Permission to be human!

The inspiration for this blog (and the title!) has come from the seminar on Feedback, the prereading and my subsequent reflection on the topic…

There was certainly a lot of food for thought in the material and group discussion that followed, but one point that kept on coming to the surface for me was this notion around perfection. In the recording ‘Preforming to an invisible audience’, Hattie Walker touches on this subject very directly in both her tips and summary at the end:  

  • “Mistakes can make you real and approachable”
  • “Don’t’ over think mistakes… perfection can be a barrier to communication”
  • “Don’t try to make it perfect, there is enough that is false about performing online”
Image created by: Sarita Wilkinson

Points of which are all true and deep down we know all of this, but it doesn’t stop the pressure of perfection manifesting in some form through our work as tutors. It made me question – why are we so fearful of making mistakes, when we know perfection itself can actually form a barrier?

But where does this pressure for perfection really come from? Reflecting on my personal experience since joining UAL just over a year ago, I can certainly say the pressure for perfection that I sometime feel doesn’t come from my fellow tutors on the course, they are extremely supportive and encouraging. It doesn’t even really come from the students, even though they do sometimes look to you as being the ‘all knowing’!

So really this ideal of perfection come from within? Somewhere, somehow, we put this unrealistic pressure on ourselves that we should know every single thing within our specialism and deliver it to-a-tee. I see it as less as a fault in human nature and more in a desire to be good at what you do – there is nothing wrong with that surely? However, the significance of this topic for me has been in openly acknowledging how crippling personal pressures of perfection can be; and since this seminar I’ve be more conscious of my own inner-critique and have started to go a bit easier on myself when things haven’t gone exactly to plan – and more recently, laugh about them afterwards, instead of agonising about them for days on end! This turned into being a bit of a therapy week!    

I do feel like the sudden switch to teaching online has exacerbated this inner pressure of perfection – not just for tutors, but I have seen it starting to manifest slowly within my students too. Even in more casual and informal tutorials and forums, students often come along with quite polished digital pages of work and go on to ‘present’ them, rather than just share their work-in-progress. The time and effort they have put into doing this, has on occasion led to some resistance to change or develop concepts or details – maybe they feel too much has been ‘invested’ already to change?

As an endnote to this blog, we really need to give ourselves permission to be human and make mistakes; those little imperfections can actually help us connect better with our students and ultimately lead to better student learning experience. 

Reflection on: Love, Care and Belonging

Following the reading of Bell Hooks introduction chapter from All about Love, I’ve selected a series of passages from the text that particularly stood out to me, adding my thoughts, reflections and questions in relation to my own teaching experiences.

Image created by: Sarita Wilkinson

‘Anchors to keep me afloat’ – The idea of something to “anchor” you and bring you back to a safe place feels really significant. What could an “anchor” be for students? A person (tutor, your peers)? An ethos (of the course)? A physical space (studio)? This anchor feels even more significant since switching to online teaching and learning – how does that anchor manifest in the digital space as well as the physical space? How do we turn a digital space into a place? An anchor could also help to create a sense of belonging for students both within their student cohort, and also as a creative on their course of study.

‘Whenever I passed this site, the affirmation of love’s possibility sprawling across the block gave me hope’ – The role of affirmations to provide support and encouragement; how could we introduce daily micro-affirmations for students? I have recently heard students requesting more firm and critical feedback from tutors; how do we balance this out with affirmations, so we don’t go too much one way of the other (mislead students into a false sense of security or demotivate them)? Hooks uses the example of Art to suggest that sharing of affirmations can be affective. How could this be recreated for a year group of students? Does it need to be physical? Is there something special in the discovery of affirmations? One important aspect to consider is different cultures & languages, and their understanding / interpretation of affirmations intended for the whole cohort.

‘Raising a generation of young people who will grow afraid to love, afraid to give themselves completely to another person, because they will have seen how much it hurts to take the risk of loving and have it not work out… intimacy without risk’ – Fear of failure and rejection – this is something I’ve seen a lot, especially in final year students.  How can we give students ‘freedom to fail’ and become more resilient? How can we get them to be risk-takers, and show that failure and risk is part of the learning experience? In this sense there is a paradox when thinking about ‘perfection’ and ‘failure’ in education. Perfection is often seen as desirable, something to strive to, but actually it can become a barrier to creativity and to learning; whereas failure (once we accept it and feel the freedom of it) can actually form an enabler to creativity and to learning. How well do we communicate this to our students and give them the tools to navigate this complexity?

