Topics may include, but are not limited to, the following:

• Glaze and Colour

This course introduces students to glaze chemistry and develops the key skills of mixing and altering glaze recipes for variation in firing temp., atmosphere, colour, and texture development. Students undertake a research project to examine raw materials of certain glazes, mapping out some of the geological, cultural and political intricacies. There are weekly lectures which incorporate examples of artists who work with conventional and alternative materials as glazes. The aim of this course is not only to gain experience in making glazes, but to think creatively about what constitutes a glaze, to experiment with raw materials and to explore the politics and poetics of material origins and transformations that are inherent in ceramic practices.

• Expanded Ceramics

In Expanded Ceramics, students are offered an opportunity to explore clay both inside and outside the studio. Students test and learn from local materials, such as clay from the SoAD garden, and experiment with blending alternative materials into and clay for sculptural works. Lectures cover a range of concepts and artists that relate to the entanglement of materials and place. Ceramics-based projects are undertaken in relation to 3 sites around the ANU campus and incorporate other complimentary art mediums such as sound, video and creative writing. Students are taught an introduction to sound and video editing as part of this course.

• Ceramic Mouldmaking and Casting

Mouldmaking and casting is centred around the practices of embossing, embedding and creating multiples using clay. Students learn how to make one and multi-part plaster moulds, build experimental one-off moulds, and cast with slip. There are weekly lectures which incorporate examples of artists who use mouldmaking and casting in their artistic practice. Students will be encouraged to use divergent thinking when considering what it means to take impressions, record and duplicate objects, and to experiment with both the construction of moulds and the material used in the casting process.

• Ceramic Surface

This course investigates the dynamic relationship between surface, form, and process in contemporary ceramic practice. Students will explore how texture, mark, and process contribute to the expressive and structural qualities of form. Students will experiment with a range of material and textural approaches, including carving, impressing, printing onto, layering, and additive techniques, to develop an understanding of surface as both skin and structure: an active site of making, thinking, and expression that both responds to and redefines the underlying form. Weekly lectures will introduce artists who challenge conventional boundaries of surface, while demonstrations will explore techniques and processes that engage with these ideas.

·      Wheel Formed Ceramics

In this course, students will significantly develop and refine their technical skills on the pottery wheel to create bodies of work that explore sculpture and an expanded approach to tableware. Students will experiment with different clay bodies and methods of surface treatment. Experimentation is encouraged, and the practical work will be underscored by a set of readings and tasks that position their work within a contemporary art context.

Learning Outcomes

Upon successful completion, students will have the knowledge and skills to:

1. demonstrate competency with a range of advancing technical skills in relation to studio area & contemporary art practice; 
2. independently explore the potential of material/s & methods relevant to the studio area and set projects; 
3. recognise and analyse precedents and influences on artistic practice; and 
4. evaluate chosen studio methodologies on the outcomes of studio projects. 

Research-Led Teaching

This course is taught with methods and processes that pertain to practice-led research. The course equips students to creatively integrate ideas and making through the exploration of materials and techniques and to identify historical precedents and contextual frameworks.

Field Trips

The course may involve visits to local institutions and glass workshops. Transport, parking and associated fees are the responsibility of the student.

Additional Course Costs

Student contribution amounts under the Higher Education Support Act 2003 (HESA) and tuition fees support the course described in the Class Summary and include tuition, teaching materials, and student access to the workshops for the stated course hours.

There will be a materials fee of $150 for this course. This is payable to the School of Art & Design to supply consumables and materials that become your physical property.

The Additional Materials Fee is payable for Materials you use in addition to those supplied as part of the course. You can purchase additional material from the Workshop and take advantage of the GST-free status. These materials are also WHS and workshop process compliant.

 Students have the option to obtain After hours Access to workshop and studio spaces outside of class delivery. After hours Access is defined as access to workshop and studio spaces outside of business hours between 6.00pm and 10:00pm Monday to Friday and 9am – 4pm Saturday - Sunday. It is afforded to students by paying an After hours Access Fee each semester.

 For further information and to Pay Materials and Access Fees go to:  https://soad.cass.anu.edu.au/required-resources-and-incidental-fees

Examination Material or equipment

Students will need to provide their presentation materials, stationary and signage to support the presentation or documentation of their work.

Required Resources

You will be required to have (minimally)a P2/P3 half face respirator for this course. A limited number are available for purchase through the workshop, or you may furnish your own to the correct standard.

Reading lists and additional resources will be added to the Canvas page for this course. Note book for recording technical information

Recommended Resources

Whether you are on campus or studying online, there are a variety of online platforms you will use to participate in your study program. These could include videos for lectures and other instruction, two-way video conferencing for interactive learning, email and other messaging tools for communication, interactive web apps for formative and collaborative activities, print and/or photo/scan for handwritten work and drawings, and home-based assessment.

