, clearly written, and logically presented.|
|Essay shows a working understanding and level of skill accredited to academic prose that is visible through proper methods of referencing, quotation and use of grammar and English language. Avoids technical errors.|
|Overall Provisional Mark (100%)|
|General comments, including what has been done well and how you may strengthen future work:|
Coventry FAH Assessment Criteria for Writing-Based Submissions:
|In addition to that for 72 – 78% below, an outstanding response that could hardly be bettered. An exceptionally high degree of understanding: at level 6, meeting relevant professional expectations in terms of critical/analytic skills. It will incorporate original and innovative research, where specified. Outstanding in all respects.
In addition to that for 72 – 78% below, the work will demonstrate an excellent level of understanding, presence of clear description, critical/analytical skills or research, it will show a higher level of originality of conception or analysis,
The work will be entirely relevant to the assignment set. It will demonstrate a clear understanding, and an independent utilisation and evaluation of theories, concepts, issues and methodology, as appropriate. Will demonstrate an informed and self-reflective awareness of the context of the work and its discipline. There will be evidence of wide-ranging reading and/or research, as appropriate. Responses will be written/presented in a clear, well-structured way, meeting professional expectations. At level 6, evidence of independent, critical thought and some originality of conception or analysis, would normally be expected.
|Work which demonstrates a very good understanding and utilisation/evaluation of relevant theories, concepts, issues and methodology. Will demonstrate a good awareness of the context of the work and its discipline. The work will be accurate/appropriate, with few errors. Little, if any, irrelevant material may be present. Reading/research well beyond the recommended minimum will be present. Evidence of independent, critical evaluation especially at Level 6. Well organised and clearly written/presented.
Work which demonstrates a good understanding and utilisation/evaluation of relevant theories, concepts, issues and methodology. Demonstrates an awareness of the context of the work and its discipline. Some irrelevant material may be present. Well organised and clearly written/presented. Reading/research beyond the recommended in evidence.
Work which demonstrates a good understanding and utilisation/evaluation of relevant theories, concepts, issues and methodology. Demonstrates an awareness, possibly limited in places, of the context of the work and its discipline. Some irrelevant material may be present. Well organised and clearly written/presented. Reading/research beyond the recommended in evidence.
|Work which demonstrates a good understanding of relevant theories, concepts, issues and methodology. Demonstrates an awareness of the context of the work and its discipline. Some reading/research beyond that recommended may be present. Some errors and inconsistencies of approach may be evident and there may be the inclusion of irrelevant material and/or inappropriate application of theory. May not be particularly well-structured, and/or clearly presented.
Work which demonstrates a reasonable understanding of theories, concepts, issues and methodology but is likely to show show some errors of understanding. May be significant amount of irrelevant material. May not be well-structured argument/case may not be consistent and expression/presentation may be unclear at times.
Work which demonstrates a reasonable understanding of theories, concepts, issues and methodology but is likely to show some more significant errors of understanding or application. May be significant amount of irrelevant material. Likely to be less well-structured with an argument/case that may not be consistent. Expression/presentation may be unclear at times.
|A piece of work demonstrating sufficient understanding of the discipline to constitute a pass, but may be incomplete and may not be supported by an appropriate contextual underpinning. Likely to contain errors of understanding and/or application. Limited use of material with limited reading/research on the topic. Likely to be poorly structured, not well-conceived inconsistent with relevant material present but disconnected from the module narrative. Irrelevant material likely to be present.
Work that demonstrates an understanding of the discipline with some correct description. Work is likely to be incomplete with some significant errors or misunderstandings and tending towards the descriptive. Little use of material and limited reading/research on the topic in evidence. May be poorly structured, poorly conceived and poorly expressed/presented. Some material may be irrelevant to the assignment requirements.
Basic understanding demonstrated, with some correct description. Work is likely to be incomplete with substantial errors or misunderstandings and is likely to be wholly descriptive. Little use of material and limited reading/research on the topic in evidence. May be poorly structured, poorly conceived and poorly expressed/presented. Some material may be irrelevant to the assignment requirements.
|Marginal fail||38%||Some relevant material will be present. Understanding will be poor, with little or no evidence of reading/research on the topic, or contextual awareness. Fundamental errors and misunderstanding likely to be present and discipline understanding will be poor. Poor structure and poor expression/presentation. Work may be largely derivative and barely competent. Much material may not be relevant to the assignment.|
|Inadequate response to the assignment task, with little relevant material and poor understanding of theories, concepts, issues and methodology. Fundamental errors and misunderstandings will be present. Material may be largely irrelevant. Poorly structured and poorly expressed/presented.
Clear failure to provide response to the assignment. Little understanding and only a vague knowledge of the area. Serious and fundamental errors and lack of understanding. Virtually no evidence of relevant reading/research. Poorly structured and inadequately expressed/presented.
Complete failure, virtually no understanding of requirements of the assignment. Material may be entirely irrelevant. Response may be extremely short, and in note form only. Response may be fundamentally wrong, inappropriate to the demands of the discipline. Not a serious attempt.