Jo McVey

‘Assessment – not just how well it is done but also what is gained from a session.’ This was written down in my notes from this the first face to face session with my group and our Friday cohort. It can be very telling to look back on notes and see what was written down as a significant point. This was one of the few notes I wrote as the session was full of enthusiastic lively discussion and debate being the first opportunity to meet in person. However, I think it a good start for this blog post as it resonates with me as to how we are ‘judged’ and how we ‘judge’. These words may seem extreme! Yet the teaching and learning landscape can encompass and reflect so many facets, who we are as educators and who our students are as learners. This comment was after a point in the discussion where we were talking about how a student is now seen more as the ‘customer’ with the student voice about their experience as paramount (Davies, 2012) and then how this reflects on your interactions with students.

When I consider my students I tend to consider their learning position in terms of the current zeitgeist (post Pandemic, climate change, culture wars, digital era etc…) and, as students coming into a new teaching and learning environment. So, within interactions how well I am doing can perhaps only be measured in surveys, which and as we joked are rarely filled out, or if feedback is taken at the end of a class/session. Yet as the ‘expert’ which often we are and in particular within formal assessment say, who is assessing who? I see it that if at least one student leaves the classroom/studio having gained something they weren’t aware of before they came into the room then there is an achievement for all, and even if they don’t hopefully there was at least some meaningful exchange!

Ice Breaker

The activity looking at quotes choosing one to discuss in a group of three gave us the opportunity to go straight into discussion.

We decided on No 4. ‘If students’ initial ideas and beliefs are ignored, the understandings that they develop can be very different from what the teacher intends.’ My responses are here below (written before the session):

• Who do you imagine saying it?

A progressive educationalist, who acknowledges the importance of the student voice regardless of the teacher’s intentions with a learning aim and outcome.

• What does it mean to you?

It is something I strongly believe in, given that the cohort I teach are international students who may often lack a ‘voice’ in the classroom. This does not mean that students should always be vocal or give ‘initial ideas or beliefs’. Particularly as perhaps it could be argued that the word ‘belief’ has underlying connotations of something that may not be appropriate in some learning situations. Rather that there is an awareness of what a student contributes and that it is valid.

• What else does it bring to mind (an idea/image/event/memory)?

It reminds me of bell hooks ‘Teaching Critical Thinking’ When I first read sections of this book I had many ‘light bulb moments’ as she describes her teaching journey.

It also reminds me of occasions early on at UAL where having come from a Tefl background I had a vision of how my skills teaching English as a second language could benefit students. It became clear as time went on that those skills, whilst useful and appropriate for some classes were only a part of my role and, when teaching art and design students even more so. This when teaching students often coming from a different teaching and learning context whilst also being aware that I do not want to ‘other’ my students.

• In what ways do you agree with it?

I agree wholeheartedly, however I realise that there are constraints and limitations. Some students may prefer guidance above all, as this is often how education is viewed. In that the teacher/lecturer is the ‘expert’ and the student takes this knowledge as learning. This is of course can be the nature of teaching and learning! Still, I see it that the more a student is given the opportunity to ‘be’ whether that be silently or vocally or visually; to contribute either in a group setting or as an individual then the learner can also take on the idea of ownership of their learning, developing a sense of learner autonomy.

• In what ways do you disagree with it?

I don’t disagree too much, only that in my experience many students are not intentionally ‘ignored’. Although, there can of course be a tendency for this to happen when groups are large or a student does not respond in any given situation. For me this is also about expectations from both student and teacher. Some students do not see it that they should contribute in a meaningful way as the teacher is giving his/her/their knowledge and skills, this is learning.

• What are the implications of this belief for teaching practice?

Allowing students to feel validated can go a long way to instilling confidence and establish a ‘safe’ space. It can also be useful as a teacher to not always believe that everything we do as the ‘expert’ means our students will take this on board. However, the ‘understandings they may develop’ opens up a debate about what ‘understandings’ are and if is this micro or macro in terms of classroom interaction? Finding out how a student may see a certain situation and then re-adjusting perceptions and expectations can be helpful, this rather than assuming a student can do this or that or assuming has an awareness. It is also worth thinking about how language is used to convey concepts and in giving feedback. Teacher discourse is an important factor here.

The group discussion

There were many valid points made, particularly when considering how important it is, for example, after initial delivery of a brief or in a seminar discussion to take on board what a student is bringing. Encouraging meaningful exchange that can lead to criticality is also part of the teaching and learning process. We then spoke about how challenging it is for undergraduate students to develop criticality, the ‘Why?’, ‘How?’ and ‘What?’. As other groups shared their discussion points the question of ‘bias’ was raised. With one lecturer talking about his position coming from industry as the ‘expert’ and finding it a challenge not to dismiss student ideas as the learner yet willing to encourage creativity. This struck a cord for me as I am often questioning my bias as the English language ‘expert’. I am aware that after 20 years of teaching English as another language I do of course know my stuff yet there is always something to learn!!

Nevertheless, when it comes to meeting a student at a point ‘where they are at’ it is my intention not to take a position of the ‘expert’ but rather as the person who can develop a rapport with a student. This within a space that feels comfortable and suitable for learning in whichever shape or form it takes given any constraints within the situation, in terms of content to be covered and/or what the student brings to the table.

Teaching Artefacts

Below are some images of teaching artefacts brought in by our group and others that were then made into posters:

This was a wonderful exchange of ideas and contexts. It also felt good to share some of my materials as often and, as I have previously mentioned in an earlier post, Language Development (or support) is often a misunderstood or unknown entity at UAL!