ANU outlines recommended student system requirements to ensure you are able to participate fully in your learning. Other information is also available about the various Learning Platforms you may use.

Staff Feedback

Students will be given feedback in the following forms in this course:

• written comments
• verbal comments
• feedback to whole class, groups, individuals, focus group etc

Student Feedback

ANU is committed to the demonstration of educational excellence and regularly seeks feedback from students. Students are encouraged to offer feedback directly to their Course Convener or through their College and Course representatives (if applicable). Feedback can also be provided to Course Conveners and teachers via the Student Experience of Learning & Teaching (SELT) feedback program. SELT surveys are confidential and also provide the Colleges and ANU Executive with opportunities to recognise excellent teaching, and opportunities for improvement.

Class Schedule

Week/Session	Summary of Activities	Assessment
1	STUDIO/ EQUIPMENT INDUCTION: intro to workshop spaces, WHS competency, understanding ceramics studio layout and workflow, Personal protective equipment (PPE)LECTURE: Intro to ceramic SurfaceWORKSHOP 1: Surface as Trace/ Recording systemIntroduction to clay as a recording system, exploring surface as an index of contact, pressure, and environment. Through imprinting, transfer, laser cut surfaces, and direct sprig/mould formers, to generate experimental surface tests that establish material responsiveness and variation as a form of inquiry.	Induction with Mahala Hill, Ceramics Technical OfficerAssessment 1 begins
2	WORKSHOP 2: Image to Surface (Translation, Distortion, Transfer)Investigation of how imagery behaves when subjected to ceramic processes such as screenprinting, decals, layering, and raster/pixel disruption. Emphasis is placed on distortion, misregistration, and material interference as generative surface outcomes.
3	WORKSHOP 3: Surface as Topography (Extrude / Sprig / Layer)Exploration of surface as extrusion and relief, testing how 2D systems transition into spatial form through additive layering, modular repetition, and press/laser/3D-informed processes. Surface is developed as a topographical system that begins to produce depth and structure.DEMO: Clay 3D printer
4	WORKSHOP 4: Review + directional focusStudents are facilitated to undertake a structured review and audit of work from Weeks 1–3, identify emerging material systems, and reduce multiple directions into a focused area of inquiry. Through critique and sorting exercises, students begin formulating a directional surface logic for further development.
5	WORKSHOP WEEK 5: Facilitated Studio Development of Independent Surface SystemsFacilitated studio development to independently refine selected surface system through studio making, iteration, and targeted support. The focus is on deepening coherent directions, testing consistency, and exploring material and conceptual relationships.
6	ASSESSMENT 1 DUE: SURFACE LABConsolidation and assessment of Surface Lab outcomes. Students to set-up and present a coherent series of experimental investigations demonstrating iterative development, material understanding, and emerging system logic. Work is installed, discussed, and supported process documentation evidencing decision-making and progression uploaded to Canvas.	SUBMIT ASSESSMENT 1: Surface LabSet-up samples on table space in Ceramics Studio area, upload process documentation to Canvas.
7	WORKSHOP 6: Moving from Surface System to Project PropositionTransition from experimental investigation to project planning by identifying a focused line of inquiry for proposed independent final work.Discussion, mapping, and studio testing will be used to synthesise material discoveries, contextual research, and conceptual interests into a clear surface–form proposition.STUDIO ACTIVITIES: begin developing a prototype that tests the viability of the proposed direction.
8	WORKSHOP 7: Contextual Positioning and Prototype Development (Independent Learning)Students work towards refining their proposition and continue developing their prototype. STUDIO ACTIVITIES: Tasks include reviewing contextual research, refining the written or visual proposition, documenting material testing, and producing a proof of concept that demonstrates how surface, form, method and idea operate together. Students to prepare their proposition and prototype for presentation in Week 9.Independent Tasks (complete by end of wk 8) Finalise proposition statement (or visual equivalent). Complete prototype/proof of concept. Continue contextual research and referencing. Document material testing and key decisions. Upload proposition, prior to Week 9 presentation.
9	ASSESSMENT 2: SURFACE-FORM PROPOSITIONSet-up and present surface–form proposition and prototype for peer and lecturer critique. Discussion to focus on the relationship between concept, material, process, and precedent, identifying opportunities for refinement before commencing the resolved studio project.	SUBMIT ASSESSMENT 2: Surface - Form PropositionUpload Proposition Statement to Canvas, present prototype in class.
10	WORKSHOP 8: Facilitated Studio DevelopmentContinuation of studio production supported by individual consultations (where applicable) and technical guidance. Emphasis on material refinement, iterative problem-solving, and maintaining alignment between the original proposition and the developing work.
11	WORKSHOP 9: Studio ResolutionStudents continue resolving their ceramic work while reflecting on key shifts, material discoveries, and technical decisions.Individual critiques support final refinements, with attention given to coherence, technical resolution, and the relationship between surface, form, and concept.
12	WORKSHOP 10: Consolidate + Assessment PreparationCompletion of all studio-making (consider installation planning, photographing work)Prepare reflective statementFinalise documentation in preparation for assessment	SUBMIT ASSESSMENT 3: Surface 'makes' FormINSTALL: Wed 11th Nov (Ceramics Studio, individual spaces TBC)

