Three things I learnt:
- Policy – climate justice – how can I better use this in my classes with international students?
- My cohort of international students. How ethical is it to enrol large cohorts of students who may not be fully prepared to study in the UK? Considering this in terms of language skill and familiarity with the teaching and learning environment, the main group I teach are from China. However, I also teach students from around the world with the main groups coming to Language Development from some of the following countries: Korea, Taiwan, Japan, Thailand. Some of these students also work whilst here and so how is this considered and supported?
- Policy – social justice – is it really possible given the monetisation of institutions that those with less opportunity to participate in further and higher education can overcome the challenges this brings when studying. As many in this position are also working, have care duties or other responsibilities outside of study that create challenging barriers to overcome. Has the university considered offering bursaries for international students as well as home students? Not all, although many do, international students come from wealthy backgrounds.
Whilst the above are three stand out take-aways from the session I also learnt the difference between policy, framework, strategy, principle and guidance. Many of the discussions involved looking at the many and various universities policies, frameworks, strategies, principle and guidance. As teachers and those facilitating education I feel we are often left bewildered as to how much of this can be reinterpreted and delivered or facilitated in the spaces where we interact and teach. The session also gave a stark reminder of how within my current role as a Language Development tutor teaching mainly pre-undergraduate students, that despite teaching for 10 years at UAL I feel that my role does not empower me effectively to be able to facilitate many of the above for students. Given the large numbers of students enrolled who do not always have adequate linguistic and literacy skills in order to study at pre-undergraduate or undergraduate level it is unsurprising that my role faces such challenges.
The session also took me back to my own learning experience of FE and HE. After ‘A’ levels, I did a Foundation in Art and Design and then a HND Graphic Design. Coming from a single parent working class family (my Mum was a nurse and then later trained to be a midwife whilst I was doing my A levels) this meant I worked throughout. At that time I was also at the tail end of the grant system in the UK meaning my circumstances meant I could apply for more funds to pay for fees, accommodation and living costs. Nevertheless the challenge of having enough money to support my studies whilst fitting in my coursework was a constant. Remembering those times was a reminder of how difficult it can be for students who may be struggling to study and balance different commitments.
From my perspective, and it could be seen as a pessimistic view, in the last 30 years or so, whilst there has been progress in terms of the values of an institution, little has perhaps changed ethically. As Geilen & van Hausden (2011) highlighted in referring to the interview between Geilen and Sennett ‘the importance of community and collaboration in education’ cannot be understated. However, many of those students enrolled who are part of the international cohort come from a teaching and learning background that ‘prioritizes individual achievement’ (ibid, 2011). I wonder how all of this is considered within current UAL 2022 – 2032 strategy where the international cohort are no longer specifically referred to instead in Guiding Policy 1 it reads as follows:
‘Our changed curriculum will not just be designed for students, but with them, too. Our students want more choice and more control over the way they learn. And they want a wider curriculum that is representative of culture and identity with insights from non-Western cultures. We will work with them to deliver this and are already doing so.’ (UAL, 2024)
How can this practically work with international students who are from cultures that may be unaccustomed to choosing how they want to be educated and how they learn? Students who are often used to a didactic teaching style, who are used to being given the tools to achieve and pass coursework or exams, who can be under intense pressure to perform from family, who may be embarrassed to speak up in public in case they make a mistake in another language, who are living in a completely new teaching and learning environment with unfamiliar and (for them at times) unquantifiable outcomes. In saying this I do not want to ‘other’ my students but rather learn from them, understand, facilitate, support and guide so that the teaching and learning experience for all is a positive one. As bell hooks said ‘When everyone in the classroom, teacher and students, recognizes that they are responsible for creating a learning community of learning is at its most meaningful and useful’ (hooks, 2010: 11). How can we learn to recognise our responsibilities? How can we foster a learning community as we consolidate the challenges faced navigating through strategy and policy? These questions and more are ones I hope to answer as I discover more about the values and ethics of teaching within art, design and HE.
References:
hooks, b (2010) Teaching Critical Thinking: Practical Wisdom. Routledge, New York. (pp. 7 – 11).
Geilen & van Hausden (2011) A Plea for Communalist Teaching: Summary
UAL (2024). Guiding Policy 1 Our strategy 2022 – 2023. Available at: https://www.arts.ac.uk/about-ual/strategy-and-governance/strategy/guiding-policy-1 (Accessed: 2nd March, 2023)