Friday, 10 May 2013
Jargon
Saturday, 4 May 2013
Cause and effect
On the day after the government got a shock at the local elections, it is a pleasure to hear Ministers talking about 'listening more'. One of them went straight on to say '... and telling people what good things the government is doing ...' That is just what you want from someone who is really listening.
But the real joy is of course Mr Gove's antics. His Department is apparently in the doghouse for not responding swiftly enough to MP's questions. One wonders if it bothers to answer any at all since they seem to take no notice of anything anyone else says.
He has also had the results of a survey of Head Teachers and Teachers looking at GCSEs. 80 percent of heads said that they had less confidence in GCSE than a year ago, largely because of the marking fiasco when grade boundaries were moved (see previous posts).
The Department for Education draws the conclusion that this bolsters the need for reform of the exam along the lines of Mr Gove's non-modular proposals.
Er ... no. It is not the modular form of exam that caused the problem, it was the movement of grade boundaries and a useless marking system. You can change the structure however you like but if the marking system is rubbish then you you will get rubbish results.
Who worries what research actually says? It naturally concludes that I am on the right track. So much for a listening government.
But the real joy is of course Mr Gove's antics. His Department is apparently in the doghouse for not responding swiftly enough to MP's questions. One wonders if it bothers to answer any at all since they seem to take no notice of anything anyone else says.
He has also had the results of a survey of Head Teachers and Teachers looking at GCSEs. 80 percent of heads said that they had less confidence in GCSE than a year ago, largely because of the marking fiasco when grade boundaries were moved (see previous posts).
The Department for Education draws the conclusion that this bolsters the need for reform of the exam along the lines of Mr Gove's non-modular proposals.
Er ... no. It is not the modular form of exam that caused the problem, it was the movement of grade boundaries and a useless marking system. You can change the structure however you like but if the marking system is rubbish then you you will get rubbish results.
Who worries what research actually says? It naturally concludes that I am on the right track. So much for a listening government.
Tuesday, 30 April 2013
Guerilla writing
The attached recently came through our e-letter box:
Not a formal training day but if you can spare an hour or so to get down to XXX where YYY will be on hand to discuss the hugely successful community engagement programme undertaken at the gallery over the last five years. Guerilla training as well as guerilla writing!
WHO MIGHT YOU MEET?
Five Go Guerilla at the XXX … 5 writers will be in residence at the XXX for just one day of guerilla writing activity.
They’ll be writing about the art and the Romans, meeting the public, versifying in the amphitheatre and generally celebrating 5 years of community creative engagement that has taken place at XXX.
The event marks the end of two important youth projects, Colouring the Canvas and ReHang:Reachout, which have both provided opportunities for members of ReHang, XXX's young curators group, to build skills and provide peer group activity for other young people.
It also signals the promise of more to come…
Since 2008, XXX has seen an exciting programme of youth and community engagement that has gone from strength to strength. From a programme of youth film making and conferences, the gallery’s work with young people and community group has developed to include the launch of ReHang (gallery youth panel), Dr Who screening with writer Q&A, sport events and live gladiatorial combat.
There are music, theatre and poetry performances, family days, photography and youth artfilm installations, political debates, swing dance and glamour evenings, and, recently, the launch of the Who Might You Meet? blog and an ever-growing and successful late night events programme.
The XX Art Gallery is fast becoming one of the most innovative galleries in the city in terms of seeking to engage people of all ages and abilities through a wide range of creative interaction and public events.
So, if you want to come down to the gallery to partake of a bit of guerilla writing activity, and be part of all of this good stuff by getting your writing posted to the youth and community arts blog, drop by on ... find the 5 writers in the gallery, and join them.
And to cap it all, there will be an informal sharing of the work of the 5 writers, followed by a Q&A somewhere in the gallery…
The CVs of the five writers are also illuminating:
One is described as a spoken word artist, photography enthusiast, poet, performer, writer and educator and co-curator of the very popular spoken word showcase
Another is said to hail from a land between spoken word, hip-hop, and theatre. With an eye for the often overlooked in the everyday, his work is entertaining and accessible but remains rooted in a love of the craft of writing.
Another is a poet and artist who works in video and visible verse, spoken word, hip hop and live art. Her work is street, visual, emotive and rhythmical. She is a published poet, a SlamBASSADOR UK Champion and a member of various writing and performance collectives.
No one could accuse the writer of over-statement. Suddenly we feel very old. To think that a poet might not also be a performer.
Not a formal training day but if you can spare an hour or so to get down to XXX where YYY will be on hand to discuss the hugely successful community engagement programme undertaken at the gallery over the last five years. Guerilla training as well as guerilla writing!