‘Female sexist thinking may lead a woman to feel she already know what another women will say. Such a reader may feel that she has more to gain by reading what men have to say – The danger of making assumptions! Experiences are individual, you can’t assume you understand the thoughts and feelings of another just because you are similar to another (i.e gender, culture, age, etc.). Considering this within the context of the student experience, how are students making assumptions about aspects of their learning experience based on their peers and previous student experiences? How is this affecting their overall perceptions of a course? And are these assumptions creating barriers to the learning?  There certainly seems like an opportunity at key points within an academic year to workshop with students about their experiences as individuals and as a cohort; getting them to identify and talk about shared experiences versus those that may be unique to them and their own personal situation. Could this be a way to help break assumptions and also build empathy with one another?

Deep and Surface Learning…

At the start of the PgCert I began reading Teaching for Quality Learning at University by John Biggs & Catherine Tang, the first part of which looks at effective teaching and learning for today’s universities. It was really intriguing to read the diversity in student approaches and attitudes to learning, mindsets & abilities, and academic orientation & commitment. It made me reflect on my own student cohort and I could instantly see a selection of those traits in some of my students.

Biggs and Tang essentially spits student types into two categories: the “Susan’s” and the “Robert’s”, which relates to the two different approaches to learning, deep versus surface.

Fig.1 How to get Robert to dive deeper, Created by: Sarita Wilkinson

Just to summarise…

  • Susan (deep approach) – academically committed, reflects on the personal significance of what she has leaned. Is motivated, knowledgeable and actively learning. Susan hardly needs teaching.
  • Robert (surface approach) – has very different motivations for being at university, his are to get qualifications to get a good job and ultimately financial gain. He only wants to put in sufficient effort to achieve this. He will need help to reach acceptable levels of achievement. He doesn’t respond to teaching methods that work for Susan.

How to get Robert to dive in deeper?

The text pointed to the fact that students like Robert are in high proportions in todays’ classes, and poses the challenge of: How to teach “Roberts” so that they learn more in the manner of Susan? Or, as I’ve rephrased it… How to get Robert to dive in deeper? Several months on from reading this text and nearly at the end of the first Unit, I’m still really intrigued by this though. From my virtual and real-world classroom observations, I feel like there are a lot more dimensions and factors influencing a student’s ability, mindset and motivation to learn.

Fig.2 Factors effecting learning, Created by: Sarita Wilkinson

In Fig.2 I have summarised my initial thoughts around some areas I hope to unpack further through the PgCert and beyond, along with a list of factors that I’ve initially identified as influencing student’s learning. If the ultimate goal is to get Robert thinking and operating in the same manner as Susan, then at the heart of this is creating a behaviour change in Robert to so that he is questioning, interpreting & reflecting on what is being taught.

But what needs to happen to elicit behavioural change? …creating deeper engagement? How do we encourage deeper engagement? …by exploring, defining & adapting learning and teaching approaches, methods & techniques to capture the attention of these diverse mindsets and attitudes.

But in order to trigger this chain reaction we need to better understand the factors influencing students learning behaviours in the first place. Drawing back to my initial list on Fig.2; for me these factors are a starting point of exploration, and in fact each area forms its own stream of inquiry. Here are some considerations for each based on my observations and experiences so far:  

Large year groups (90+):

  • The ability to quickly assess the learning approaches of students as they progress through each Stage of study. Could we create a simple metric to help guide this?
  • The ability of tutors to adapt between different teaching and learning approach in various student contact points (lectures, workshops, forums, tutorials, studio time).

Cultural nuances & language barriers:

  • The extent to which language barriers effect a student’s learning ability – are “things” literally lost in translation? How could we better utilise visuals, tangible examples and simple language to communicate complex theories?
  • Understand how students with English as a second language navigate their way through English education – what are their workarounds and how can we support these?