Tutorial Registration

Via Canvas

Assessment Summary

Assessment task	Value	Due Date	Learning Outcomes
Surface Lab	40 %	02/09/2026	1,2
Surface - Form Proposition	20 %	07/10/2026	2,3
Surface 'makes' Form	40 %	11/11/2026	1,2,3,4

* If the Due Date and Return of Assessment date are blank, see the Assessment Tab for specific Assessment Task details

Policies

ANU has educational policies, procedures and guidelines , which are designed to ensure that staff and students are aware of the University’s academic standards, and implement them. Students are expected to have read the Academic Integrity Rule before the commencement of their course. Other key policies and guidelines include:

• Academic Integrity Policy and Procedure
• Student Assessment (Coursework) Policy and Procedure
• Extenuating Circumstances Application
• Student Surveys and Evaluations
• Deferred Examinations
• Student Complaint Resolution Policy and Procedure
• Code of practice for teaching and learning

Assessment Requirements

The ANU is using Turnitin to enhance student citation and referencing techniques, and to assess assignment submissions as a component of the University's approach to managing Academic Integrity. For additional information regarding Turnitin please visit the Academic Skills website. In rare cases where online submission using Turnitin software is not technically possible; or where not using Turnitin software has been justified by the Course Convener and approved by the Associate Dean (Education) on the basis of the teaching model being employed; students shall submit assessment online via ‘Canvas’ outside of Turnitin, or failing that in hard copy, or through a combination of submission methods as approved by the Associate Dean (Education). The submission method is detailed below.

Moderation of Assessment

Marks that are allocated during Semester are to be considered provisional until formalised by the College examiners meeting at the end of each Semester. If appropriate, some moderation of marks might be applied prior to final results being released.

Participation

Participation in the weekly classes and independent studio study time is essential to fulfilling the learning outcomes of this course. If you cannot attend all of the scheduled classes and out of class activities, please consider a different course.

Please do not enrol in this course if you cannot attend the ANU campus Ceramics Workshop and commit to these study requirements.

Examination(s)

This course does not include a formal examination. Submission of assessable elements are outlined above in Tasks 1-3.

Students will need to provide their presentation materials such as paper table coverings, stationary and signage to support the presentation or documentation of their work for assessment.

Assessment Task 1

Surface Lab

ASSESSMENT BRIEF:

This assessment will guide students to undertake a structured series of experimental investigations into surface as an active system within ceramic practice. To achieve this, students will be introduced to a practice-based research methodology, where making, testing, and reflecting are used as a continuous cycle of inquiry. Students are expected to work iteratively, each test informing the next, and outcomes are not judged on resolution or aesthetic finish, but on the quality of investigation and decision-making. The focus is on understanding how surface can operate as a generative force, capable of interrupting, organising and contributing to form development rather than being applied as a final decorative layer. Students will be introduced to the idea that material thinking is a form of research, where knowledge is produced through testing, repetition, variation, and failure. Students will undertake a structured series of experimental ceramic surface investigations. This must include at least two of the alternative/expanded processes demonstrated, this may include (but is not limited to):

• Screenprinted slip/ underglaze systems
• Iron oxide decals (or commercial digital on glaze decals)
• laser cut texture imprinting surfaces
• Relief detail sprig moulds / 3D printed formers for sprigs moulds
• Stencil resist masks
• 2D surface 3D form systems

The assessment is split into two phases:

Phase 1: Guided Systems

• Lecturer-led processes
• Controlled variation
• Learning surface approaches through repetition

Phase 2: Independent Application

• Student-selected imagery/material sources
• Development of personal direction
• Proposition + prototype logic development

STUDIO RESEARCH WALL (non-assessed):

This assessment also includes contribution to a shared visual wall in the studio developed as a collective space for contextual research and process thinking. Students are encouraged to contribute throughout the six weeks. The wall operates as an evolving site of exchange and reflection in preparation for assessment 2.

SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS:

1. SURFACE INVESTIGATIONS

This is a physical submission and students should present:

• A minimum of 6 experimental material investigations presented as a coherent series.
• The series must demonstrate iterative development through testing, variation, reflection, and refinement.
• Evidence of engagement with at least two alternative/expanded surface processes introduced during the project.
• Work installed on the tables in the ceramics studio by 10.00 am, Week 6.
• Investigations should be arranged in a way that clearly communicates the progression of testing, exploration, and key findings.
• Students should be prepared to participate in a brief 2–3 minute discussion of their work during assessment. This is to explain the rationale behind your investigations, identify key material and technical discoveries, discuss how individual tests informed subsequent decisions and directions, reflect on successes, failures, and unexpected outcomes.

 

2. PROCESS DOCUMENTATION

Students must maintain documentation throughout the project that records the development of their investigations from Weeks 1–6. This can take the form of either a physical process journal/sketchbook, and/or digital methods of recording. Please note all students, regardless of whether they have chosen physical or digital documentation format, are required to upload a single PDF document to Canvas by 5.00 pm, Week 6. If you have chosen a physical format you will need to scan or photograph your submission then compress into a single file. Please include at least one image of your final assessment display.

Documentation should include:

• Material and technical testing.
• Images of experiments, processes, and outcomes.
• Notes, annotations, and reflections.
• Evidence of iterative development and decision-making.
• Research references, source material, and contextual influences as relevant.
• Key material findings and observations.

3. STUDIO RESEARCH WALL (Non-Assessed)

Students are encouraged to contribute reference images to the shared studio research wall throughout the project. Contributions may also be documented within the process PDF as evidence of research and development.

Rubric

Criteria	High Distinction	Distinction	Credit	Pass	Fail
Technical competency in ceramic surface processes (LO1) Demonstrates technical competency across a range of ceramic surface processes, including at least two alternative or expanded methods. Shows increasing control and understanding of material behaviour through iterative testing and experimentation. Technical decisions reflect responsive engagement with process, resulting in coherent experimental outcomes.	Highly developed technical control across a range of ceramic surface processes, including at least two alternative or expanded methods, with confident manipulation of material behaviour. Experimental investigations show sophisticated iteration, variation, and refinement informed by critical observation and responsive decision-making. Samples evidence strong technical fluency across guided and independent phases, producing coherent and purposeful experimental outcomes.	Strong technical competency across a range of ceramic surface processes, including required alternative or expanded methods. Investigations show clear iteration and developing control, with decisions informed by testing and material response. Samples evidence consistent technical understanding across guided and independent phases, producing resolved and coherent experimental outcomes.	Competent use of ceramic surface processes with some evidence of experimentation across required methods. Iteration and variation are present, with developing understanding of material behaviour. Sample show emerging technical control across guided and independent phases, with generally coherent but uneven experimental outcomes.	Basic competency in selected ceramic surface processes with limited engagement across required methods. Some experimentation and testing is evident, but iteration and material understanding are inconsistent. Samples show some technical control, with outcomes demonstrating early or uneven development across guided and independent phases.	Insufficient competency demonstrated in ceramic surface processes, with minimal or no engagement with required methods. Little evidence of experimentation, iteration, or understanding of material behaviour. Work lacks technical control and does not demonstrate meaningful development across guided or independent phases.
Independent investigation of surface as an active system (LO 2) Demonstrates independent, research-led exploration of ceramic surface as an active system through iterative experimentation and material inquiry. Shows progression from guided systems to independent application, including the development of personal imagery, materials, and process directions. Surface is tested to inform development, supported by reflective documentation.	Demonstrates sustained, independent investigation of surface as a system through rigorous iterative experimentation. Process documentation shows clear evidence of testing cycles, variation, reflective annotation, and documented decision-making. Strong progression from guided systems to original inquiry, supported by developed imagery/material sourcing and critical reflection. Surface is critically tested, clearly evidencing advanced material thinking and responsive development.	Strong independent exploration of surface as a system through consistent iterative investigation. Process documentation shows clear evidence of experimentation, variation, annotation, and recorded decision-making. Clear progression from guided to independent application, including developed use of imagery/ material sources. Surface is effectively tested, supported by coherent reflective documentation and informed development.	Competent exploration of surface as a system through iterative investigation with some independent direction. Process documentation shows evidence of testing, variation, and basic annotation, with some recording of decision-making. Progression from guided systems to independent application is evident but uneven, with developing use of imagery/ materials. Surface is explored and supported by basic reflective documentation.	Basic exploration of ceramic surface as a system with limited iterative investigation. Process documentation shows minimal evidence of testing, variation, or reflective annotation. Progression from guided to independent work is limited, with restricted development of imagery/ material sourcing. Surface is considered in relation to form development in a basic way, with limited documentation of decisions or reflection.	Insufficient exploration of ceramic surface as a system. Process documentation lacks evidence of iterative testing, variation, annotation, or decision-making. Little or no progression from guided tasks to independent inquiry, with minimal engagement with imagery or material sources. Surface is not meaningfully tested and documentation does not evidence reflective practice.