WHO MIGHT YOU MEET?
Five Go Guerilla at the XXX … 5 writers will be in residence at the XXX for just one day of guerilla writing activity.
They’ll be writing about the art and the Romans, meeting the public, versifying in the amphitheatre and generally celebrating 5 years of community creative engagement that has taken place at XXX.
The event marks the end of two important youth projects, Colouring the Canvas and ReHang:Reachout, which have both provided opportunities for members of ReHang, XXX's young curators group, to build skills and provide peer group activity for other young people.
It also signals the promise of more to come…
Since 2008, XXX has seen an exciting programme of youth and community engagement that has gone from strength to strength. From a programme of youth film making and conferences, the gallery’s work with young people and community group has developed to include the launch of ReHang (gallery youth panel), Dr Who screening with writer Q&A, sport events and live gladiatorial combat.
There are music, theatre and poetry performances, family days, photography and youth artfilm installations, political debates, swing dance and glamour evenings, and, recently, the launch of the Who Might You Meet? blog and an ever-growing and successful late night events programme.
The XX Art Gallery is fast becoming one of the most innovative galleries in the city in terms of seeking to engage people of all ages and abilities through a wide range of creative interaction and public events.
So, if you want to come down to the gallery to partake of a bit of guerilla writing activity, and be part of all of this good stuff by getting your writing posted to the youth and community arts blog, drop by on ... find the 5 writers in the gallery, and join them.
And to cap it all, there will be an informal sharing of the work of the 5 writers, followed by a Q&A somewhere in the gallery…
The CVs of the five writers are also illuminating:
One is described as a spoken word artist, photography enthusiast, poet, performer, writer and educator and co-curator of the very popular spoken word showcase
Another is said to hail from a land between spoken word, hip-hop, and theatre. With an eye for the often overlooked in the everyday, his work is entertaining and accessible but remains rooted in a love of the craft of writing.
Another is a poet and artist who works in video and visible verse, spoken word, hip hop and live art. Her work is street, visual, emotive and rhythmical. She is a published poet, a SlamBASSADOR UK Champion and a member of various writing and performance collectives.
No one could accuse the writer of over-statement. Suddenly we feel very old. To think that a poet might not also be a performer.
Monday, 15 April 2013
Counting what counts II
... a little PS to our last posting is inspired by a recent ten page questionnaire from Arts Council England - there are 24 pages of notes on how to fill it in.
This questions about the ethnicity of any permanent or freelance staff split by 'specialist staff', 'managers' and 'others'; and they want their ages too.
This questions about the ethnicity of any permanent or freelance staff split by 'specialist staff', 'managers' and 'others'; and they want their ages too.
It then asks us for a whole range of turnover figures which could be picked up from our published accounts if they bothered to read them. But what is this we see ... ah yes, they want those figures presented in a different way.
It might have been good if they had warned us in advance that they might want to know this. We don't collect the ages of freelance staff and such things.
Among a whole range of questions which are irrelevant for a museum -such 'how much of your work is 'touring activity' and 'attendance at film screening days' - is a real gem: 'Please indicate the hours worked by volunteers at your organisation in the last financial year. Round your answer up to the nearest hour.'
It is the last bit we really love. Anyone who has worked with volunteers knows that they do not keep regular hours and, although we do ask them to sign in and sign out, we do not waste our time totaling the hours actually worked 'to the nearest hour'. We know how many shifts they work; will that do?
Looked at another way, rounding up the time to the nearest hour gives an accuracy of about 0.005% or better than one part in 20,000. No, we have not made a mistake. What on earth are they thinking of, asking for that level of accuracy? What are they going to do with the answer? Why have they not asked how many hours our staff work which might at least have provided a useful comparison or ratio.
It is the same mindset that tells us that visitor numbers are 5.14% up. So nice to know that the figure is accurate to one left leg.
It is the same mindset that tells us that visitor numbers are 5.14% up. So nice to know that the figure is accurate to one left leg.
The questionnaire could only have been put together by someone with no concept of basic statistics or mathematics, or who has ever been involved in the real world.
It is that time of year and another questionnaire is waiting in the wings ... oh joy!
Monday, 1 April 2013
Counting what counts
A recent report entitled Counting What Counts by Anthony Lilley and Prof Paul Moore encourages us to use what they call Big Data. We don't say that we follow every step of their argument which seems to confuse use of data in decision-making with data drawn from web usage but we were struck by some of their general comments which echo our views on the use of data generally. Here are some paragraphs from their report.
They start with that brilliant quotation from Einstein: Everything that can be counted does not necessarily count; everything that counts cannot necessarily be counted. Essays should be written on this.