Neurodiversity:

  • Students with additional learning needs require different approaches based on those specific needs – how does this then overlay onto the deep and surface approach to learning that Biggs and Tang discuss?
  • What happens if Susan is autistic, or if Robert has dyslexia? How might that impact on the way we teach those students and their ability to learn? What workarounds have they adopted as part of their individual learning approach and how can we tap into these?

Sense of belonging & community:

  • A lack in ‘sense of belonging’ or lack of community within a cohort can have a direct impact on student engagement.
  • Celebration of student diversity is an initial area that comes to mind – not merely cultural diversity, or diversity in sexuality or even neurodiversity; but another layer of diversity that isn’t really discussed in depth is ‘creative diversity’, and more specific to my discipline, the line between art and product design.

Online teaching & learning:

  • A very topical area at the moment and one that we have all been thrusted into headfirst due to the pandemic! As tutors we have all experienced the challenges of student engagement through online learning, and even the mindset of students working from home (in bed, in their pyjamas) and how this impacts their learning.
  • Moving forwards post-Covid, what benefits of online learning can we take forwards to enhance the overall learning experience of students? Is online teaching and learning a barrier or an enabler for the likes of Robert?

Socio-economic & widening participation programme:

  • Another hugely influential and complex area that affects students learning is socio-economic factors (paid work commitments to part-fund course / living costs).
  • This can affect a student’s ability to engage with the programme of study; cost of materials required for a course; the sense of belonging with wider cohort, etc. What might this mean to Robert?

Mental health:

  • An extremely complex area to navigate through, but we know the impact of mental health on student’s ability to engage and learn.
  • While we have Student Services in place to support students with their mental health, how does this relate to the academic support we as tutors provide to students? Is there a slight disconnect between these areas of support?

So to conclude, while there are too many large and complex topics to tackle within the time and scope of the PgCert, I have identified two areas that require more immediate attention on the course I teach. And, these will form the basis of my deep dives into the next two units: Online teaching & learning (Unit B TEL), and Neurodiversity (Unit C SiP). It is quite likely that I will overlap into some of the other topics through my inquires, but I also see these as areas for continuous reflection and development as part of my general academic practice following the PgCert.  

Reflection on Micro-teaching Session

Image: Nike LeBron Soldier 8 FlyEase

Design of the session…

I based my micro-teaching session on an object/example that I had recently used within a lecture (the lecture I submitted for my tutor/peer observation); as after the lecture to my students I came away feeling that there were better ways of doing the object-based section to make it more interactive. The narrative around the example, Nike LeBron Soldier 8 FlyEase, is really important in delivering the message of human-centred design and inclusive design; however, I wanted to encourage the students to express their thoughts and assumptions around the trainer first, before I used the narrative to challenge their assumptions.

What happened…

To address the areas of improvement I had identified in my reflection of the lecture, I designed the micro-teaching session to start with gathering the participant’s thoughts around the image of the object and used 4 key prompt questions visible next to the image to help trigger their thinking. The participants were given 4-minutes to write their thoughts onto a Padlet. I’d also posted the picture of the trainer and the questions into Padlet as well, so they didn’t have to flick back and forth between screens breaking their flow of thought. After the allotted time, I ran through the responses (which were as expected, focused predominantly on the aesthetics of the trainer and stereotypical perceptions of the wearer) and then proceeded to unravelling the narrative around the trainer, but this time focusing just on inclusive design. I ended my session with a rhetorical question: What does / should inclusive design look like? With the aim of reinforcing the point about inclusive design.

Image: Padlet page for micro-teaching session, Created by: Sarita Wilkinson

Feedback: “Good structure to the session.” My thoughts: I did feel like the structure was right too, however my pace was totally off! I unintentionally rushed through it and was left with 3-minutes spare at the end. I felt like I could have done this at a more gentle pace (as practiced!) and used the time to ask the participants additional questions when I introduced elements of the narrative – this would have engaged them in more conversation throughout the session rather than just at the beginning. For future lectures, I’m going to factor in more regular pause-points and bring in additional ways to engage the students in conversation – this will also help me with setting the pace.

