For this part of the session we were introduced to TEF (Teaching Excellence and Student Outcomes Framework) which measures teaching quality, learning environments and student outcomes. I was not familiar with this award, and the more I read about it the more I wondered just how do they measure these things?

Doing the quiz task that was set up for us was confusing and frustrating in equal measure. I found it difficult to answer some questions, and it sort of left me with more questions than answers. Going over it in the session shed light on the framework grading system, and revealed perhaps that there were inconsistencies in the measurement system.

I was surprised to find that UAL released such a strong statement against the TEF grading system, but was also quite pleased to see them challenge a perhaps flawed system. The whole thing left me thinking….what are good ways to measure teaching excellence? Should it be so consumer focused? It will be interesting to see the new iteration of this framework when it comes out, and how they have responded and improved the measurement system.

I agreed with what the university stated:

‘From the start, students learn within a high trust and progressively more independent learning environment. This is a different teaching paradigm to many mainstream subjects that place greater emphasis on direction and knowledge transfer.

We explicitly teach our students that developing creativity is about taking risks to produce innovation. This is deliberately uncomfortable for them, especially so in their final year, which we consider a further factor in our NSS scores and in the negative flags in our TEF metrics. The NSS does not in our view measure the effectiveness of our teaching and learning, but rather satisfaction at a point before our students fully appreciate the value of their experience.’

In my experience the year 1 students can sometimes struggle with the agency given to them in year one if they come straight from school, without doing a foundation which seems to be the norm these days. It got me thinking is the 3 year degree the best format? Should UAL be offering different options?

When students reflect in the moment while still at university is this a valid measurement? Sometimes with the stress of the final hand in and the disappointment that can come from not necessarily getting the mark you though you wanted, compared to a year down the line, when you have a job and you can reflect on your university experience with a bit of distance, you may give an entirely different answer.

TEF Short Guide, accessed here: https://moodle.arts.ac.uk/pluginfile.php/1049028/mod_resource/content/1/TEF%20short%20guide.pdf

https://www.arts.ac.uk/about-ual/excellent-teaching-at-ual/teaching-quality

I was really nervous about this session! But I ended up thoroughly enjoying it. It was so fruitful to sit through colleagues sessions, see different teaching styles in action and try out new things- something I usually have minimal time for in the academic year.

The focus for our micro teach was object based learning (OBL).

OBL is a form of active learning and experiential learning (Chatterjee, 2011). Objects offer a palpable experience for students, which challenges them to question the object and conceptualise their ideas. Though the teacher facilitates this session, the students construct meaning for themselves through their interactions with each other centered on the object (Chaterjee et al., 2015). This approach allows students to explore ideas, processes and events related to the object and further link their observations to more complicated abstract ideas and concepts.

I find OBL is an effective way to encourage learners curiosity and have fun whilst exploring a new topic. It can also aid in explaining techniques and skills in a way that is easy to understand for visual learners. OBL is something I do a lot in my technical role. With teaching the session online, and not in person, this presented some new challenges and removed some of the joy of learning through use of a physical object and its tactility.

IDEA

I have to deliver a new session in the future to students to help them think about how to go about creating a creature design. I have noticed in the past students have jumped right into the visual aspects of design without thinking about it holistically. I wanted to get the students in a relaxed and fun way, thinking about what makes good creature design and why, with the hope that it would help them explore not just the visual side of the design.

LEARNING OUTCOMES

The intention of the micro teach was for my students to find engagement in their chosen creature and use their observational and communications skills, their design awareness and knowledge and critical analysis by thinking of a successful/ unsuccessful creature and why it is so. I also wanted them to work in teams to take inspiration from each other, as it was my hope that students may be exposed to new creatures they had not heard of or seen before.

THE OBJECT

Being unable to use any physical objects, it was constraining at first but then actually quite freeing. I decided that the object would be any creature of the students choice, rather than one of mine. I hoped that this would give me more of an insight into the things that students like rather than studying something that I provide, and also give a diverse range to draw inspiration from.

THE TASK

I had so may ideas around a task, but again, this part was constrained by the online delivery. I decided to start the session by putting students in pairs and asking them to find out each others favourite/most memorable creature they have seen for 5mins. I then asked that they feed this back on the white board for around 2mins. I then gave them 3mins to think about why this creature stuck with them and feedback to the write board.