Assessment Task 2

Surface - Form Proposition

ASSESSMENT BRIEF:

Building on Assessment 1 (Surface Lab), students will identify a clear and promising line of inquiry and develop a project proposition that establishes direction for future ceramic work. This assessment shifts from exploration to selection, focus, and intent. Students are expected to synthesise prior material investigations and contextual research into a defined proposition statement that articulates their intended direction. Consideration should be given to how surface operates as a conceptual, material, and formal driver. This statement should frame surface as a conceptual and operational system within their practice and must be grounded in both reading and research. Additionally, through the development of a prototype, students will test the viability of their proposed direction and establish a framework for ongoing making. The prototype should function as a proof of concept, not a resolved outcome. Students must demonstrate how their proposition emerges from:

• material experimentation and testing undertaken in Assessment 1
• analysis of relevant precedents and influences
• theoretical and contextual research
• reflection on key material findings and decisions

 

SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS

1. SURFACE–FORM PROPOSITION (presented as either):

• a written statement of 500–800 words, OR
• a visual alternative that communicates equivalent depth of thinking through annotated drawings, diagrams, images, material samples, mind maps, and/or visual mapping strategies. The proposition must clearly identify:
• the question, problem, or opportunity being pursued;
• relevant precedents and influences informing the direction;
• material strategies to be developed further;
• the constraints, systems, or rules that will guide the project;
• anticipated outcomes, opportunities, and areas of uncertainty.

IMPORTANT: The proposition must also demonstrate how theoretical ideas inform at least one material decision, process, constraint, or formal strategy within the proposed project. Academic sources should be used and cited to support your proposition. If images have been included please include image caption references using Chicago referencing style and a reference list on the final page.

(https://www.anu.edu.au/students/academic-skills/academic-integrity/referencing/chicago-manual-of-style)

Your proposition statement should be submitted in a digital format as a single PDF document uploaded to Canvas by 10.00 am on Week 8.

 

2. PROTOTYPE / PROOF OF CONCEPT

Students must present at least one prototype, maquette, material system, or proof-of-concept object that tests a key aspect of their proposition. Prototypes do not need to be fired. Students are encouraged to select the materials and methods most appropriate to testing their proposition. This may include unfired clay, paper, card, found materials, digital fabrication, or other media where these effectively communicate and evaluate the proposed direction. The prototype should:

• emerge from investigations undertaken in Assessment 1;
• test the viability of the proposed direction;
• demonstrate material, technical, conceptual, or formal decision-making;
• function as an exploratory model rather than a resolved artwork.

Your prototype will be presented in class on week 8. Students should be prepared to participate in a 3–5 minute discussion of their proposition and prototype that covers the following questions:

• What question, problem, or opportunity will be pursued?
• Which contextual, theoretical precedents have informed the direction and why?
• What material strategies will be developed further?
• What constraints, systems, or rules will guide the project?
• What outcomes are anticipated and what remains uncertain?

Rubric

Criteria	High Distinction	Distinction	Credit	Pass	Fail
Surface–form proposition development through independent material inquiry (LO 2) Independent development of a focused surface–form proposition synthesising material experimentation and reflection. Clear intent is established through defined questions or problems, supported by material strategies, systems, and constraints, positioning surface as a conceptual and material driver.	Develops a compelling and well-defined ceramics surface–form proposition that synthesises material investigations into a coherent project direction. Material strategies, systems, and constraints are clearly articulated and supported by purposeful decision-making.	Develops a clear and focused ceramics surface–form proposition informed by material investigations. Material strategies, systems, and constraints are well considered, with decisions supporting a coherent project direction.	Develops a considered ceramics surface–form proposition that draws on material investigations to establish a project direction. Material strategies and decision-making are evident but may lack consistency or depth.	Develops a basic ceramics surface–form proposition with some connection to material investigations. Project direction, material strategies, and decision-making are evident but remain limited or underdeveloped.	Does not establish a coherent ceramics surface–form proposition. Limited or no evidence of synthesising material investigations into a defined project direction or material strategy.
Contextual research, precedents, and prototype as indication of concept (LO 3) Engagement with relevant precedents, influences, and contextual/theoretical research to inform project direction. Integrates research into material, conceptual, or formal decision-making within the proposition and prototype. Prototype functions as an indicator and tests key aspects of the proposed direction through material exploration.	Critically integrates relevant precedents, influences, and contextual research to inform material, conceptual, and formal decisions. The prototype functions as a rigorous proof of concept, effectively testing and advancing the proposed direction.	Integrates relevant precedents, influences, and contextual research to inform the proposed direction. The prototype effectively tests key aspects of the proposition as a coherent proof of concept.	Demonstrates appropriate engagement with precedents, influences, and contextual research to support the proposed direction. The prototype tests aspects of the proposition, with generally clear links between research and practice.	Demonstrates basic engagement with precedents and contextual research, with limited influence on the proposed direction. The prototype shows some testing of the proposition but with weak integration between research and material decisions.	Demonstrates insufficient or no engagement with precedents or contextual research. The prototype does not meaningfully test or support the proposed direction.

