4. THE COMMITTEE’S WORK AND RECOMMENDATION
4.1. THE BASIS FOR THE APPRAISAL
The basis for the final appraisal is apparent from the objective for the whole programme as formulated in section 1 of the regulations:
The national Programme for Research Fellowships in the Arts shall qualify participants for work in the arts and for other work in the community that requires a high degree of artistic competence and insight. The objective of the programme shall be to produce an independent work of art at a high international level. The research fellow shall also study theory and method in depth in order to acquire greater depth and breadth of knowledge in his/her own field, while at the same time putting the discipline in a broader context.
4.2. COMMITTEE MEETING FOLLOWING THE PUBLIC PRESENTATION/INTERIM RECOMMENDATION
The full committee shall meet with the secretary immediately after (in prolongation of) the public presentation of the artistic result to evaluate its artistic quality, cf. § 5.1 of the regulations. The committee makes its interim recommendation that the candidate be permitted to proceed or not on the basis of the presentation’s artistic quality against the established criteria for evaluation of the artistic project as regulated in Chapter 4.3.1, compared with the candidate’s revised project description. On this basis the committee may come to the conclusion that the project is Not Approved, and that the process shall not proceed. Such decision must be unanimous.
This recommendation must be available no later than six days after the public presentation. If the committee finds the candidate Not Approved according to the paragraph above, the following provisions relating to procedures for considering the committee’s recommendation, apply correspondingly here.
4.3. THE APPRAISAL COMMITTEE’S FURTHER PROCEEDINGS
The appraisal committee shall jointly make a recommendation on the basis of the final appraisal pursuant to Chapter 2.1 – 2.5 of the regulations after the Viva Voce has been carried out. The recommendation shall contain a discussion of each of the four elements of the basis for appraisal in accordance with the guidelines described in each of the following sub-chapters compared with the revised project description and including subsequent endorsed adjustments approved by the programme committee.
The recommendation itself should be discursive in form, ending with a clear conclusion as to whether the project should or should not be approved.
The committee shall normally not be in professional contact with the candidate before the Viva Voce, but under special circumstances the tutor may be requested to meet in front of the committee to elaborate on her/his counselling and explain work with the project.
4.3.1. The artistic project/work
The appraisal committee shall – on the basis of the revised project description – make special mention of the artistic project as it is presented to the committee in the public presentation and other documentation.
The committee shall evaluate whether the project has resulted in an independent work of art of high international level with respect to:
- Originality;
- Expression;
- Consistency;
- Relevance;
- Presentation and communication;
- How this project contributes to professional development of the subject area.
The committee shall evaluate whether the work contributes to the development of new insight, knowledge and/or experience.
4.3.2. Critical reflection
The committee shall revise chosen medium and form and evaluate whether the reflection has found its relevant application in relation to the artistic project. The committee shall evaluate how the candidate has addressed the demand for critical reflection according to Chapter 2.3, including how the candidate approaches relevant professional discourse and whether the candidate contributes to critical reflection in the subject area.
4.3.3. Other documentation
If the project also demonstrates professional innovation as described in Chapter 2.4, the committee shall revise the chosen medium and format and evaluate whether documentation has proper form according to the innovation.
The committee shall also evaluate how well versed the candidate is in this area, how significant these innovations are to the profession, whether documentation is presented adequately and is accessible for others.
4.3.4. The Viva Voce
The committee shall, as stated in Chapter 2.5, evaluate whether the Viva Voce supports the results from the other parts of the appraisal.
A standard for the Viva Voce has been prepared as an appendix to this procedure.
4.4. THE COMMITTEE’S CONCLUSION AND FINAL RECOMMENDATION
The committee’s conclusion whether the public presentation and submitted material satisfies the requirements for Approved must be available before the Viva Voce can be conducted. For the purpose of clarification or elaboration the committee may request additional information from the candidate. Until such information is presented the Viva Voce may not be conducted.
If the requirements for Approved have not been satisfied, the committee shall inform the institution. In this case the Viva Voce may not be conducted.
The appraisal committee makes its final conclusion as to whether the project on a whole satisfies the requirements for Approved or Not Approved in an immediate session following the conclusion of the Viva Voce. Subsequently the candidate and the institution will be notified of the result.
Generally the committee delivers a justified recommendation within a month following the Viva Voce, or after further evaluation has been stopped. The committee’s recommendation shall conclude whether the project as a whole is Approved or Not Approved.
Dissent on the recommendation must be justified. Individual comments or dissent from committee members must be included together with the recommendation.
The appraisal committee shall address their recommendation to the institution.