UAL policies – thinking thoughts academic practice

Inclusive Practices: Artefact

Inclusive Practices: Blog Link

Sam Barber Blog | Inclusive Practice

Inclusive Practices PG Cert | Artefact Reflection

This reflection is centered around a teaching intervention for the Collaborative Unit which is in the second term of the MA in Design Management (MADM) at LCC.

My approach to designing the artefact was to:

reflect on which elements of the Inclusive Practices (IP) unit have resonated with me most in terms of direct relevance to my teaching practice
identify an inflection point on the course where an artefact could bring a real immediate benefit to students’ learning
connect to my own personal areas of interest and connection, to bring authenticity behind why I have developed the artefact

ARTEFACT DESIGN STARTING POINTS

Reflect on which elements of the Inclusive Practices (IP) unit have resonated with me most in terms of direct relevance to my teaching practice

Engaging with Freire’s position in Pedagogy of the Oppressed (2006) gave me a starting point for the artefact design. The artefact is primarily situated in the key areas highlighted below on the adapted image of Pedagogy of Social Justice.

According to Tapper in the article ‘A Pedagogy of social justice education: social identity, theory and intersectionality’ he discussed that ‘students’ identities need to be considered in all educational settings’, this led me to consider an artefact that could give students the opportunity to share and reflect on their own individual identities, how this may impact their creative learning and their group identity.

I have placed the artefact in a unit on the course which is about collaborative working skills in design so a reflection on their group identity would be valuable. During a conversation with Sara Ekenger, Programme Lead for the MADM it was confirmed that there are 15 different nationalities, and a total of 22 languages spoken on the unit this year meaning a huge range of diversity and individual identities

A diagram of a diagram

Description automatically generated

Secondly, I wanted to explore an artefact that incorporates storytelling, we have seen many examples of this through the IP unit, for example text-based stories in Shades of Noir, Film by Christine Kum in the unit on disability and there is significant evidence that storytelling can promote inclusivity and be an enabler of effective working practice, it also underpins so many creative endeavours that it felt an appropriate area to explore.

“When people hear stories that feel representative, it creates a vehicle for nuanced conversations, which are what truly drive change. Stories invite perspective-taking: the concept of standing in someone else’s shoes and imagining what it’s like to be them”

Identify an inflection point on the course where an artefact could bring a real immediate benefit to students’ learning

I have placed the artefact in the second term of the course, students know each other better and have a more established relationship with the staff members on the course. As a result, this may encourage more open and authentic conversations about key inclusivity issues.

Additionally, the students have had one term of living in a culture that is not their own and observing themselves differently in a new city, with new peers and friendships, and an unfamiliar cultural context. Their cognitive overload may have lessened, and they may be open to sharing to encourage better collaborative working.

connect to my own personal areas of interest and connection, to bring authenticity behind why I have developed the artefact

I have spent eight years of my adult life living and working in Southeast Asia, specifically Bangkok and Singapore, including undertaking postgraduate study whilst in Singapore. On the course I was the only non-Singaporean student and yet I was probably the most comfortable speaking up and engaging with tutors. I was very conscious of my own voice and my own positionality in that group, although I would not have had those specific words for it then. It was a situation where I was both in a minority and yet there was a slightly confusing power dynamic. Singapore systems operate within a strong colonial context and influence and as a white British woman I feel this conferred some type of power within that educational context.

I have had experiences whilst working in these countries where specific, intentional discussions around identity have led to strong working relationships and experiences where that has been overlooked and feel that is led to less connectivity and creative outcomes. In my experience where people are given a framework and process through which to communicate it can bring equity to share of voice and lead to more inclusive discussions.

I need to be mindful that whilst my experience has influenced my choice of artefact I cannot assume that because I have experienced working and living in another culture that their experience is the same but in reverse. It is not directly transferable. I am also aware that my experience was as a working professional, moving with my family and therefore had a completely different support system to many of the students on my course.

THE FINAL ARTEFACT

EVOLUTION OF THE ARTEFACT

Due to the structure of the MADM course and the limitations of my teaching schedule it was not possible for me to explore using this artefact with students, however I am viewing the artefact as a method through which to reflect on issues of inclusion and diversity woven throughout the Inclusive Practices unit of the PGCert.