Assessment Task 3

Surface 'makes' Form

ASSESSMENT BRIEF:

In this final stage, students will develop a resolved ceramic work or coherent series of work that demonstrates how surface operates as a generative system that produces form, rather than something applied later. Your work should show that form and surface are connected, and that the logic of the surface actively generates, determines, or disrupts the structure of the object or presentation. This assessment looks to make theory operational in material practice: your final work should enact your ideas, not simply describe or illustrate them. You will produce either:

• A single resolved ceramic work, or
• A small, coherent series of works

In either case, the work must clearly demonstrate a consistent system or logic that links surface, form, and method. Your project should show:

• Technical competency and progression in ceramic processes relevant to your project direction
• Independent exploration of material and method, including testing and iteration
• Clear engagement with precedents and influences in contemporary or historical practice
• Critical decision-making, where outcomes are shaped by testing, failure, refinement, and response
• A clear relationship between concept, method, and final form

Across this project, you are expected to work with the following principles:

• Surface is a system that generates form, not decoration applied to it
• Research is active and process-based, not a collection of reference images
• Theory functions as a tool for making decisions in the studio
• Form emerges as a result of surface logic and material experimentation

SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS

1. FINAL RESOLVED WORK

Present either:

• One resolved ceramic work, or
• A coherent series of related works.

The submission should demonstrate:

• A clear relationship between surface, form, and method.
• The implementation of the proposition developed in Assessment 2.
• Technical competency appropriate to the chosen processes and materials.
• Evidence of independent decision-making and refinement.
• A consistent conceptual and material logic across the work.

Work must be installed in the designated assessment space (TBC) by 10.00 am on the designated assessment day in Week 14.

2. REFLECTIVE STATEMENT

Submit a reflective statement of 500–800 words (or visual equivalent).

The reflection should address:

• How research, precedents, and theory informed material and formal decisions.
• How the project developed from the original proposition.
• Key shifts, discoveries, failures, and refinements encountered during making.
• How chosen studio methodologies shaped the final outcomes.
• Areas for future development or unresolved questions emerging from the project.

Students must upload a single PDF document to Canvas by 10.00 am, on the designated assessment day in Week 14.

3. PROCESS DOCUMENTATION

Submit selected documentation demonstrating the development of the project from proposition to resolved outcome.

Documentation should include:

• Development drawings, plans, or visualisations.
• Material testing and technical experimentation.
• Evidence of iteration, refinement, and problem-solving.
• Process images showing significant stages of development.
• Relevant contextual research where appropriate.

Students must upload a single PDF document to Canvas by 10.00 am, on the designated assessment day in Week 14.

Please include in the PDF:

• Installation photographs and final documentation images.