Feedback: “Nice background information on the object after the exercise / Good storytelling, makes the content become more memorable / The storytelling reinforces the message you are communicating.” My thoughts: It was good to hear this feedback, I’ve been investing quite a lot of time and thought around the narratives within my lectures to create a build up to the key messages; with the aim of taking the students on an emotive journey to make the content more memorable.  

Feedback: “You could have reengaged the audience again at the end of the session with the question around inclusive design, by allowing people to respond with their thoughts before delivering your own, you had enough time at the end to do this…” My thoughts: I completely agree with this, it was a bit of a missed opportunity to reengage the audience in conversation and get their thoughts on the subject before I gave mine. For future session I’m really going to take this into account. It could also be a lot more impactful to do this at the end of the session to ‘complete the journey’ and end the student’s experience of that lecture on an active note.

Inspiration from my peer’s micro-teaching sessions…

Collective Colour Session (Erica Weide)

This was a really inspiring micro-teaching session for me, partly because I’m a CMF obsessive (colour, material, finish), but also due to the visual nature of it and the structure. It was wonderful how we were encouraged to get out of our seats and hunt around our homes for inspiration. I thought it was a great use of Padlet to upload our photos, in a far more visual way than I have seen it used for before. And the session ended well with everyone being invited to talk about a couple of their images. It was made quite exciting by the tasked being introduced in real-time and we just had to get on with it and upload things instantly! No chance to over think, no chance to edit – it was quite liberating. I can imagine students engaging with this really well – it’s something I want to try with my students!

How Can Music Influence Emotion? (Simone Watson)

This was a very hands-on and instinctive micro-teaching session, where we had to listen to a piece of music, share an emotion based on that music and then jump straight into creating a 3D object with things around us to represent that emotion. A lovely interactive and fast pace session that stripped out any thoughts of perfection and over thinking! Again, I found this really liberating to do; teaching and learning online has brought about a sense of formality around onscreen interactions which can be quite stifling. This session turned that feeling on its head and celebrated imperfection and benefits of thinking in 3D – something we are constantly trying to get our students to do by using sketch modelling as part of their development process. This is another activity I’m going to look at factoring into one of my student sessions soon!  

Both of these sessions had a fantastic interactive element that got you as an audience member either up off your seat or physically creating something. These formed refreshing and liberating alternative ways to the more traditional screen-based methods for online teaching and learning. I’m currently exploring ways to integrate these methods into my future lectures to make them more engaging and add that element of the unexpected for the students!

Understanding the meaning of “to-and-fro play” within the context of teaching and learning

Reflection on Monica Vilhauer’s – Understanding Art: The Play of Work and Spectator

Monica Vilhauer unpacks the meaning of Gadamer’s Ethics of Play, where the concept of ‘play’ is proposed as a key mechanism in ‘understanding’. Whilst reading this text I tried to reflect on what this means within the educational setting, selecting two areas from the chapter to explore further.  

“Artwork and spectator to be participants in a continuous to-and-fro play of presentation and recognition in which meaning is communicated, and a shared understanding of some subject matter takes place… the spectator plays a crucial interpretive role in what the meaning of the artwork is.”

Considering this passage within the context of teaching and learning, the ‘artwork’ becomes the teaching and content, and the ‘spectator’ becomes the student. The notion of ‘continuous to-and-fro play’ suggests a two-way dialogue between the tutor delivering lecture content and the student receiving the content. Rather than the tutor merely broadcasting out information and knowledge, the structure of the lecture (workshop or mode of delivery), should be designed in such a way as to allow and encourage the student to engage in a dialogue surrounding the content: Question, Interpret, Reflect.

This two-way dialogue implies that the spectator (the student) can achieve a better level of understanding of what is being communication (or taught). And in fact, engaging the student in this dialogue at key moments, is crucial in establishing their understanding of the content.

Questions this raises when reflecting on my own teaching methods:

  • In what ways can we better engage students in content during the lecture? (Rather than passively taking in information)
  • How may this differ between in-person teaching versus online-teaching? (Feel less connected to the students during online teaching)
  • Do we allow enough time within a lecture for students to pause – question, interpret and reflect on what they have just heard?     
  • How can we establish if students truly understand content that is being delivered at key moments? (During the lecture, after the lecture, 2-months on, etc.)

