The seminar on teaching methods provided an opportunity for me to consider the benefits and challenges of different group dynamics. My group discussed and made notes on 1-2-1 teaching/tutorial, and when I was compiling the notes it occurred to me that the benefits and challenges are different from a teacher and student perspective. Reflecting on the discussions around the room it seems that boundaries can sometimes be blurred between the roles of student and teacher. For example, the issue of ‘expert knowledge’: expert knowledge does not always come from the teacher. During a recent group crit I felt more like a student than a teacher because the students had more knowledge of a particular printing process. This made me feel somewhat inadequate, however I was able to address it through a practical workshop. Honesty is important in these situations, as a student I would rather my teacher let me know if they do not have specific knowledge, and as a teacher I am usually open to admitting when I have limited knowledge. I think this is important to build trust and open communication in a student/teacher relationship.

Looking broadly at all the responses from different groups it is interesting to note that the bigger the group size the more challenges occur. For me personally I feel more effective as a teacher in 1-2-1 or small group dynamics, however to develop my pedagogy I recognise it’s important to come outside of my comfort zones and I hope to find opportunities to challenge myself further within larger groups. Teaching 30+ secondary school students in one room was certainly a big challenge, mainly due to behavioural issues. This is less likely to be a problem in a HE setting.

Further reading:

PgCert course material, ‘Selected texts: Opportunities, challenges and strategies of different types of teaching. Available at https://docs.google.com/document/d/1YzNJbTGEHhUoszDYwX1yhgTQDWQNHU6xyH1E9BAbVPU/edit

By reading Biggs (2011) Chapter 4 ‘Using constructive alignment in outcomes-based teaching and learning’ my understanding of the ways in which teaching in Higher Education aligns with my pedagogy began to make more sense to me. I had struggled to align my values and beliefs during my Secondary teacher training and this theory helped me understand what a constructivist teaching model can look like in practice, and to reflect on my own experience as an art student within the British education system. Key question: How might I design and deliver teaching and learning in new ways that draw on past experience to create new knowledge for students and myself?

References:

Biggs,J. and Tan, C. (2007) Teaching for Quality Learning at University, Open University Press

After feedback from a peer during a seminar on writing case studies I reflected on the kinds of language I have used in the past and how I could change how I design workshops to create inclusive learning spaces. My peer suggested that when I am giving feedback or advice to students I could try to use words that provide connections to different aspects of creative practice, for example, if students are being asked to translate research findings/sketches into designs I could use words that encourage description of texture and how that might be translated into drawings. By using specific, accessible language I can help students gain a deeper understanding of learning tasks and outcomes. The language I use, written, verbal and visual should be used carefully chosen to include all students in learning content, activities and feedback.

Key Words that might bridge the gap between 2D sketching and 3D making: soft lines, rough surface, stippled, sharp egde, bold pattern, hairy, smooth, messy, precise, clean, jagged, miniscule

During a peer observation/micro teach where there task was to visually describe knitted textures, I aimed to think through the connections between feeling (experience of touching an object), thinking, responding to sensory information and how I can translate this into drawing, mark making, choice of medium. Reflecting on the drawings I produced and the way the information was presented I feel these drawings were successful in describing texture.

Key words: values, ethics, beliefs, morals, duties, attitudes, knowledge, equality, equity, personal, professional, conflict

https://canvas.arts.ac.uk/documents/sppreview/e559543e-1db7-4154-b7c4-d843861603ad

The cohort seminar on Sustainability was an opportunity for me to reflect on and discuss my positionality and to listen to my peers’ views, which I found very interesting and revealing. We were asked to look at UAL policy on sustainability and consider what values inform the way we teach in relation to the policy. I learnt that values can be tacit and/or articulated. My group’s discussion centred around the fact of ‘sustainability’ being used as a broad term that encompasses climate and social justice issues. For me it seemed ‘unjust’ that these two pressing issues are addressed in one policy document, as if they can be approached from one perspective. To me ‘climate crisis’ and social justice/anti-racism/decolonisation are two very separate issues that I believe should be addressed from different angles, although poilitcally, socially and culturally they overlap.