I secured feedback from the following people to help me with designing it further:

Shani-Louise Osei tutorials
Conversation with Sara Ekenger regarding the cohort
Feedback from Romero Bryant (Unit Lead Collaborative Unit) on the initial artefact idea
Peers on the Inclusive Practices Unit PG Cert in our sharing session

Shani suggested thinking more about which areas of diversity and inclusion the artefact would be focused on, how the intervention genuinely addresses inequity in staff student hierarchy and how to create a safe space, and finally how would I measure the outcome.

Sara was able to give me insight into the cohort demographics

Romero recognised the opportunity for this intervention, he strongly supported the concept of storytelling and the proposed timings around this. He felt the framework idea was strong and he suggested:

“Perhaps we could tie this into the collaborative unit as part of contextualising their orientation into the UK and how they may have to adapt from former ways of doing things, before even diving into the heavy theories on this unit?”

Romero Bryan

These were all helpful and constructive challenges. Whilst I may not yet have addressed all of them, the process of consultation and challenge has without doubt enabled me to go back to the literature and reapply some different concepts to my practice in terms of designing this artefact.

THE REDESIGN

I considered the guidance around ‘assumptive acts of behaviour’ from Shades of Noir (2018) curriculum design and specifically created guidance in the artefact on how to engage with one another during this activity in response to the conversation with Shani on safe spaces.

I have encouraged the practice of active listening skills, however I do recognise this may take different forms for people with unseen disabilities, for example, according to the website Autism Speaks eye contact can be challenging and stating that eye contact is a sign that you are listening maybe exclusionary for people with autism or ADHD. I have personal experience of this from a previous workshop in a professional context where I outlined eye contact as an indicator of listening and was, quite rightly, gently challenged by a participant who had mild autism. A key learning moment for me!

I had originally designed a more directed outcome for the students which was a visual representation of their group identity. However, on reflection I have changed that to be more open (see slides above). This was in response to the reading on Retention & Attainment in Art & Design (2016) and specifically the concept of the Pedagogy of Ambiguity (which is included in my blog) recognising that there is ‘neither one correct end result nor one way to get there’. This connects into the staff/student power dynamic in the classroom, my role in this exercise is to support and create a safe space for discussion, by overly directing the outcome I could be inadvertently excluding particular students and hopefully enabling a more inclusive space for creativity.

Additionally, the article ‘The power of language or the language of power’ in Shades of Noir (2018) made me stop and think about the considerations around the language that might be used around these stories. We talk of having a cohort of all international students, which, in itself, is a term loaded with complexity and huge diversity. There could be significant differences in their proficiency in English, how comfortable they feel speaking publicly, they could be from a culture where they have been marginalised , have an unseen disability or are less comfortable with a culture of public sharing of backgrounds and personal perspectives.

It would be my role as a facilitator of the session to be mindful of this and take action to ensure students do not feel marginalised and excluded compared to students for who maybe more proficient in expressing themselves in English or more confident sharing in a public space. It is important that people are not forced into sharing personal details with which they are uncomfortable, and that the storytelling does not become performative. Setting clear boundaries and expectations is important, and to be clear that the ‘’purpose of storytelling is to strengthen and improve relationships, as opposed to proving how entertaining or vulnerable you can be’’

A key consideration from the peer sharing session was how to protect the students in their sharing, particularly independently of the classroom where I would be there to facilitate. This is an excellent point and again the setting of boundaries is essential, with mutually agreed boundaries put in place by the students.

CONCLUSION
This process has been an iterative one, starting with a clear structure around what I was hoping to achieve gave me direction, and the feedback process constructive and positive. One reflection is that the Inclusive Practices unit has added a layer of nuance, inclusivity and insight which I would not have had previously.

Reference list

Autism Speaks. (2015). Why is it so hard for someone with autism to make eye contact? | Autism Speaks. [online] Available at: https://www.autismspeaks.org/expert-opinion/why-it-so-hard-someone-autism-make-eye-contact [Accessed 28 Jul. 10AD].

Ekenger, S. (2023). CONVERSATION.

Finnigan, T. (2016). Retention and attainment in the disciplines: Art and Design. [online] Available at: https://s3.eu-west-2.amazonaws.com/assets.creode.advancehe-document-manager/documents/hea/private/ug_retention_and_attainment_in_art_and_design2_1568037344.pdf [Accessed 25 Jun. 2023].