“Play has a life, essence, or spirit of its own that emerges from the players’ engagement in their to-and-fro rhythm… in the activity of playing, the players become absorbed in a dance of mutual responsiveness that takes on a unique pattern, and that it is that pattern of movement that becomes the meaning of the subject matter”

This section of the text refers to “Gadamer’s notion of play as an “event” [and] that it is a process whose character is fundamentally dynamic.” The words rhythm and dynamic resonated with me when considering ways of engaging students within this dialogue around content delivered – and in fact, questions the very term ‘content delivery’, which by very nature suggest a one-way motion (tutor delivering to student).

Maybe a more fitting term should be ‘exchange’, the act of giving and receiving (the to-and-fro of play). So, if the key to students’ understanding is engaging in a dialogue around knowledge – knowledge exchange – further reading of Vilhauer’s chapter suggests that it is crucial that this engagement is dynamic and possess a rhythm.

It certainly seems that there are some key components that are starting to be revealed for creating engagement within the knowledge exchange setting to achieve this to-and-fro play, raising again more questions to reflect upon:

  • How can we create a rhythm with a lectures & workshops?
  • How could we utilise the idea of a ‘repeated pattern’ to allow students to pause for thought, question, interpret and reflect what they are seeing and hearing?
  • How can we create a dynamism within lectures & workshops?
  • How can we introduce a change in pace through interactive components to incorporate ‘learn through doing’ and real-time engagement with content?

Despite this text initially being difficult to get into (a reread was necessary!) the clarity it has brought regarding the importance of to-and-fro play in understanding meaning has been extremely valuable, and has certainly created plenty of food-for-thought when designing lectures and workshops moving forwards.

Exploring the meaning of ‘social solidarity’ in higher education…

Reflection on John Holmwood text (Part 3)

This final instalment of the mini-blog series around John Holmwood’s chapter on Race and the Neoliberal University, briefly touches on the meaning of ‘social solidarity’ in higher education and further questions what this means within the wider context of ‘diversity’ as we know it today…

If the focus of social solidarity is the ‘interdependence between individuals in a society, which allows individuals to feel that they can enhance the lives of others’. And follows the core principle of ‘collective action founded on shared values and beliefs among different groups in society’; then within higher education the emphasis is surely about facilitating (or enabling) the cohesion of the cohort within the course community, and the wider university, so that they are working and moving together in the same direction based on the shared values of their course (and university).

Before really understanding how we can enhance social solidarity in higher education, we need to pause, step back and consider the wider context of ‘diversity’ within a student cohort. Race, age, sexuality, socio-economic background, approaches to learning (surface versus deep) and of course, neurodiversity – to name just a few…

Certainly, some large and multifaceted areas to consider when trying to create cohesion and ultimately foster a ‘sense of belonging’ within this micro-community. So, perhaps some initial step towards achieving this, or at least areas to consider as a starting point for further investigation:

  • Create a deeper understanding of the nuances of various types of diversity that may exists within higher education – the positives, the challenges, the opportunities.
  • Be open to adapting teaching and learning approaches to take into account these diversities – moving away from the ‘one-size fits all’, to more flexible and inclusive approaches.
  • Acknowledge that bringing together a diverse cohort should also be about providing a platform for individuals to celebrating their own uniqueness and the diversity of their fellow students – bringing new, fresh and unique viewpoints for the benefit of all.

Viewpoint on ‘justification for some people earning more than others’…

Reflection on John Holmwood text (Part 2)

The second instalment of this mini-blog series around John Holmwood’s chapter on Race and the Neoliberal University, speculates on possible justifications for some people earning more than others in relation to achieving higher education qualifications.

Part 1 of this reflective series touches on the monetary focus that is now being place on higher education in light of the Neoliberal model; and the challenges that arise in managing student expectations around responsibility for academic success. However, this topic transcends academia, entering into the professional arena. Fast forward 4+ years to the post-grad working world…

If the emphasis now (and moving forward in the Neoliberal model) is that: “Students should regard their education as an investment in human capital with an eye to its returns in the labour market…” then it would be of no surprise to hear the opinions and expectations of some students lean towards the feeling that they should (or in some cases, have the right to) earn more than others.