I believe it is important for there to be policies in place to protect staff, students and the interests of the university as a whole. However, through discussion I found that protecting and including these three bodies do not always align in practice. It is ‘utopian thinking’ to think that they do align because conflicts will always arise due to differences in the human experience, positionality, politics and culture of the people who make up the UAL community.

The Creative Attributes Framework provides a broad context within which the university approaches the purposes of teaching and learning. These ‘attributes and ‘capacities’ are helpful when considering how I design teaching and learning, and the kinds of specific areas that could inform my aims and intended learning outcomes. There is a variety of ‘soft’ and ‘hard’ skills that students should develop which are challenging to ‘teach’ in different ways. Soft skills are more about a person’s character, positionality and identity. Hard skills are perhaps more tangible. I also consider the framework in relation to my own learning, and the ways I might demonstrate the attributes in my practice.

Reflecting on group tutorials during which I felt my limited knowledge of the heat press process negatively impacted my ability to provide practical advice to students I took part in an induction in the print workshop at CSM. Above are some of the prints I made on fabric to explore the process. Making these prints has given me a basic understanding of the process and I am now in a better position to advise students on this specific technique of textiles printing.

OBL as an academic discipline in art and design is an area that I am interested in to synthesise creative practice and pedagogy. Judy Willcocks and her colleagues presented information in a cross programme event on UAL’s archive that sparked this interest.

Key words: language, experiential learning, haptic knowledge, unconscious bias, empathy.

Two frameworks for research prompted me to consider approaches to synchronous , asynchronous, live and digital teaching and learning, and how I might integrate or use different frameworks that align with constructive alignment.

Framework 1: ‘expert’ in the room places teacher/facilitator in a position of power; is subject specific; uses visual analysis. Framework 2: employs material and cultural analysis; emotional positionality; visual analysis; meaning making with material culture.

From the exercise I was asked to participate in I found that I was most able to form a connection with the object in my hand (Fanta bottle; I was slightly less able to connect with an object from UAL archive that allowed me to view it from various angles; I felt more limited in my respond to objects that were presented as still images despite the written information attached. I considered how my prior knowledge, experiences, heritage and identity informed my responses. How does unconscious bias inform others’ responses to objects I present and make?

Considering Gillian Rose’s four ‘sites of seeing’ encouraged me to broaden my understanding of how I and my students might see and experience objects.

Key questions:

How does sense of self, the positionality of the maker and viewer inform our responses?

What are the implications of ‘interlectual property’ and how does this inform responses to the images and objects we see and make.

How do digitial platforms shape/influence that way we make and see?

How do we use mobile technology in the making process and audience engagement?

We hold a greater degree of autonomy as artists in the 21st Century due to digital platforms that allow direct access to global audiences. These ideas link to research by Michelle Salamon who devised ‘Drawing Laboratory’, a series of workshops to exploring associations between the physical act of drawing, and the encoding and retrieval processes of human memory. It seems to me that memory is another form of seeing relating to Rose’s ‘site of audiencing’. The research was interesting because participants were asked not to use their mobile phones during the activities.

References: Rose, G. (2001) Visual Methodologies – An Introduction to the Interpretation of Visual Materials. Sage

Salamon, M (2015) ‘Drawing Laboratory’, Spark Journal, 2018, Volume 3, Issue 2

Further Reading:

Kador and Chatterjee (Eds). (2020) Object-Based Learning and Well Being. London: Routledge

Willcocks and Green, ‘Exploring the archive: Live projects in a post graduate learning setting. Spark Journal, 2019, Volume 4, Issue 1. Available at https://sparkjournal.arts.ac.uk/index.php/spark/article/view/114/217