February 2023 – thinking thoughts academic practice

‘good’ learning

I was finally able to attend an in-person session, despite the challenges of landslips on the train line and a 2.5-hour commute rather than 55 mins!

notions of criticality

In preparation for this session I read Macfarlane, Teaching with Integrity and was immediately surprised by the comment that ‘the notion of criticality has rarely been systematically and rigorously applied to teaching practice in university education’, – the idea of criticality is an integral part of what we expect our students to demonstrate on the MA in Design Management and I was surprised to read that, in his opinion, this has not been brought to reflective academic practice systemically.

As someone whose undergraduate degree was in Politics and History (admittedly many moons ago) the notion of criticality is so embedded in my thinking it is more about who I am not what I do! I’m not sure I can think in any other way…

evaluating learning

Further, into the text Macfarlane discusses that ‘lecturer performance and student performance are not necessarily synonymous’. I found this a thought-provoking concept and I am unsure how you start to disentangle the two and note that Macfarlane doesn’t really expand upon this either.

Throughout most of 2022 I was fortunate enough to have a student from the MA DM course, work with me as an intern on a challenging consultancy project around redesigning work for a large global publishing group, I had mentored her through her thesis and was aware that her skill set and personal attributes could add value to the work. It was a great learning experience for both of us. For me, I could see the value of the studies she had undertaken in a ‘real world’ context, and also identify where the gaps may have been in her learning and understanding which could inform my curriculum design.

It enabled me to see where the student had internalised concepts and was easily integrating this into how we practiced and where there were gaps in understanding and/or application of knowledge. In this respect, I was looking at ‘student performance’ in a different context which was illuminating.

Therefore, when Macfarlane discusses SEQs and the need for a variety of tools to evaluate the quality of teaching this really resonated with me. I strongly feel that the real value from the MADM course evolves and emerges as students gain professional/practice experience post-graduation – clearly this will depend on which role, sector, and tasks they undertake.

Whilst LCC may do evaluations post-graduation, as a lecturer on the course I have never had sight of any of this feedback and/or understand how it feeds into curriculum design and iterating our teaching and student needs. This is further supported when Macfarlane comments that higher education is a complex service, moving away from it being a ‘consumer-based service and one that you can only evaluate the value and experience some years after graduation’.

‘We are not transmitting knowledge, we are supporting learning’ writes Gill Aitken, director of post-graduate education at Edinburgh University. This aligns with Macfarlane’s comments that we should ‘challenge students to re-examine their own knowledge base rather than simply transferring information uncritically’

Graham Barton and Judy Wilkins state that ‘one of the central assumptions of learning development is that learning is often more than the simple acquisition of new knowledge and skills, with the potential for transformations in perceptions, values and beliefs’. Whilst we do undertake assessment of learning in the short term via a range of methods such as assignments, I do feel that assessing whether a ‘transformation’ has taken place may require distance and space from the actual learning process. Which led me to think about where does the value sit in the course and learning for my students? I feel like I make assumptions about this without real insight…

The UK Framework for Programme Reviews (2022) sets out to give some definition around quality and value in response to the OfS focus on courses deemed ‘low quality’ and recognise the risk that ‘regulation and funding decisions based only on narrow graduate outcome measures will harm courses that support levelling up, improve social mobility and deliver student choice’

I would be interested in exploring this further with students who are alumni of the course, or exploring with my course leader how we assess value on our course, how we are measuring and understanding value.

My thoughts are unclear on this at the moment however in terms of input to curriculum design it feels important to understand where the ‘value’ sits for our students in our course. Moreover, it could assist me when I am interviewing prospective students, I don’t really have a clear view on how I can discuss this topic with them when asked that question. I can talk about student progression in a functional way i.e. job roles, which organisations they may be working in, but not really communicate where the real value has come in the course which I would hope is wider than job role or earnings.

https://www.timeshighereducation.com/campus/designing-postgraduate-education-means-sharing-and-developing-academic-and-professional

https://sparkjournal.arts.ac.uk/index.php/spark/article/view/75/129

https://www.universitiesuk.ac.uk/sites/default/files/field/downloads/2022-01/uuk-framework-for-programme-reviews.pdf

thinking through drawing

Thinking through drawing….