Their two main themes are language ... The sector exists in a context of narrative of subsidy and market failure which means that measurement is too often seen as a burden placed on defensively-minded organisations as a form of accountability and the use of data ... Data and information are most often used in arts and cultural settings somewhat passively, mainly to satisfy the needs of accountability.
Too often the gathering and reporting of data is seen as a burden and a requirement of funding or governance rather than an asset to be used to the benefit of the [organisation]. This point of view ... arises partly from the philosophy of dependence, subsidy and market failure which underpins much of the cultural sector.
The subsidy model tends to trap many cultural organisations in a survivalist, financial mindset and that, in turn, makes it difficult to adopt an expansive, entrepreneurial perspective when under regular implied threat by accountability.
Without the pull of a more enlightened approach to data from funders and regulators, the likelihood of widespread adoption of a more modern approach to data at the level of organisations is low.
A shift in mindset ... is a requirement. Such a shift would match much of the rhetoric of 'investment' which is used in the sector, particularly by policy and turning bodies. ... this rhetoric has largely been just that: a new term to replace the loaded word 'subsidy' rather than a genuine change.
The Arts Council England's recent ten-year strategy, Achieving Great Art for Everyone uses the term 'investment' itself no less that twenty-one times. However, there is considerable mismatch between this use of terminology and the reality of how commercial investment actually works. Too often 'investment' is used as a synonym for 'subsidy' and this linguistic sleight of hand is, in fact, sometimes harmful.
'Subsidy'. ... is a loaded term which indicates an in-built power relationship. 'Subsidy' is given to something which is weak. Conversely 'investment' is something from which we expect returns and which is thus imbued with potential. Framing public investment in culture as 'subsidy' positions it as a weak, dependent activity. When in harmony, investor and investee should be committed to achieving the same ends.
Being data-rational is a skill and not something that can imposed or encouraged by the dull demand for 'metrics' so beloved by funders. You first need to collect the right data - data which is relevant and representative - then to turn this into useful information for decision-making.
Not understanding the difference between good and bad data, or the way figures can tell a coherent story, our funders frequently ask the wrong questions and seem satisfied with any numbers.
I suppose you would not expect 'artists' to understand something as rational as 'numbers' which come from the other side of the great arts-science divide. Their use of the word 'investment' is probably the same: a desperate attempt to adopt the language of a business world they so little understand.
They start with that brilliant quotation from Einstein: Everything that can be counted does not necessarily count; everything that counts cannot necessarily be counted. Essays should be written on this.
Their two main themes are language ... The sector exists in a context of narrative of subsidy and market failure which means that measurement is too often seen as a burden placed on defensively-minded organisations as a form of accountability and the use of data ... Data and information are most often used in arts and cultural settings somewhat passively, mainly to satisfy the needs of accountability.
Too often the gathering and reporting of data is seen as a burden and a requirement of funding or governance rather than an asset to be used to the benefit of the [organisation]. This point of view ... arises partly from the philosophy of dependence, subsidy and market failure which underpins much of the cultural sector.
The subsidy model tends to trap many cultural organisations in a survivalist, financial mindset and that, in turn, makes it difficult to adopt an expansive, entrepreneurial perspective when under regular implied threat by accountability.
Without the pull of a more enlightened approach to data from funders and regulators, the likelihood of widespread adoption of a more modern approach to data at the level of organisations is low.
A shift in mindset ... is a requirement. Such a shift would match much of the rhetoric of 'investment' which is used in the sector, particularly by policy and turning bodies. ... this rhetoric has largely been just that: a new term to replace the loaded word 'subsidy' rather than a genuine change.
The Arts Council England's recent ten-year strategy, Achieving Great Art for Everyone uses the term 'investment' itself no less that twenty-one times. However, there is considerable mismatch between this use of terminology and the reality of how commercial investment actually works. Too often 'investment' is used as a synonym for 'subsidy' and this linguistic sleight of hand is, in fact, sometimes harmful.
'Subsidy'. ... is a loaded term which indicates an in-built power relationship. 'Subsidy' is given to something which is weak. Conversely 'investment' is something from which we expect returns and which is thus imbued with potential. Framing public investment in culture as 'subsidy' positions it as a weak, dependent activity. When in harmony, investor and investee should be committed to achieving the same ends.
Being data-rational is a skill and not something that can imposed or encouraged by the dull demand for 'metrics' so beloved by funders. You first need to collect the right data - data which is relevant and representative - then to turn this into useful information for decision-making.
Not understanding the difference between good and bad data, or the way figures can tell a coherent story, our funders frequently ask the wrong questions and seem satisfied with any numbers.