• 

• 

After we chatted about the reasons why these creatures where memorable I showed a few slides about things to think around creating a believable creature.

• 

• 

• 

For the final part of the session I asked the group to select one creature to dissect, analyse its success and consider its inspiration.

REVIEW

The session seemed to go well. The group engaged well and my hesitancy of both the subject matter- not everyone is into creatures, and giving complete freedom to the group to choose turned out to be fine! The fact that the genre was constrained in one sense, but also very open meant that everyone could contribute regardless. An interesting thing happened though- the group chose an image that I had put up on a slide to dissect. Which made me think more about the images I include in my slides and their purpose. Yes they are there for inspiration and a prompt- but I was really hoping that I would hear the students voice on and their own original thought. Something to think about for future sessions. It would have been nice to have been less rushed too in future I think the larger group task at the end could be extended further and have more time to collaborate on a space like padlet. A follow up session could be based around groups designing a creature together in some way.

I very much enjoyed attending the other sessions run by Ocean, Kangan, Karen and Larry. Each teaching style was slightly different but there was one running theme throughout- at the beginning of each session there was an image (or moving image) with limited context, but TIME, and space to sit with the image quietly to think. I found this style really successful- having the space to think on my own, before diving in gave me time to become more confident in my ideas as I had more time to collate my thoughts for more valuable contribution- rather than feeling the pressure of needing to contribute the first thing that comes to mind. And even though these sessions were short there was still ample time and space for thinking. This was a huge take away for me. My instinct is to fill the space with activity, especially online, to keep students active and engaged, but what this technique demonstrated to me was not to be afraid to put something out to the group and give silent alone space for thought before asking for contribution. I do believe part of the success of this was also the group size so that is something to also keep in mind.

Reading:

Chatterjee, H. (2011) Object Based Learning in Higher Education: The pedagogical power of museums, UMAC journal, accessed here:

https://edoc.hu-berlin.de/bitstream/handle/18452/9349/chatterjee.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y

Chaterjee et al. (2015) Engaging the Senses: Object Based Learning in Higher Education, Routledge, accessed here:

https://books.google.co.uk/books?hl=en&lr=&id=E7K1CwAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PP1&dq=object+based+learning+higher+education&ots=p1YzpMU7TB&sig=AkPkTE3cDD4m4XXewRWSrfE3kKg&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=object%20based%20learning%20higher%20education&f=false

To prepare for this session we watched a video on performing to an invisible audience. It was interesting to watch someone presenting online about presenting online, and listening to tips and tricks about ‘imagining’ your audience and ways to cope with the lack of feedback you can encounter in the online space. I found the presenter very polished, even though she advocated being natural and not to overthink mistakes/ worry about being perfect. However, I did find her calming and engaging and came away thinking I must make more of an effort to look into the camera rather than at my screen (so easy to do when other peoples faces are on it, as naturally that is where you want to look!). A lot of the things were small actions and common sense, but it was nice to have it re-enforced that some of what I was already doing (like smiling, embracing the awkwardness, and definitely not being perfect) were naturally helping me to cope and connect with my invisible online audience.

The second article we looked at was a case study, an excerpt from Bruce Macfarlane’s 2004 book Teaching with Integrity: The ethics of higher education practice (Routledge). In this article there is a fictional lecturer named ‘Stephanie’ who receives feedback on her teaching. Reading through at first I felt a bit sorry for her, it sounded like she had a lot on her plate. But at the same time the tone seemed to suggest that in her role, she felt research had a much higher importance than student facing time, and perhaps it could be potentially the ethos of the institution as a whole- research based not student focused? I questioned why her religion was mentioned… why was that relevant?! I thought it was funny that it was mentioned that even ‘Professors!’, those even higher up academically, were not immune to student feedback. I found the assumptions about the students difficult to read. I can see why she would be upset about receiving poor feedback, its natural. But it was also easy to judge her slightly dismissive attitude. The idea that making resources available early could be seen as ‘spoon feeding students’ was surprising as its seen as good practice now! It very much reminded me of ‘old school’ attitudes that can be encountered within teaching- in particular one of my lecturers at art school who simply ‘didn’t do’ emails, and it was just accepted as his ‘way’ even though it was incredibly inconvenient and everyone else had to use it as a means of communicating!