I’m a big fan of visual frameworks for aligning, problem-solving, and enabling different points of view, `I use them all the time in my practice workshops and designing consultancy projects

In a deliberate attempt to develop new skills, I attended the Thinking through Drawing workshop with Ilga Leimanis FHEA . From a teaching point of view I wanted to attend a workshop that is totally different to anything I currently teach myself to see what learnings I may have for my own practice.

Ilga’s view is that too often we think of an idea and try to draw it, this keeps our thinking in the rational side of our brains. To unlock alternative thinking she advised we need to try not to think.. just do (it all sounds very Jedi) and see what emerges

As you can see I’ll never have a career in illustration (!) but accessing a different part of my brain around one of my work topics on the future of work design was enlightening and indeed gave me alternative thoughts on how to talk about tackling it.

the workshop

The workshop was online with approx 12 attendees. The steps that Ilga took us through reduced my worries about being able to draw, she made it very clear that the workshop was not about drawing ‘skills’ but about thinking and unlocking thinking. We worked individually for an hour or so as she guided us through various stages which involved inputs of words to help us iterate and develop our thinking, laddering through ideas.

We then moved to Padlet where we shared content, talked through our work and how we found the experience, Ilga then offered ideas and thoughts on how to develop the work further, in my case that meant not using so many words but perhaps using shapes in their place.

reflections

Ilga’s tone was measured, thoughtful and encouraging. This encouraged a relaxed learning environment where I felt confident to explore and less worried about comparing my output to the other attendees (all of whom seemed to be from either illustration or fine art courses!). I hope I deliver an encouraging learning context for my students but I do feel I sometimes rush through content, I would like to bring more ‘breathing space’ into the teaching I do, more reflection, and ‘ease’. This relates also to my other blog post on learning environments and time to think.
Ilga runs this workshop often and her use of the technology and smoothness with which that worked was evident, this in turn ensured she was relaxed. Her expertise in this topic was clear – a reminder of the benefit of testing tech and smooth transitions between tools used
At the end was a link to a very simple questionnaire to understand what value we had taken from the workshop – I would like to test using a simple Typeform survey at the end of some of my teaching sessions or perhaps a more engaging, playful way of getting feedback.

I’m keen to encourage my students to attend this workshop or perhaps use this technique when planning teaching to see what options it unlocks

Micro-teaching reflection

“Object-based learning (OBL) is an experiential pedagogy concerned with the close and tactile study of material things, such as artworks, specimens, texts and artifacts… Like its historical antecedents, object lessons and object teaching, contemporary OBL practice draws its strength from the power of sensory experience.”(Barlow, 2017, p.27)
Barlow, 2017, p.27

first thoughts

On reading the Moodle brief for this exercise I had three immediate questions

1. what is object-based learning and why have I never heard of it before?
2. what constitutes an object in this context?
3. how could this be relevant to the course I work on?

As someone who feels the need to ‘ground’ concepts and make them relevant and meaningful, I needed to clearly understand in my head what a potential outcome might be from an object-based teaching session and I was struggling to see an outcome. In my professional practice, I work with organisations where the workshops I run are very outcome oriented and I’m learning that there is a mindset shift for me to make with regard to the difference between commercial facilitation and higher education teaching.

unlocking an approach

I read an article by Dr Francesca Baseby on Edinburgh Universities ‘Teaching Matters’ blog that offered a moment of clarity on how to structure the session and how an object could be used. Dr Baseby comments that ‘it is about looking beyond the object as a container of information (whether textual or graphic) and considering what its physicality can tell us about the context in which it was created, consumed and preserved’.

I decided to structure the micro-teaching as if the audience were students on my course. The idea was to teach how objects can be another way of helping them think differently about inquiry and design insights, this would be as part of the Design Management Research and Critical Practice unit.

Approaching it in this way meant that the object did not need to be connected to any particular topic – it needed to pique curiosity, prompt questions and then help the students stretch their considerations of what ‘research’ may consist of and encourage them to think about how to use objects in their own contextual research or as inspiration starting points.