I suppose you would not expect 'artists' to understand something as rational as 'numbers' which come from the other side of the great arts-science divide. Their use of the word 'investment' is probably the same: a desperate attempt to adopt the language of a business world they so little understand.
Sunday, 31 March 2013
An Easter thought
From this distant vantage point, the Earth might not seem of any particular interest. But for us, it's different. Consider again that dot. That's here. That's home. That's us. On it everyone you love, everyone you know, everyone you ever heard of, every human being who ever was, lived out their lives. The aggregate of our joy and suffering, thousands of confident religions, ideologies, and economic doctrines, every hunter and forager, every hero and coward, every creator and destroyer of civilization, every king and peasant, every young couple in love, every mother and father, hopeful child, inventor and explorer, every teacher of morals, every corrupt politician, every 'superstar', every 'supreme leader', every saint and sinner in the history of our species lived there – on a mote of dust suspended in a sunbeam.
The Earth is a very small stage in a vast cosmic arena. Think of the rivers of blood spilled by all those generals and emperors so that in glory and triumph they could become the momentary masters of a fraction of a dot. Think of the endless cruelties visited by the inhabitants of one corner of this pixel on the scarcely distinguishable inhabitants of some other corner. How frequent their misunderstandings, how eager they are to kill one another, how fervent their hatreds. Our posturings, our imagined self-importance, the delusion that we have some privileged position in the universe, are challenged by this point of pale light. Our planet is a lonely speck in the great enveloping cosmic dark. In our obscurity – in all this vastness – there is no hint that help will come from elsewhere to save us from ourselves.
The Earth is the only world known, so far, to harbour life. There is nowhere else, at least in the near future, to which our species could migrate. Visit, yes. Settle, not yet. Like it or not, for the moment, the Earth is where we make our stand. It has been said that astronomy is a humbling and character-building experience. There is perhaps no better demonstration of the folly of human conceits than this distant image of our tiny world. To me, it underscores our responsibility to deal more kindly with one another and to preserve and cherish the pale blue dot, the only home we've ever known.
Carl Sagan, Pale Blue Dot: A Vision of the Human Future in Space, 1997 reprint, pp. xv–xvi
Saturday, 23 March 2013
Teaching us to lie
Can I borrow £2?
Thanks ... come to think of it, I don't need that much. Here is £1 back.
When do I get back my £1 back?
What £1? I have just paid you £1.
In a telephone call to a potential business partner in Germany, this form of economics was described as milkmaid economics after a story by La Fontaine. We are not sure there is a direct parallel but the title has a certain charm, even if if politically milkmaidist.
It is much the same sort of economics as that required by (both British and European) grant-making organisations. These fine, upstanding organisations have a clear view of best practice and priority when dealing with public money, and encourage good behaviour in funded bodies on all occasions. But, with the year-end approaching, what is my moral position on the following?
We bid let us say £10k on the basis that we would contribute match-funding of 4 days of staff time. In totalling the staff time involved I find we did it in 2 days. Do we:
Thanks ... come to think of it, I don't need that much. Here is £1 back.
When do I get back my £1 back?
What £1? I have just paid you £1.
In a telephone call to a potential business partner in Germany, this form of economics was described as milkmaid economics after a story by La Fontaine. We are not sure there is a direct parallel but the title has a certain charm, even if if politically milkmaidist.
It is much the same sort of economics as that required by (both British and European) grant-making organisations. These fine, upstanding organisations have a clear view of best practice and priority when dealing with public money, and encourage good behaviour in funded bodies on all occasions. But, with the year-end approaching, what is my moral position on the following?
We bid let us say £10k on the basis that we would contribute match-funding of 4 days of staff time. In totalling the staff time involved I find we did it in 2 days. Do we:
- 'Find' another 2 days in our diaries so that we can show that we contributed what we said we would?
- Spin the work out to 4 days - a few bows and ribbons on top perhaps - so that we can honestly say that we provided the full match-funding?
- Confess all and tell the funder that they should only be paying us half the cash sum as we did not provide the match-funding we promised?
We could of course get a life and do what everyone else does: adopt option 1.
But imagine the implications of the other two approaches. One would encourage inefficiency as we spent our time cutting out paper doilies to adorn our already-completed project. The other would produce a reaction like a Bateman cartoon The organisation that said it did not need the money that had been promised.
How would they ever cope with an efficient and honest organisation? Are we the milkmaids or are they?
But imagine the implications of the other two approaches. One would encourage inefficiency as we spent our time cutting out paper doilies to adorn our already-completed project. The other would produce a reaction like a Bateman cartoon The organisation that said it did not need the money that had been promised.
How would they ever cope with an efficient and honest organisation? Are we the milkmaids or are they?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)