Reflective Blog Post 5 (Additional) Gregersen, T. (2007). ‘Language learning beyond words: Incorporating body language into classroom activities’

After my observation by a PGCert tutor in my feedback there was a suggestion that I look further into how my body language can impact my teaching and to consider writing a reflective blogpost on this topic. The feedback mentioned specifically, tapping my fingers on a table when asking a question, thus conveying the message that there wasn’t space or time for the students to consider and/or give the answer. In hindsight, I was rushing through this stage of the class as many students arrived late and did not prepare so I had to make some time back in the class to accommodate for this, the finger tapping was completely unconscious.

Tammy Gregerson writes that nonverbal communication consists of “non-linguistic codes such as body language, facial expressions…used to communicate meaning” (20007, p.53). She goes on to explain that although there is a distinction between verbal and non-verbal communication, these happen in conjunction, they “become integrated into one communicative event” (Gregersen, 20007, p.53). As both happen simultaneously, when communicating or being communicated with we read both together. One can be read into more than the other, or the verbal and nonverbal can conflict and send mixed messages.

She states there are four kinds of gestures that are key in effective communication and “convey the same meaning as the verbal message” (Gregersen, 20007, p.54). One of these gestures she calls ‘emblems’ which refer to body language which conveys a word and/or message, for example tapping one’s finger.

I found the reading very interesting and must admit I had not actively considered my body language when teaching or ways in which I can mindfully use my body language to convey a point and/or concept. Its food for thought, something I will be more mindful and reflective of going forward and a topic which I look forward to research further.

References

Gregersen, T. (2007). ‘Language learning beyond words: Incorporating body language into classroom activities’, Reflections on English Language Teaching, 6(1), pp. 51–64. Available at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/252225970_Language_learning_beyond_words_Incorporating_body_language_into_classroom_activities (Accessed: 18 March 2025).

Posted in Theories, Policies and Practices | Tagged | Leave a comment

Reflective Blog Post 4 – Hardie, K. (2015) ‘Innovative pedagogies series: Wow: The power of objects in object-based learning and teaching’

In this journal, Dr Kirsten Hardie gives an overview of their teaching practice, focusing on one distinct area of their pedagogy, Object-based learning (OBL). In which she uses design objects in student-centred learning activities to “to develop their theoretical and practical skills and knowledge of their discipline and wider related contexts” (Hardie, 2015, p.4-5)

She goes on to write that as she is working “with learners who are visually orientated and visual thinkers, and predominantly makers who ‘learn by doing’” (Hardie, 2015, p.4-5) this informs her practice. Therefore, the learning activities she designs are experiential and this ensures active learning which Charles Bonwell describes as learning that “involves students in doing things and thinking about the things they are doing” (p.2). One of my favourite quotes I have come across this term.

Hardie goes on to describe three case studies in which she uses OBL. Firstly, ‘The Power of Wow’, in which all students select an object and share it with group (they do not present it), the room is completely silent which is only broken with reactions such as “oh or aaagh…and on occasion wow” (Hardie, 215, p.6). This then leads to a group discussion on the object.

The second case study, ‘A Matter of Taste’ has many similarities with ‘The Potential of online object-based learning’ by Judy Willcocks & Kieran Mahon which I wrote my first reflective blog post on. The students work in small groups to look at several objects then they “complete an object identification form for each item: for example, what is its function, age and target audience? Who designed and manufactured it?” (Hardie, 2015, p.6). Lastly the students are invited to look at the object regarding taste, “the learners are encouraged to reflect upon their perceptions and those of others so that they may position and potentially reframe their consideration of design examples” (Hardie,2015, p.9).

Lastly, in case study three, ‘For the Love of Graphics exhibition’, Hardie sets the students the task of curating and displaying an exhibition in their studios, students select an artefact or collection that they like, research it and produce a short piece of text about it. This activity is not assessed and aims to “to develop learners’ experience of decision making; reflection; and research” (Hardie,2015, p.14).

All case studies above have at their centre OBL, are fun, student-centred, creative and engage students in active learning. As Hardie puts it “My rationale for using objects lies firmly in the belief that students’ hands-on engagement with objects can inform and inspire their thinking and design making; and that objects can energise learning and teaching.” (Hardie,2015, p.5).

