I need to finish the content of my audio paper.
Here’s my proposed structure again
- Intro
- What are Audio papers and Written Dissertations?
- Benefits of a written dissertation as a means to prepare and teach students how to formalise their ideas and also acclimatise them to the field of sound arts
- Why I wouldn’t be making an audio paper in my final year
Although it’s unfortunate that I have to be brief when describing what an audio paper is, I thought it would be fine when thinking about the context of the paper (being marked by a sound arts tutor).
The main chunk of the paper is the third part, Benefits of a written dissertation as a means to prepare and teach students how to formalise their ideas and also acclimatise them to the field of sound arts. The way I have and plan to go about this section is by splitting the benefits of a written dissertation into 3 main points. Fairness, usefulness and equivalents, which in turn are in reference to 3 of the 8 tenets that Groth and Samson say are what makes an audio paper.
Fairness is quite obvious as the marking criterion for a written dissertation and audio paper will have to be different. I could also go into the unfair nature of offering this boon to anyone on the course as the audio paper should be used to level the playing field between those who legitimately struggle with the written dissertation and those who are arguably not inspired enough to want to put time into a written dissertation. However, I plan to bring up accessibility in my final section as it makes more sense there.
Usefulness is an ironic point as it talks about how an audio paper in the final year wouldn’t fulfil the core aspect of an audio paper (that being that it tries to bring a new perspective to already established topics) because we are not even undergraduates in sound art yet and we are too restricted in terms of scope and topic in our university course as we are primarily focusing on marks, not furthering research. This point is ironic because despite everything I’m trying to do with my audio paper, it has that same context and narrow scope and it could be seen as hubris and ignorance that my topic is what it is.
The last point is equivalents. I wrote that a long time ago in my script proposal so I have no clue what I originally meant by it. If I had to guess it would be about one of the ideas I initially wanted to touch upon in this project Audio papers are not equivalent to written dissertations. It’s not a debate that audio papers are fundamentally different to written dissertations despite both mediums sharing similar goals, so it does throw into question why it’s being utilised as an alternative to written dissertations. I mentioned before how this makes it unfair in terms of marking but an even bigger problem due to how the 3rd year is structured, an audio paper would test for the same skills as our final sound arts project and would also lack the depth that a written dissertation has (at least is the audio paper is limited to a time similar to the time limit we have in this project I.e., 30 mins). While the point does practically rehash the previous points, I’m sure there is a unique angle I can take and even without that angle, the 2 different mediums being different is something that needs to be remembered.
After those 3 points, I want to reflect a bit on them, talking about how hardship would be better for one who is growing as a sound artist, question whether it is better for the student or the teacher that an audio paper is being introduced and then something idealistic and inspiring.
I want to finish with something personal but also something that will tie the whole piece together, Why I wouldn’t be making an audio paper in my final year. I still want to use the quirks of an audio paper to create something more interesting and impactful even if my how paper practically opposes the format in this context. I think it will be interesting to share my perspective as someone who should be more inclined to make an audio paper instead want to write a written paper for self-betterment.