Rubric

Criteria	High Distinction	Distinction	Credit	Pass	Fail
Technical resolution (LO1) Demonstrates technical competency through the resolved application of ceramic processes appropriate to the project. The final work shows an integrated relationship between surface, form, and method, with evidence of technical refinement, material understanding, and appropriate process control in relation to the intended outcome.	Demonstrates highly accomplished technical competency through the resolved integration of ceramic surface processes, form, and making method. Material systems are skilfully controlled and responsive to ceramic material behaviour. The final work is coherent, refined, and fully realises the project intent through disciplined material resolution.	Demonstrates strong technical competency through effective integration of ceramic surface processes, form, and method. Material decisions show clear control and responsiveness to ceramic processes, supporting a coherent and resolved outcome. The final work demonstrates clear technical refinement in relation to project intent.	Demonstrates competent technical application across ceramic surface processes, form, and method. Material systems are generally integrated, with evidence of understanding of ceramic processes and material behaviour. The final work shows reasonable technical refinement, though some aspects may benefit from further consideration/ resolution.	Demonstrates basic technical competency in ceramic surface processes, form, and method. There is partial integration of material systems, with limited consistency in control or response to ceramic material behaviour. The final work shows emerging resolution but remains somewhat limited.	Demonstrates insufficient or no technical competency in ceramic surface processes, form, and method. There is limited or no integration of material systems or understanding of ceramic material behaviour, resulting in an unresolved final outcome.
Independent development (LO2) Demonstrates independent exploration and development of idea, material, method, and process from the established proposition. The project evidences sustained testing, refinement, and decision-making, resulting in a coherent material and conceptual system that connects surface, form, and making.	Practice demonstrates a sustained independent development of a coherent approach that clearly extends from the proposition. Surface, form, and process are rigorously tested through iterative making, with strong responsiveness to ceramic material behaviour and process outcomes. The work shows a sophisticated integration of testing, refinement, and decision-making, resulting in a resolved and conceptually consistent system.	Practice demonstrates strong independent development of a coherent approach informed by the proposition. Surface, form, and process are effectively tested through iteration, showing clear responsiveness to ceramic material behaviour. The work evidences consistent refinement and decision-making, producing a coherent and well-resolved system.	Practice demonstrates competent development of an approach extending from the proposition. Surface, form, and process are tested through iterative making, with some responsiveness to ceramic material behaviour. The work shows developing coherence, with evidence of refinement and decision-making, though consistency may vary.	Practice demonstrates basic development of an approach with limited connection to the proposition. Surface, form, and process are inconsistently tested, with partial responsiveness to ceramic material behaviour. The work shows limited refinement or coherence across the system.	Practice does not demonstrate development of an approach. There is little or no clear connection to the proposition, with limited evidence of iterative testing, material responsiveness, or coherent integration of surface, form, and process.
Integration of precedents, theory, and contextual research (LO3)  Demonstrates engagement with relevant precedents, influences, and contextual research to inform material, conceptual, and formal decisions. The final work and reflective statement show how theory and research operate as active frameworks for making rather than post-rationalisation.	Demonstrates critical and sustained integration of relevant ceramic precedents, influences, and wider contextual research. Research actively informs surface, form, and material strategies, with clear evidence that ideas are operational within the making process rather than descriptive. The final work and reflective statement show sophisticated positioning within contemporary or historical practice.	Demonstrates strong integration of relevant precedents and contextual research into ceramic practice. Research informs material and formal decisions, with clear connections between ideas and outcomes evident in both the work and reflection. The project is well positioned within relevant practice contexts.	Demonstrates competent engagement with precedents and contextual research relevant to the project. Research is reflected in some material or formal decisions, with partial but generally clear connections between ideas and outcomes. Positioning within practice is evident but not always consistent.	Demonstrates basic engagement with precedents and contextual research. Limited evidence that research informs material or formal decisions, with weak or inconsistent connections between ideas and outcomes. Positioning within practice is underdeveloped.	Demonstrates insufficient engagement with precedents and contextual research. There is little or no evidence that research informs, ideas, material or formal decisions, and no meaningful positioning of the work within practice contexts.
Critical evaluation of studio practice and project development (LO4) Critically evaluates the impact of chosen studio methodologies/approaches on the development and outcomes of the project. Reflection demonstrates how experimentation, refinement, successes, failures, and decision-making shaped the final work and identifies opportunities for future development.	Demonstrates critical and insightful evaluation of studio approach and its impact on project development and outcomes. Clearly articulates how experimentation, decision-making, failures, and refinements shaped the final ceramic work or body of work. Reflection shows sophisticated understanding of the relationship between method, material behaviour, and conceptual intent, with well-supported identification of future directions.	Demonstrates strong evaluation of studio approach and its influence on project outcomes. Clearly reflects on key decisions, refinements, and changes in direction during making. Shows good understanding of the relationship between method, material, and intent, with considered identification of future development.	Demonstrates competent evaluation of studio approach and project development. Reflects on some key decisions and changes during making, with general understanding of how methods influenced outcomes. Future directions are identified but may lack depth or specificity.	Demonstrates basic evaluation of studio approach with limited reflection on its impact on outcomes. Some decisions or changes in making are described, but connections between method, material, and intent are weak or inconsistent, needing further development. Future directions are minimally articulated.	Demonstrates insufficient evaluation of studio approach. Little or no reflection on decision-making, material processes, or how methods shaped outcomes. No meaningful identification of future directions.

Academic Integrity

Academic integrity is a core part of the ANU culture as a community of scholars. The University’s students are an integral part of that community. The academic integrity principle commits all students to engage in academic work in ways that are consistent with, and actively support, academic integrity, and to uphold this commitment by behaving honestly, responsibly and ethically, and with respect and fairness, in scholarly practice.