 I found this journal refreshing to read, Hardie’s enthusiasm for the subjected is evident which is very inspirational. I am unsure yet of how I can implement all that I have taken from this journal in my practice but am now aware that I do have to re-design the activities and classes within my remit to be more student centred and to promote active learning.

References

Bonwell, C.C. (no date) Active learning: Creating excitement in the classroom, Active Learning: Creating Excitement in the Classroom. Available at: https://www.ufv.ca/media/assets/teaching–learning-centre/images/Active_Learning_Creating_Excitement_in_the_Classroom.pdf (Accessed: 17 March 2025).

Hardie, K. (2015) ‘Innovative pedagogies series: Wow: The power of objects in object-based learning and teaching ’, Innovative pedagogies series: Wow: The power of objects in object-based learning and teaching, pp. 1–25. doi:https://s3.eu-west-2.amazonaws.com/assets.creode.advancehe-document-manager/documents/hea/private/kirsten_hardie_final_1568037367.pdf. UCL (2022)

Teaching & object-based learning, UCL CULTURE. Available at: https://www.ucl.ac.uk/culture/schools/teaching-object-based-learning (Accessed: 17 March 2025).

Posted in Theories, Policies and Practices | Tagged | Leave a comment

Record of Observation or Review of Teaching Practice Observed by a PGCert Tutor

Record of Observation or Review of Teaching Practice         

Session/artefact to be observed/reviewed:

‘Core Skills: Hinge’, BA Fashion Jewellery (Year One), at London College of Fashion

Size of student group: 24

Observer:        Catherine Smith

Observee:       Emilia Netto

Note: This record is solely for exchanging developmental feedback between colleagues. Its reflective aspect informs PgCert and Fellowship assessment, but it is not an official evaluation of teaching and is not intended for other internal or legal applications such as probation or disciplinary action.

Part One


Observee to complete in brief and send to observer prior to the observation or review:

What is the context of this session/artefact within the curriculum?

This is a Core Skill (technical session) taught to BAFJ year one, I have inherited this session from another member of staff and have adapted the lesson plan.

How long have you been working with this group and in what capacity?

I taught this group three core skills last term, they were however three separate groups then This term they have been merged into two groups, which has made the class sizes larger, this is my first time teaching them since this change has taken place.

What are the intended or expected learning outcomes?

  • To gain an understanding of the application and use of hinges in jewellery. 
  • To further build on previously attained knowledge of measuring, marking and the correct use of jewellery tools. 
  • To make a functional three-part hinge. 

What are the anticipated outputs (anything students will make/do)?

The students will make a three-part hinge.

Are there potential difficulties or specific areas of concern?

Other colleagues have raised concerns over the size of the group and how these impacts on the outcomes being met within the three hours allocated for the class. I have sent a link with videos of the process to the students through Moodle one week prior to the session, which is to help them understand the process that will be taking place, they often however do not watch the videos. I have also requested them to bring their toolkits, however they often don’t and we have limited tools to give out to students which means there are points in the session where students have to wait for a tool in order to proceed this often also delays the students meeting the lessons outcomes. Lastly when I demonstrate due to the room layout and size of the work the students struggle to see the demonstration (this is where the pre-recorded videos are useful) I am currently looking into acquiring a camera and tripod that I connect to the screen for future classes, but this hasn’t happened yet.

How will students be informed of the observation/review?

I will inform them verbally at the start of the session.

What would you particularly like feedback on?

I would like feedback on: how effective my delivery is in communicating the technique to the students, my time management in delivering the class, how effective the resources are i.e. handout and video and in general any areas of improvement. I am open to any feedback that will improve my teaching.

How will feedback be exchanged?

However, is most suitable, I suggest a team’s video call as this is the most flexible option.

Part Two

Observer to note down observations, suggestions and questions:

Dear Emilia,

Thank you so much for inviting me to observe your ‘Hinge’ class last week. I enjoyed meeting you and learning from the experience. Here follows firstly a record of my observations. I have added some concrete suggestions in italics, along with a few questions for you to think about going forwards.

If you have any questions, please email me: c.h.smith@arts.ac.uk

Thanks, Catherine

Observation notes

You started very promptly at 9.31am by welcoming students into room. You were smiling and welcoming as you did so.

You had a teaching technician called Mizuki supporting you for the class, and this was clearly a useful addition.