The core thought: when we do research, we often have a linear process, starting with data gathering through to insight, inspiration and leading to a designed outcome, I wanted to explore ‘if we start with the designed outcome and think backward, what different conversations or insights might we open’?

My intention was for the students to learn one way of using an object in their research approach, to reflect on the usefulness of this technique, and to stretch their perceptions of what research might be.

designing the teaching session

My core design principles were as follows:

have clear learning objectives
give context
assess the learning from the group
choose an object to pique curiosity and create conversation to give a sense of fun and energy in the room.
I am interested in the idea of playfulness in higher education as based on Lisa Forbes’s work and her findings that ‘play is under-utilised and devalued in higher education, and the idea of play seems to intuitively connect to object-based learning
https://jtl.uwindsor.ca/index.php/jtl/article/view/6515/5264
keep the content simple.
I watched the UAL Thinking Learning video on Sweller’s work on cognitive load and whilst I always aim to keep content simple I sometimes feel I overload with detail
https://ual.cloud.panopto.eu/Panopto/Pages/Viewer.aspx?id=e61926f0-70e7-489a-a4da-af960124573e

the object

the object

clarity and direction

I created a short PowerPoint deck to support the session as I wanted to be clear on the learning objectives, to ensure students understood what we were planning to do, and to give some context around how we do research and where this exercise might fit in that process.

I gave the session the name ‘Thinking Backwards’. Naming something can give identity, indicate purpose, and give meaning from the start, so I wanted to test if that was the case for this session.

To give some context I created one slide to demonstrate how we often approach research in a linear way, explaining we were going to use an object to reverse that process and think from the outcome backward.

I then placed the object on the table. Without touching it I asked the students a simple open question “what do you think this is”?.

I was interested to see how the conversation progressed from only being able to view the object through to touch and a more sensorial engagement. So, I then invited the students to pick up the item, touch, feel, and build on their initial assessments, this created a different relationship with the object and we started to discuss what its purpose might be and what design inspiration may sit behind it

At this point I told them that the object was a product called The Ostrich Pillow, one student knew the object, but the others did not.

I then posed the following question to the group:

This opened up discussion around insights and human needs, and indeed expanded out into more considerations about work & society, and I captured the discussion using a mindmap technique

To assess learning I had a separate question, in all honesty, this felt like a slightly loose and unstructured way to assess learning or value. I felt I had rushed my thinking on how to assess the learning – I was so relieved to think of a way to use an object that I didn’t give the assessment process the attention deserved.

reflections / what I feel took place

I had some very insightful and useful feedback from my group, which was positively delivered and constructive, this feedback combined with my own reflections is synthesised below.

Overall the feedback indicated it was an immersive experience, partly from ‘teasing’ the item first, creating a lower-risk situation for exploration and conversation, and having a playful structure to the session. There was a sense of relaxation as no one knew what the object was and this seemed to have an equalising effect as the students built on each other’s guesses and suggestions and it seemed there was no risk in speaking up or participating. Additionally starting with an open question seemed to bring immediate contributions – the question was not based on students’ knowledge, simply a point of view.

I felt that starting with the learning objectives should help the group understand the purpose of the session and this clarity of aims and objectives was appreciated.

My concerns about assessing learning were realised, in that we ran out of time to address the final question, and feedback from the group indicated bringing this question forward would have been helpful. Finishing with a summary or key takeaways would have rounded off the learning effectively in place of exploring the final question.

Additionally, clarification on some terminology would have been helpful, I had felt this might be a concern and had included an image to help with the understanding of the research process which the group felt had been useful.

The object analysis did seem to open up both specific design considerations with regards to what human needs may have led to its creation, and also a more wide-ranging discussion on societal expectations of the culture of work, why a product such as this may be needed, and what that means for society?

what to do with this learning?

My key takeouts would be

building on the idea of play to de-risk learning, and to encourage more equal participation
continuing to simplify using visual language for concepts in line with theories on cognitive load
always include learning objectives at the start of each teaching session
further consideration on how to build assessment of the learning objectives a session into the design of the learning activity
with more time I would ask students to capture their own thoughts but in the interests of time I participated as a facilitator of the discussion as shown below.

mountains and new beginnings

16^th January

Attended my first PGCert intro session whilst sitting in the French Alps on a family holiday, not for the first time I reflected on the impact of the seismic shift to remote working and learning, how it has both enabled balance of life and work and simultaneously brought other challenges around setting boundaries and not being constantly available.