During the session we went into groups of four and had 40mins to pick a question this article raised and discuss it. I really enjoyed the longer small group activity- I liked the idea of giving time (7mins) on our own to think and then coming back together as a group to work collectively. It gave me time to gather my thoughts rather than just panicking that I had nothing to say! I will definitely use this in the future as I can imagine it’s how a lot of students feel about group work. We focused on ‘How can feedback be more Holistic?’ and we used a padlet to collect our thoughts which we then came together to discuss.

https://padlet.com/reneemariaos/vcftft8l4cwydl3d

It was clear from our discussion as a group that feedback is most definitely a skill, both giving it and receiving it gracefully. We discussed our various experiences on this and felt that feedback on a course is so important, and empowers students to take responsibility for their own education. However, we questioned what then happens with feedback when it is given, and how the interpretation their tutor may have of said feedback is out of their control- especially in relation to given example in the text. This also got us thinking about the purpose of feedback, who benefits from it, why it is taken and and what point it is taken, and if this is always explicit enough when you are trying to gain it. We also discussed ideas around how to make feedback more holistic, ways to get students to feel comfortable giving honest constructive feedback (and staff), and perhaps training for staff (and maybe even students!) around this as it is an important life skill! Lindsay recommended some really helpful books on this topic when we discussed it afterword’s in the session- I will look into in particular ‘Difficult conversations: How to discuss what matters most’ by Douglas Stone, Shiela Heen, and Bruce Patton.

On recommendation,I also enjoyed watching a few Ted talks by Sugata Mitra, and listening to his views on teaching as he was brought up in conversation. It was fascinating to hear him recount his experiences with children self organising their own learning, achieving educational objectives on their own, and reading by themselves when provided with the right environment. It got me thinking about the need to give students agency to achieve more.

Engagement and building relationships is a key factor in the ability to give and take feedback. If you have invested in the relationship, trust and feel valued by the person you get constructive feedback from, you are more likely to be able to see this feedback within a positive framework. I do however feel personality and mental state also feed into this too. It is certainly a complex, multi-dimensional thing which is not particularly easy to measure on a large scale. Learning communities shape learning and persistence on campus and have a direct impact on how involved students get in the academic and social life of the institution (Tinto, 1997).

It was also great to hear other groups takes on the article and what they focused on. There was a lot of crossover of ideas around how to remedy ‘Stephanie’s’ situation looking at it from many different angles.

At the end of the session I thought it was really interesting to read the student excerpts and imagine what they were trying to say vs what they said and the extra information Lindsay gave because she had a longer chat with them and had more context. Again this re-enforced the need to have more background knowledge about students, and having established a relationship when seeking and giving feedback.

Vincent Tinto (1997) Classrooms as Communities, The Journal of Higher
Education, 68:6, 599-623, accessed here:

https://www-tandfonline-com.arts.idm.oclc.org/doi/pdf/10.1080/00221546.1997.11779003?needAccess=true

• 

I really enjoyed this topic, it resonated so much with me. For me, it is such an important part of what we do as teachers, and something that has a HUGE impact on students.

For the session I read D’Olimpios, Ethics Explainer: Ethics of care, which went over the ‘Feminist Ethics or Care Ethics’ originating in the 1980s as a reaction to the traditional, male-centric, emotion void moral theories that preceded it (D’Olimpio, 2019).

Which got me thinking- thank goodness I did not grow up before the 1980s! Being creative is such an emotional endeavor, and everything we do, and ask the students to do, is full of emotion. Our students pour themselves into their projects. I cannot imagine a space void of these feelings.

It felt comforting to read that being a caring individual, who listens to different perspectives, who is open to self-reflection, who wants to understand and respond to any power imbalances, and who wants to promote inclusion for all, is valid! I often take my work home with me- worrying about students. We discussed this in our group chat and it nicely brought us round to the Patience (2018) article (which I did not read but some members of the group had) referring to forming ‘dramatic friendships’ with students. We discussed the need for affective pedagogy, but also how it is hard to draw the line and create boundaries with students. We discussed that in each of our roles as technicians and lecturers we encounter these ‘dramatic friendships’, and the different forms they take – getting to know our students and seeing them every day. We also discussed the authenticity of relationships, and how sometimes ‘social networking’ is pushed on students at university. Is tech disabling this authentic/dramatic relationship?