Following the welcome you reminded them to sign in online and asked them to take their toolkits out as they would be needing them. This was helpful set up information.

You had cleverly prepared a short “warm-up” exercise for the students to do as they wait for others to arrive (a known problem that you had already identified). This was your ‘Hunt the Hinge’ exercise, which required them to find a hinge anywhere in the room, and draw it in as much detail as possible.

The accompanying instruction slide had been up on the projector when I entered the room. It was nicely designed, with a photo and a clear and succinct instruction.

You briefed this exercise, asking them if they knew what a hinge was. However, before you gave them a chance to answer the question, you answered it. It would have been a learning opportunity to get one of them to explain it. And it would help to bring their voices into dialogue with you, which I sense that you wanted, but perhaps were uncertain about how they felt about it. It almost looked like you were uncertain anyone would speak, so you rushed to fill the silence before it happened. One simple suggestion would be to allow a much longer period of quiet after you answer the question. And then if no one answers, repeat it. Wait again. And then if still no response, try to ask it in a different way.

After you had explained what a hinge was you asked them if they were clear on the task and if anyone had any questions. This checking understanding was good to see. They all appeared to be clear and got on with it.

You then walked around the room, checking in with individuals, asking latecomers if they had signed in. You reminded them all to help themselves to the hairbands at the front.

There were supposed to be 24 students, some turned up late. At 9.40am there were 13 students present. [Question: Have you asked those that are consistently non-attending or late about why their attendance and punctuality is mixed?]

You had prepared a high quality Powerpoint presentation on hinges. This was well laid out, with clear text (and not too much of it!) alongside really excellent imagery. I commend you on the diversity of the object sources, this is a model of good decolonial teaching practice – well done!

Before you started going through the slides you said, “I am going to make this as quick and painless as possible.”

You asked if people could hear as there was some noise from traffic outside. You suggested you would close the window but then you didn’t. They did seem to be able to hear what you were saying, so it was fine, but if it was bothering you I think you should have just closed it anyway and asked them to tell you if they were getting too warm.

You gave a very interesting presentation with range of clear photos of historic jewellery items from all over the world. You also included previous student and colleague work, with some more contemporary pieces. This was a nice touch and will have made them feel part of a successful, professional community. Again, well done for this.

When you were explaining a particular type of hinge, Mizuki chipped in to show the example of the spring hinge on her hair claw clip which helped explain the point very well. There was a nice dynamic between both of you throughout the class. It is not always easy to teach with someone else, so you did a seamless job of supporting each other’s points.

When you had finished your presentation you said “Any questions – feel free to ask.” After you said this you tapped fingers on the desk, thus (inadvertently) indicating time was tight. No one asked anything. [Question: are you aware of your body language when teaching? If not, it could be a useful mini experiment to try and tune in to it and write a reflective blog post on that…]

You then asked them to come to front desk to look at some real egs of hinges, whereupon you passed around the 5 hinges and asked them to take notes and ask questions. The desk was well set up, and the examples were good and I could see how interested the students were in this element of the class.

Mizuki jumped in and asked you some questions when the students did not. [Question: what effect do you think it has if the other tutor asks the questions instead of leaving space and time for the students to do so? Is there a way around this, perhaps the other tutor not doing so and reframing the way you ask for their input? Could you use their names to single people out to ask directly maybe? i.e. “What do you think Catherine? What problems can you spot in that eg?”]

You asked them to identify the problem with example 1 – why doesn’t it work. A student answered. You augmented their answer and wrote a note about it down on your flip chart paper, as if modelling what you want them to write. [Question: what do you think they will learn from your note? Is there a different way of getting them to make their own notes if you believe that is a valuable activity?]

You asked them more specific questions with each of the 5 examples, such as: “What has happened to this hinge?”, “Any ideas as to why this has happened?”.

They start talking between them about the minimum measurements required for certain things. It doesn’t look like people are noting or taking that information in but they are discussing it.

You asked to see their initial drawings of the hinges. You pick one out and say it is very nice, inviting the student to talk about the detail. This was great to see, as praise works wonders for engaging students and making them feel more confident to join in discussion.

Then you said, “It is an open discussion – feel free to jump in” and laughed a little nervously. [Question: If you are looking for a group discussion, how might you design this in? Could they speak to each other for a few minutes to answer the question, so they can jointly come up with responses which they can then feed into you? Try it and see perhaps.]