The University expects all staff and students to be familiar with the academic integrity principle, the Academic Integrity Rule 2021, the Policy: Student Academic Integrity and Procedure: Student Academic Integrity, and to uphold high standards of academic integrity to ensure the quality and value of our qualifications.

The Academic Integrity Rule 2021 is a legal document that the University uses to promote academic integrity, and manage breaches of the academic integrity principle. The Policy and Procedure support the Rule by outlining overarching principles, responsibilities and processes. The Academic Integrity Rule 2021 commences on 1 December 2021 and applies to courses commencing on or after that date, as well as to research conduct occurring on or after that date. Prior to this, the Academic Misconduct Rule 2015 applies.

 

The University commits to assisting all students to understand how to engage in academic work in ways that are consistent with, and actively support academic integrity. All coursework students must complete the online Academic Integrity Module (Epigeum), and Higher Degree Research (HDR) students are required to complete research integrity training. The Academic Integrity website provides information about services available to assist students with their assignments, examinations and other learning activities, as well as understanding and upholding academic integrity.

Online Submission

You will be required to electronically sign a declaration as part of the submission of your assignment. Please keep a copy of the assignment for your records. Unless an exemption has been approved by the Associate Dean (Education) submission must be through Turnitin.

Hardcopy Submission

For some forms of assessment (hand written assignments, art works, laboratory notes, etc.) hard copy submission is appropriate when approved by the Associate Dean (Education). Hard copy submissions must utilise the Assignment Cover Sheet. Please keep a copy of tasks completed for your records.

Late Submission

Individual assessment tasks may or may not allow for late submission. Policy regarding late submission is detailed below:

• Late submission not permitted. If submission of assessment tasks without an extension after the due date is not permitted, a mark of 0 will be awarded.
• Late submission permitted. Late submission of assessment tasks without an extension are penalised at the rate of 5% of the possible marks available per working day or part thereof. Late submission of assessment tasks is not accepted after 10 working days after the due date, or on or after the date specified in the course outline for the return of the assessment item. Late submission is not accepted for take-home examinations.

Referencing Requirements

The Academic Skills website has information to assist you with your writing and assessments. The website includes information about Academic Integrity including referencing requirements for different disciplines. There is also information on Plagiarism and different ways to use source material. Any use of artificial intelligence must be properly referenced. Failure to properly cite use of Generative AI will be considered a breach of academic integrity.

Returning Assignments

Physical works submitted for assessment will be made available for collection by the student at a time advised after the Task submission date.

Extensions and Penalties

Extensions and late submission of assessment pieces are covered by the Student Assessment (Coursework) Policy and Procedure. Extensions may be granted for assessment pieces that are not examinations or take-home examinations. If you need an extension, you must request an extension in writing on or before the due date. If you have documented and appropriate medical evidence that demonstrates you were not able to request an extension on or before the due date, you may be able to request it after the due date.

Privacy Notice

The ANU has made a number of third party, online, databases available for students to use. Use of each online database is conditional on student end users first agreeing to the database licensor’s terms of service and/or privacy policy. Students should read these carefully. In some cases student end users will be required to register an account with the database licensor and submit personal information, including their: first name; last name; ANU email address; and other information.
In cases where student end users are asked to submit ‘content’ to a database, such as an assignment or short answers, the database licensor may only use the student’s ‘content’ in accordance with the terms of service – including any (copyright) licence the student grants to the database licensor. Any personal information or content a student submits may be stored by the licensor, potentially offshore, and will be used to process the database service in accordance with the licensors terms of service and/or privacy policy.
If any student chooses not to agree to the database licensor’s terms of service or privacy policy, the student will not be able to access and use the database. In these circumstances students should contact their lecturer to enquire about alternative arrangements that are available.

Distribution of grades policy

Academic Quality Assurance Committee monitors the performance of students, including attrition, further study and employment rates and grade distribution, and College reports on quality assurance processes for assessment activities, including alignment with national and international disciplinary and interdisciplinary standards, as well as qualification type learning outcomes.

Since first semester 1994, ANU uses a grading scale for all courses. This grading scale is used by all academic areas of the University.

Support for students

The University offers students support through several different services. You may contact the services listed below directly or seek advice from your Course Convener, Student Administrators, or your College and Course representatives (if applicable).

• ANU Health, safety & wellbeing for medical services, counselling, mental health and spiritual support
• ANU Accessibility for students with a disability or ongoing or chronic illness
• ANU Dean of Students for confidential, impartial advice and help to resolve problems between students and the academic or administrative areas of the University
• ANU Academic Skills supports you make your own decisions about how you learn and manage your workload.
• ANU Counselling promotes, supports and enhances mental health and wellbeing within the University student community.
• ANUSA supports and represents all ANU students