I also read Bell Hooks, All About love. I really enjoyed her style of writing- I found it easy to read and understand. It was a welcome change to some of the more academic style of texts that I have been reading so far.

‘Everywhere we learn that love is important, and yet we are bombarded by it’s failure.’ (Hooks, 2001)

The book explains that true love is so difficult in our culture because of the affect of the unrealistic pressures and expectations society and the media have put upon us e.g. materialism and dishonesty (Hooks, 2001). Living in an age where we are always seeking the next best thing, and where online we can fabricate false constructs of ourselves. Hooks reminds us that love is not just a feeling of affection, it is the constant and consistent work to nourish spiritual growth inside ourselves and others. I can see the parallels to our role as teachers in university- we must facilitate this ‘growth’. It is our responsibility to create a unified and trustworthy environment where students and staff have the freedom to learn and grow with each other. Mutual respect and feeling like you belong, and are valued, are at the heart of the classroom- whether it be in the virtual world or the physical classroom.

When feeding our thoughts back to the larger group, Vikki suggested some podcasts to listen to and some articles. Fostering Belonging and Compassionate Pedagogy- I liked the schematic diagram, and felt like it was something good to look at with the whole tech team. I will pass it on- but also look to see if there are any more documents available on more practical examples of implementing this. I really enjoyed reading David Whites articles about Spatial collaboration: How to escape the webcam – it had many practical resolutions to what I, and am sure my students were feeling- the need for creating more valuable togetherness in the online classroom- other than a sea of dis-embodied faces floating in cyber space. White talks about creating ‘imagined spaces’ where no bodies are present but instead a collaborative, common ground to work on (White, 2021). I have found recently that students really respond to a white board where they can anonymously contribute. He suggested a move away from trying to re-create the ‘real’ classroom, instead concentrating on providing cues which help to spatialise thinking and identity. This definitely inspired me to think about simple solutions as how I can do this more in my online group sessions- perhaps using things like Padlet and Miro.

I also really enjoyed listening to the podcasts ‘Interrogating Spaces: Belonging in Higher Education and Belonging in online environments’. Currant et al. (2020) and Jethnani et al. (2020) echoed this need to facilitate the student voice. And the different ways to do that- making students feel like they matter right from the minute they start university. Adding the more personal touches- making and taking the time to find out about each student, remembering names, starting sessions with ice breakers etc. All things that I think as technicians sometimes we miss out on at the beginning of term as we can be so bombarded with inductions. And again moving online, sometimes we can be so focused on the learning outcomes, creating resources on request at the last minute (and the short allocated time to meet these outcomes) that these fundamental things can sometimes get brushed aside, or feel like are too late to do. I can see that now, without a physical classroom, belonging is more important than ever, and time must be given to create these relaxed spaces where we can get to know students better- not to just race on with the task in hand.

I found the group work in the session really lovely, it was so great to meet other staff from Lime Grove- Claire and Jo- we have all been working in the same building for a few years but it took an online class for us to meet!! We talked about our different plans on how to implement love care and belonging. Both of their plans focused on the importance of ice-breaker sessions and staff well being.

Karen and I focused on a general plan or agreement that could be drawn between staff and students that would set expectations and hopefully shape a supportive environment from the beginning. We focused our thoughts around the online classroom but these could be adapted to suit the physical classroom- sort of like a best practice to do list. So at the start of every session do the ‘housekeeping’- let everyone know what is expected of them in the space- do’s and don’ts- these can be made in collaboration with the students too. Ask everyone to log on at the beginning of the session with their preferred name and pronouns to create consistency and make it easy for everyone to learn and remember. Make sure that a variety of formats of lesson take place, offer choices of group tutorials and individual tutorials to cater for everyone’s needs. Create more informal spaces for students to communicate- this could be another virtual classroom/break room and encourage its use. Check ins with the students which focus on well-being and not just work-and the same for staff. A lot of this has been done in bits already, but when all of this is done in combination, I think is quite a powerful way to foster belonging. If it becomes a standard way of working, inbuilt into each course- I think it would go some way to create a more caring and nurturing organisation.