You then moved on to show them the video resources of filmed hinge making processes. These are evidently such a useful resource. As you were starting to show them you said, “I get the general impression that you haven’t watched the video.” [Question: what effect might this have had on the students’ feelings about your expectations of their behaviour?]

You didn’t play the LCF Technicial Resource videos in full, but pointed out how useful they are which was sensible. You played and showed some details of particular processes, and then augmented that with more instruction.

You realised at this point – by looking at a student – that this was too much information, and so you said “Too much info – don’t worry we are here all year round!” which resulted in some laughter. This was a really nice moment of connection and transparent pedagogy – letting them know that you think about your teaching.

After the videos, you passed around a 1 page handout with clear photos of how to make a hinge. Really great and clear resource – well done.

As you talked through the processes, you asked rhetorically, “Am I going too fast?”. You didn’t seem to be, but I think they did need the diagrams that Mizuki then drew in order to be able to clearly see how it was supposed to work.

For eg, Mizuki made a diagram of how to file a groove into the flat edge of both pieces. This seems very helpful. [Suggestion: perhaps you can make a slide of these diagrams to include in your Powerpoint as it was tricky to see in the video stills.]

You advised them to take their time over stage 2 of the process which is challenging – and suggested they get a snack/drink before they do it. Again, this resulted in laughter, which was lovely to see.

You speak very clearly and your voice carries to the back of the room. You set a good pace and frequently checked if they were following. All good practice.

V interesting description of how to make the hinge. The students were listening.

At 10.24am you moved to demonstrate the process live, at a workbench. You suggested they take photos and notes.

You uses a physical resource with parts of a hinge on it to show them the steps. You passed it around and said there was only one. [Question: So useful! Do you need more of them?!]

Mizuki helped students to get in a better position all around the bench so they could all see. This was another good example of you working well together.

Sadly I had to leave after one hour but the demo was going very well, with good attention from the students. During what I saw of your live demo you were using humour about dropping and searching for the tube, air tagging the mitre jig etc. The students were very engaged with some filming it and taking notes.

I can’t speak to your time management as I don’t know if one hour was supposed to get you to the bench, but the time did not seem to drag at all! I was sorry I had to leave. The students were very engaged with your demonstration. I hope they managed to make their first hinges!

All the best with completing the other work for this unit, and let me know if you have any questions.

Part Three

Observee to reflect on the observer’s comments and describe how they will act on the feedback exchanged:

It was reassuring to hear that us co-teaching was “seamless “and that my sense of humour created a “nice moment of connection and transparent pedagogy”.

By 9:40 there were 13 out of 24 students (by mid class 17). It is great that the warm-up exercise I set to accommodate for late comers was effective. It was suggested I ask those that are late or absent as to why this is. The whole team have attempted to do so, unfortunately their punctuality and attendance has not improved which has led to three groups being merged into two as mentioned in Part 1. We continue to discuss solutions for this as it is very disruptive.

It was also highlighted that I said “I am going to make this as quick and painless as possible” before starting the PP. As the observer pointed out this was a joke, but it could have a negative effect on students. It was indeed a joke, but I hadn’t considered that this could be taken badly and that my body language can affect my teaching, which is why observations are so useful. I will be more mindful of this in future.

Feedback was given on improving how I deliver group discussions, with the suggestion that I allow students to discuss amongst themselves first before giving an answer. It was also suggested that they should write down the answers for the “faulty hinge quiz” not me. Next time I plan this session I will adapt this task to be a group exercise, with additional time to draw a quick sketch of the hinge, discuss and take notes on what’s wrong with it.

I made sure to ask further questions “What has happened to this hinge?”, I have recently researched it and had made note to do so. Although this was not always successful in this session, as it was pointed out that once I asked a question and then answered it myself. I will allow more space for answers in future.

I only showed snapshots of the videos, they were shared with students prior to the class with a reminder to bring their toolkit (Part 1), they are meant to watch these beforehand. When asked at the start of the class, none had watched the videos and half had not brought their toolkits (the obeserver must have missed this interaction). When I said, “I get the general impression that you haven’t watched the video.”, I was expressing some frustration towards this, as this impacts the learning, and the outcomes aren’t completed. Since this session there has been a team meeting, the course leader has decided that if students don’t bring their toolkits, they cannot attend the class and will be marked absent.