It felt almost luxurious to have 3 hours of reflective practice, and my first thought at the end of the workshop, as I looked out at the snow and my different surroundings, was how had this different environment influenced my ability to process, learn and engage with the content of the session. I had felt relaxed, engaged and open to listening and learning from others.

We know that the digital / metaverse / phygital world provides many options for new blended learning experiences, however the reality is that I teach again in an uninspiring room, in a building not fit for purpose, and with the physical restrictions of tables, room layouts, etc.

How can this type of space stretch thinking, and inspire creativity and reflection?

Having recently visited my son’s new university with a £25m investment in a new engineering building, all the staff enthusiastically and excitedly talked about the design thinking behind the new building, the labs and how the lecture rooms have been designed to encourage group work, focus and healthy learning environments.

I have worked in the design of retail space and am a co-founder of a creative co-working space outside of London where we took inspiration from the writing of Nancy Kline in Time to Think and the Ten Components of a Thinking Environment to create an effective working environment.

With reference to Place, Nancy Kline says

Producing a physical environment – the room, the listener, your body – that says, ‘You matter’. When the physical environment affirms our importance, we think more clearly and boldly. When our bodies are cared for and respected, our thinking improves.

Thinking Environments are places that say back to people, ‘You matter.’ People think at their best when they notice that the place reflects their value to the people there and to the event. And because the first place of thinking is the body, it needs to be in a condition that says to us as thinkers, ‘You matter’.

In these ways, Place is a silent form of appreciation.

The question of how does the space at LCC say to our students ‘you matter’ is an interesting one. In the meantime how am I managing the space we have and myself within it to reinforce a message that my students ‘matter’? What can I do with the space that I have and the restrictions of that …

Shelia Ball takes Kline’s ideas and questions ‘in what ways does Kline’s Thinking Environment create the conditions for developing equity? What are the implications for education policy and practice?’ This got me thinking about power structures and the development of teaching spaces.

Further explorations around this topic in connection with academic environments brough up a Spark Journal article ‘A journey around my classroom: the psychogeography of learning spaces’ – the term psychogeography was new to me and the focus of one of the presentations in the workshop this morning. In this article the writers pose the following question

‘If it is common practice in art and design subjects to create a non-hierarchical relationship between students and staff, why are we still looking for the educator who supposedly holds all the knowledge and stands at the front of the room?’

I’m interested to think about this further, how in my own practice I can think about both the use of space in terms of a learning environment and connected with that how the use of space can contribute to a non-hierarchical relationship between myself and students. This is particularly interesting for me in my role as an AL – I often feel that as an AL I am engaged with the university for my content knowledge and less for my teaching and learning expertise. Therefore students do not tend to challenge or perhaps I am too directional in the way I approach topics.

Further exploration of this topic led me to a book called Bernstein, B. (2000) Pedagogy, symbolic control and identity: Theory, research and critique (Rev. ed). Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield, it appears this is available in the LCC library so note to self to pop in next time I’m at LCC and take a look

So.. in my efforts to bring small changes, this week I used music, playing the song Lovely Day by Bill Withers as the students entered the room – I could sense a slight surprise and a lightness in the room and environment as students filed in and connected differently with both myself and one another. It helped that the sun was out and the sky was blue! Reminiscent of my week in the Mountains before.

Definition of Psychogeography

Psychogeography is the study of specific effects of the geographical environment, consciously organized or not, on the emotions and behaviour of individuals. (Debord, 1955

The Ten Components

https://www.timetothink.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/12/literature-review-s-ball.pdf

https://ualresearchonline.arts.ac.uk/id/eprint/10341/1/25-178-1-PB.pdf

Debord, G. (1955) ‘Introduction to a critique of urban geography’, in Knabb, K. (ed.) (1981) Situationist International Anthology. Oakland: Bureau of Public Secrets