Ethics Explainer: Ethics of Care

Hooks, B. (2001) All About Love: new visions, Harper Collins, available at: https://wtf.tw/ref/hooks.pdf

https://www.arts.ac.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0019/223417/AEM3_FBCP.pdf

White, D. (2021) Spatial collaboration: how to escape the webcam, Web-page, Feb 2021, available at:

Spatial collaboration: how to escape the webcam

Currant et al. (2020) Interrogating Spaces, Belonging in Higher Education, Podcast, June 2020, available at:

https://interrogatingspaces.buzzsprout.com/683798/4671476-belonging-in-higher-education

Jethani et al. (2020) Interrogating Spaces: Belonging in online Learning Environments, Podcast, July 2020, Accessed Feb 2021, available at:

https://interrogatingspaces.buzzsprout.com/683798/4795271-belonging-in-online-learning-environments

Hill et al. Fostering Belonging and Compassionate Pedagogy: AEM and Attainment Team, Ual, available at:

https://www.arts.ac.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0019/223417/AEM3_FBCP.pdf

I had a love hate relationship with this text Understanding Art: The Play of Work and the Spectator by Vilhauer about Hans George Gadamer’s Ethics of Play. Ok, maybe hate is a strong word!! But I did struggle to get my head around it at times, and felt frustrated with the interrupted flow of trying to read, google meanings, and re-read to try and grasp the concept, all from a screen. But at times I really did (at least I think I did!) and the reward of that felt GOOD.

The idea that by creating and presenting a piece of art we invite the act of ‘play’- the artwork and the viewer become intertwined by a dialogue, a ‘to-and-fro’ exchange of ideas, a recognition of something that’s perhaps familiar, and hopefully the activation of some sort of understanding (Vilhauer, 2010), resonated with me. Also the idea that the spectator is an essential part of this process- an artwork is incomplete until it has been viewed by others (Vilhauer, 2010). It articulated something I have been subconsciously doing for as long as I have been looking at art, but never really thought about through the metaphor of ‘play’.

It made me think about the dynamics of viewing art, and also context. How much does the curation of a piece or group of pieces affect this ‘play’? Are we supposed to blindly ‘play’? Or is ‘play’ stimulated by some kind of context- will the ‘game’ be obvious or not? Is ‘play’ better with others? i.e if I go to a gallery alone vs. going with a friend and chatting and comparing our individual ‘to-and-fro’ to the piece and by doing so creating our own secondary ‘two-and-fro’.

This in turn got me thinking about the classroom, and the kind of ‘play’ that happens there. The interactive event of presenting something and the path to recognition:

‘understanding only takes place in a dynamic, interactive, interpretive process of working through meaning with others’

The same could be said about the classroom- the subconscious happenings in between others can equate to a greater understanding and a more enriching experience. Does ‘play’ happen differently with different groups of people? And then understanding is different? What if the intended meaning is missed- does this also invite other opportunities for learning and interpretation? This also got me thinking about the fluidity of the group learning experience and the space for adaption and randomness in a lesson. You can plan to cover a topic or for a lesson to go a certain way but you cannot control the randomness of your ‘players’ reactions to what you are presenting to them- this highlighted to me that space must be made for these enriching, interactive collaborative activities in the classroom- to make it an exciting place where anything can be expected to happen- and for all parties involved to know that that is ok!

The idea that ‘play’ can only happen when all members of the ‘game’ are participating proactively and intentionally is an important one in the classroom. Especially during these challenging times, where all learning is taking place online. Players only become free to ‘play’ when everyone is committed and proactive. The ‘play’ may not have to be serious but the approach to engagement is. It is so difficult to teach into the online void and get very little back from students, so it is very important to create an environment, where as far as possible, this type of interaction and commitment to engagement can take place. Not always an easy task as there are so many factors to it! But how can we facilitate this ‘play’ in the online space? What about dis-engaged students? Can they still learn from observation alone? How can we get everyone to participate equally?

In the session we chatted about different ways people had tried this online- deck of character, eno’s oblique strategies, we are not really strangers, freedom and balance- all types of games to play online that encourage lateral thinking and participation. I also thought a good old word association game might be a fun way of starting a dialogue about something.

In our smaller group chat about the Vilhauer chapter, Ocean likened it to a something she had read called ‘The Act of Reading’ by Wolfgang Iser so I will enjoy reading further on this.