This notion of ‘investing in your future’ was also discussed in James Wisdom’s lecture on The Context of UK Higher Education 2021 – where James suggested repositioning students’ sense of ‘value’ from current experiences during studies, to the idea of ‘future value’ of their studies impacting on future employment and earnings. This aligns to some issues raised in Holmwood’s chapter; however, Holmwood also highlights “the paradox of neoliberal credentialism” suggesting there are some perceptions that, gaining higher education qualifications are “necessary for any job beyond those paying the minimum wage” and that the place of study can be considered as important as the degree in some cases.

But there is another side of the argument that should be considered here, in that, higher education isn’t accessible to all. Holmwood’s text talks about the decline in proportion of students supported by scholarships, and an increase in students from more wealthy backgrounds who are able to self-finance.

In this sense the idea of ‘investing in ones’ future through higher education’ is not a view that is inclusive to all; but instead, is more exclusive and reserved for those who are in a position to defer earning a salary for three (or more) years while also paying rising fees and the associated living costs.  The juxtaposition between ‘desire’ of people to invest in their future (or that of their children) and the ‘means’ to do so, puts a spotlight on the continuing selective nature and socio-economic inequality of the Neoliberal university.

To what extent are individuals personally responsible for their success?

Reflection on John Holmwood text (Part 1)

This first instalment of a three-part mini-blog series takes a look at John Holmwood’s chapter on Race and the Neoliberal University; reflecting on ideas and perceptions around the extent to which individuals are personally responsibility for their success.

The shift towards a neoliberal model puts a ‘monetary focus’ on higher education for students (and their families who may be fully or part-funding them); some of whom are now scrutinising their course of study in terms of ‘what they are getting’: contact hours, number of lectures, tutorials, forums, studio time, workshop time, etc. This has led to some students openly question: “Am I getting value for money?”  This behaviour of quantifying (and justifying) every aspect of their experience in the present moment, without considering the future value, appears to be leading to unrealistic expectations.

The application of this ‘monetary focus’ to higher education suggests that some students (and their families) feel that the responsibility for their academic success lies predominantly with the university and more specifically, the course and course team. But surely both individuals and universities share the responsibility for a student’s success…

University – by providing a broad and rich curriculum; creating a high-quality teaching and learning environment that drives students to want to engage; and providing the sufficient amounts teaching support.

Student – by fully participating with the programmed teaching and learning activities; engaging at a ‘deeper’ level by questioning, interpreting, reflecting; and operating with the autonomy that is required for their level of study (levels 4, 5, 6).

While these points may set out an ‘idealistic state’, this topic suggests the need for carefully considered and clearly communicated ‘expectation setting’ for students. Delivered by the course of study at key moments in their higher education journey; not just prior to starting in higher education, but also at each stage of progression throughout the course.

Reflection on “perceptions of value”

Follow-up #1: Reflect

Reflection on issues discussed by speaker (James Wisdom)

I’m fairly new to teaching, prior to my post in March 2020 (yes, right at the start of the first lockdown), I’ve worked on and off at CSM as an Associate Lecturer whist also working in the industry. Up until recently I hadn’t really considered the wider context of HE, notably the political context and the impact on future of education. I found James’s lecture really insightful in providing a view into this wider context and plenty of ‘food for thought’.

The discussion around student’s perception of “value for money” was of particular interest as this has come up a few times in staff discussion on our course; how some students are quantifying the course (and their experience) against how much they are paying – number of lectures, number of tutorials, forums, studio time, workshop time, etc. James mentioned that ‘students were viewing “value” based on their current experience, rather than the impact to their future employment and earnings’ – leading to the question of how do we get students to consider their experience at university as “future value”?

Student experience, expectations and how this relates to perceptions of “value” and how students learn is an area that I would like to unpack more. How can we shift perceptions? How can we set realistic expectations at the start of each Stage? How can we enhance the student experience with the current challenges we face – blended learning, working in isolation, large year groups numbers, etc. Just a few big questions to end on (or start on)!