Round the room discussions

We did an activity after the lunch break that is a familiar one for me as it is an often used ‘go to’ technique within my teaching context if I have groups. We discussed various elements of teaching practice to include: Small group teaching, one to one teaching, lectures and large group teaching and presentation/crits. I have chosen to focus on one to one teaching here as this is something I not only enjoy but would like to think about further.

One to One Teaching

This discussion raised some good points in the group and for me when thinking about tutorials. In my own teaching practice I regularly meet students on a one to one basis, either through a booked tutorial the student has chosen through the Language Centre or in my role as in studio support. With international students this is often a good opportunity for some meaningful interaction. Students are allowed a space to express needs as well as develop a rapport with the tutor. In my experience there is a tendency for students to either attend once or who rebook, although the former is rare. I have sometimes met students that I have taught on a pre-sessional or Foundation and it is always good to see how far they have come.

In a Language Development tutorial there can sometimes be a sense of urgency as students are near a deadline or a resubmission date. Students come to a tutorial with written work or any text they would like looked at. On other occasions pastoral care can be the focus of a tutorial perhaps revealing areas that the student had not been aware of; for example, other support services or a renewed sense of understanding of a brief, a skill such as writing or how to improve speaking skills. I really enjoy tutorials because I find that given the right conditions they can work well and are worthwhile, especially when a student has been struggling or hasn’t realised how language support can be of help.

Final Thoughts

Leaving this session I felt on a high from having met my group as well as having the opportunity to discuss topics areas that are all close to our daily teaching experiences. It has brought forward some ideas, as well as a sense of purpose and I look forward into ways of exploring my ongoing areas of interest. At the moment these are decolonising the curriculum and empathy in the classroom, after this session I feel there is so much to explore within these areas and more! I’m excited to move onto the next stage of this unit.

Meeting my tutor group was really positive. It was good to finally meet fellow students as those working across different colleges in a variety of roles.

As our group gradually shared our positions at the university and what we had read, I learned that each person had something intriguing to say and had explored a diverse range of pedagogic approaches within arts education. There were a variety of perspectives that included a community of enquiry, ‘not knowing’ (as a practicing artist/lecturer) and what this means, using play in the learning environment, archive and memories, a range of pedagogic theories and how to develop research within a particular artistic practice (architecture).

My role with Language Development has given me the opportunity to dip in and out of the different colleges at UAL over the years so it is fascinating to meet and discuss with lecturers and technicians who have a role within the disciplines I am often attempting to understand and decipher along with my students. There is a tendency for myself and some of my colleagues to feel that our roles can be misunderstood. In that as English Language Tutors/Lecturers (the title in itself is not clearly defined and varies across our field) this defines us in a certain way. For example, that we teach or correct grammar, or that we can help students to speak up ‘they don’t speak’, or that we are the ‘fixer’ by correcting English language mistakes. However, it is unsurprising that given that learning English previously comes historically from a hegemonic position it can be seen as such. Given this I find myself (as I am aware some of my colleagues also do) positioning my role as one that encompasses much more than improving language level and ability. Rather building confidence for international students and their ability to communicate in either written or spoken form as I facilitate learning in studio and beyond. In other words encouraging students to literally find their ‘voice’ as well as expressing themselves artistically through what is required for assessment as part of a progressive inclusive learning environment. In turn I see my role as also one that can and should potentially act as a bridge to a student’s understanding of being a student within a UK art university or even within the preferred ‘western’ heuristic teaching and learning approach to coursework and assessment.

Given this, I also take the view that myself and colleagues consider decolonising the curriculum of great importance. By our daily encounters with students who bring a cultural capital from many diverse rich creative places across the world we see how inclusivity is needed more than ever for the large cohort of international students we teach. Nevertheless, I do not see this perhaps in terms of a high brow status as Bordieu may consider it, as ‘high culture’, rather what can a student’s point of cultural reference bring? Whether that be art, music or literature. What is their story?

Through this approach I consider it possible to garner empathy within the various learning spaces students occupy.

‘Mud, muddy, muddier still: Pedagogic research in the arts university’ with Lindsay Jordan, James Corazzo and Catherine Smith

What are your feet touching? What’s touching your feet?

This was a fun way to start the session, and as we moved into a small group my thoughts were: does this mean literally or non-literally? As it turned out myself and the other’s in the group started to chatting about were we taught (as I was at work) and then suddenly time had ran out, so we did not discuss the questions fully. No matter we in fact did talk literally and that made it a worthy exchange.

My own teaching practice

An activity like this is very close to what I have done over the years with my students, and so it was also fun to see this from the other side as it were!

Research methods

Having used a few different research methods during my MA Ed, it is illuminating to look at research methods within the arts university. Listening to James Corazzo’s section reminded me how ethnography can have a broad creative approach. As Catherine Smith moved into her slides it looked even more illuminating as the possibilities to explore research methods within arts higher education can develop into something that can taps into a student’s creative reality.

A creative approach to research is certainly an area of interest for me. In particular when teaching English as an academic language to international students who often tend to arrive to study arts in higher education with different expectations. Many have previously studied in what is a more didactic teaching and learning environment rather than a heuristic one. I am reminded of Pat Francis from her book ‘Inspiring Writing in Art and Design’, where she introduces the idea that ‘the writing process parallels the stages of working in many arts’ (2009, p 15) This in turn connects with many of the themes of today’s session, in that considering ‘creative difference and rejection of normative research practices’ to design a research approach can add to enquiry.