Vilhauer, Monica. (2018) Gadamer’s Ethics of Play: Hermenuetics and the other, Lexington Books, Chapter 3, p31-48, acessed here:

https://moodle.arts.ac.uk/pluginfile.php/1049027/mod_resource/content/1/Vilhauer.pdf

It was so great to virtually meet everyone in the tutor group and see everyone’s backgrounds, work, motivations and interest areas around teaching. The plethora of knowledge, skills and experiences everyone will bring to the table is very exciting and I feel so positive we will learn so much from each other. In fact- we already have just from this first session! My brain actually feels a bit overwhelmed with all the important information to digest from this session. Themes explored were: learning from objects and the relationships these objects have within teaching, curation and exhibition spaces as a tool for learning, ‘interruption’ as a form of ‘disturbance’ in the classroom and the different ways that manifests itself within the physical and online classroom, de-colonising the curriculum and inclusive teaching practices, pluriversality in education and the importance and responsibility of image making. The session had me reflecting and questioning how all these things fit into my own practice and identified areas I’d like to read more on.

• 

• 

• 

For my presentation I focused on the Spark journal article :

SAKE: Student led, skills based workshops to support inclusivity within the creative curriculum by Michelle Wild (Journal no.3, Issue 1)

•Assumed roles of tutor and student were flipped to provide a more inclusive learning environment

•Students designed a short manageable session to demonstrate and transfer a skill to peers

This really captured my interest as I could see just how beneficial it could potentially be in the classroom. It would facilitate a great bonding session for everyone, students can learn from each other, it would give the opportunity for staff to learn from students about their learning styles and personal interests. It also creates a level playing field for everyone because of the shift of assumed power, and it promotes trust and places value on the students and their own knowledge and experiences. As someone who has the dual role of both teacher and student I believe that seeing things and experiencing things from both viewpoints opens doors to richer learning experiences and helps manage expectations from both sides. Having experience with my own students it did make me wonder just how comfortable they would be assuming the role of a demonstrator/teacher, and how they would feel about not learning from an experienced practitioner.

https://sparkjournal.arts.ac.uk/index.php/spark/article/view/95/153

Further Reading:

https://journals.sfu.ca/jalt/index.php/jalt/article/view/197/173

Using the pluriverse concept to critique Eurocentrism in Education, Journal of Applied Learning and Teaching

https://sparkjournal.arts.ac.uk/index.php/spark/article/view/110/215

How inclusive is object-based learning? Spark Journal

James Wisdom- HE Overview

Eye opening stats about higher education in the arts and how success is measured by different bodies. Possibly naively did not realise the bigger picture of HE in general and quite how much politics and government funding are so intrinsically linked. A lot of food for thought- how is the pandemic going to affect HE institutions in the future? Is the current 3 year semester format really that accessible? Should the system be so focused on school leavers? Will HE become more Vocational/Academic or a mixture of both?

Victoria Odeniyi – Reimagining conversations with Multi-Lingual Students

Very interesting insight into the research Victoria is doing on the use of language and its affect/effect in the online learning environment. Very insightful and highlighted the need to reflect on own language use in the classroom environment as well as students. How is tech changing conversations with multi-lingual international students? Many things hard to interpret online- especially ‘silence’ and ‘pause vs silence’ and its functions online.

The idea of being a student again is quite daunting, but on reflection it brings so much insight with it to my own teaching practice – so that in itself is comforting. I realised that the online experiences both as a staff member presenting online and as a student participant have many similar obstacles- its hard to balance it all! From the amount of information given/received, to the ability to present or listen and keep track of the chat and people wishing to speak, the pauses or silences and how to handle them and monitoring engagement whether that is as a student finding the space and voice to participate or as the teacher keeping the students interested, included and active in the session. Setting boundaries and expectations was also a key issue e.g. how much chat in the chat is acceptable? When does it become distracting and off-topic? Should there always be a moderator when teaching online where possible?

Hi, 

My name is Lauren (she/her) and I am based at Lime Grove, D Block.

I work as a technician on the 3DFX for performance course, and teach students the practical making side of the course. I also work with the Hair, Make-up and Prosthetic students, and costume students as well.

I am hoping to inform and improve my practice and also get some fresh ideas!