Hahn Tapper, A.J. (2013). A Pedagogy of Social Justice Education: Social Identity Theory, Intersectionality, and Empowerment. Conflict Resolution Quarterly, 30(4), pp.411–445. doi:https://doi.org/10.1002/crq.21072.

Hiscock, C. (2018). Discourse: The Power of Language and Communication. [online] Shades Of Noir. Available at: https://shadesofnoir.org.uk/journals/discourse-the-power-of-language-and-communication/ [Accessed 4 Jul. 2023].

Rezvani, S. and Gordon, S.A. (2021). How Sharing Our Stories Builds Inclusion. [online] Harvard Business Review. Available at: https://hbr.org/2021/11/how-sharing-our-stories-builds-inclusion [Accessed 1 Jul. 2023].

Shades Of Noir. (2018). Curriculum Design. [online] Available at: https://shadesofnoir.org.uk/programmes/curriculum-design/ [Accessed 14 Jul. 2023].

THE Campus Learn, Share, Connect. (2023). Managing cognitive load for EAL – and all – students. [online] Available at: https://www.timeshighereducation.com/campus/managing-cognitive-load-eal-and-all-students.

www.practice-space.org. (2020). Resource 2: Making Storytelling Inclusive and Equitable | The Practice Space. [online] Available at: https://www.practice-space.org/storytelling_guide/resource-2-making-storytelling-inclusive-and-equitable/.

Inclusive Practices | DISABILITY

One key takeout for me in our opening session was how do we support students to feel they have agency? Agency is the “sense of having control over the action and outcomes of one’s life” and this was the core reflection for me as I navigated these resources….

Film by Christine Kum

Agency was evident in Film by Christine Kum and I can imagine using this resource to discuss how students can bring their own unique perspectives, talents and interests to their work. I think this is an inspiring resource to encourage boldness and also to find your own intepretation

Deaf Accessibility for Spoonies: Lessons from touring Eve and Mary are having coffee

This triggered a reflection that whilst we encourage students on my course to consider their own positionality, we don’t necessarily get them to consider the intersectionality of participants in their own research, particularly for final major projects. We often have students researching and designing for issues such as women’s health and I’m now conscious that we could do more to help them reflect on their research participants, who they wish to speak to and more thoughtful consideration of the research findings in relation to that intersectionality.

UAL Disability Services Web page

Reviewing this content highlighted to me that I personally have very little insight into any disabilities the students on my course have. The line between student confidentiality and understanding the disabilities in the cohort is unclear for me.

Does it matter that I don’t know? If my starting point is inclusivity is that enough to ensure my teaching practice will cover any ‘gaps’ in my knowledge of students lives and intersectionality?

I had recent experience with a student who was quite emotional after a teaching session, I had shared my own experience of working with a colleague with ADHD and how challenging both of us had found some of our interactions. The student had ADHD and some of the discussion had been quite triggering for her. In hindsight I could have highlighted this content more effectively even though her reaction was how positive she had found the discussion, it had still been an emotional situation for her.

Shades of Noir

On reviewing the terms of reference for Disability in SoN I discovered the Evolution of Disability models based on posts by Drake Music, it was a revelation that there are so many interpretations of disability from political, social and personal perspectives. I followed the link through to Drake Music where again the issue of language and terminology emerged,

“One of the biggest hurdles to achieving this is that, in talking about disability, people often get stuck on finding the “right language”. However, there isn’t 100% fixed, agreed or rubber-stamped good language”.

In terms of my practice, I have never really discussed with my colleagues how we reflect on our individual cohort and the needs they may have to ensure we give a cohesive and intentionally designed approach to develop our teaching practices around unseen and seen disability. It would be fascinating for us to discuss these models as a teaching group, what do we feel is most pertinent, how would we want to integrate these models into both our approach to students and in supporting student projects when they are exploring issues of design related to disability.

https://www.arts.ac.uk/students/student-services/disability-and-dyslexia
https://vimeo.com/31083172
https://www.huffpost.com/entry/confronting-the-whitewash_b_10574994?guccounter=1
https://issuu.com/shadesofnoir/docs/disabled_people
https://issuu.com/shadesofnoir/docs/disabled_people/18

‘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.