I agree with the suggestion, the diagrams should be in the presentation and so should the board with the stage by stage of the hinge. I will photocopy the board, draw the diagrams on illustrator and embed these in the presentation.

Posted in Theories, Policies and Practices | Tagged | Leave a comment

Record of Observation/Review of Teaching Practice Observing a PGCert Peer  

Session/artefact to be observed/reviewed: GCD (Graphic Communication & Design) Yr2 

Size of student group: 15 

Observer: Emilia Netto 

Observee: Clare Bannister 

Note: This record is solely for exchanging developmental feedback between colleagues. Its reflective aspect informs PgCert and Fellowship assessment, but it is not an official evaluation of teaching and is not intended for other internal or legal applications such as probation or disciplinary action. 

Part One 
Observee to complete in brief and send to observer prior to the observation or review: 

What is the context of this session/artefact within the curriculum? 

This is a one-off session I put forward as part of GCD’s (Graphic Communication & Design) Yr2 Skillz week, which is an annual programme offering students on that course the opportunity to gain new skills outside of their regular curriculum. Each student will have signed up to this workshop. It’s meant to be a fun workshop without too much technicality 

How long have you been working with this group and in what capacity?  

I have not met this group before, I don’t normally teach on this course. 

What are the intended or expected learning outcomes?  

The students will be making a ‘mock shop’ using existing assets which I will get them to download at the start of the class. They will need to bring together assets to create a scene with furniture, add textures, then add garments folded and hanging to complete the ‘mock shop’, and then render out some final images. 

What are the anticipated outputs (anything students will make/do)? 

They will work digitally and produce final rendered images for their portfolio or whatever they like 

Are there potential difficulties or specific areas of concern? 

Computer literacy particularly using a PC may be of varying degrees. 

Using 3D software may be new to them too which takes a while to get used to.  

I would like to keep it light and fun but there are still some technical aspects to it. Getting it all done and rendered within the time frame without rushing may be a concern.  

How will students be informed of the observation/review? 

I will inform them verbally at the start of the class 

What would you particularly like feedback on? 

I know there are many areas that I need to improve on. I often struggle to maintain the attention of all students and a lot of students need additional help which takes me away from leading the session and it can disrupt the flow – there can be a lot of variation in students learning speeds within one classroom, and would like feedback on how I manage this.  

I’d like feedback on the speed at which I deliver the content and if I am trying to squeeze too much into one session.   

How will feedback be exchanged? 

Verbally after the session if time, otherwise completing this form and discuss over Teams 

Part Two 

  •  PP slide was on the large screen before students arrived with class title “Making a Mock Shop” (catchy title) with the tutor’s contacts details (great practice) and a link to download files for the class (good preparation). 
  • 6 Students arrived before 10am (class start time). 
  • Instructions were given at 10am to log into computers and which browser to open.
  • One student forgot their password, Clare gave clear instructions on how to re-set the password. 
  • Class starts promptly at 10:07. 
  • Learning Objectives, mentioned at the start of the session.
  • Clare asks students their previous experience with software (great practice). 
  • There are movable “Pop-up/Stickers” on the screen with some information and a link to download the files needed. Great visual tool. 
  • An explanation was given on how to unzip a file (good practice).
  • Clear step by step instructions are given at a good pace.
  • Options, given on how to change the “Gismo” selection tool works. Good for more experienced students as they have options.  
  • Emphasizes hitting stop a few times changing colour and or texture to render as this crashes the programme. Good use of reiteration to emphasize a key point.  
  • Encourages, students to play and experiment (great practice). 
  • Takes breaks from explanation/demonstration often to answer students’ questions/check in/check progress. 
  • Demonstrates step by step how to make a throw using a new AI tool (this is great) and the throw has puppies on, I’m not sure if this as intentional but students did laugh and enjoy this and seemed very keen to design their own throws.  
  • Stickers on screen with commands to undo, space bar to drop, etc. Good visual aids.   
  • Explains positions of objects on the digital 3D space by gesturing and pointing at different spots in the room to demonstrate where the object would be in real life. Good visual tool.  
  • Break at 11:15. 

Feedback on points requested in part one 

  • The session had a good pace, I didn’t notice the breaks in between demonstrations whilst you were helping students as being disruptive, in fact quite the opposite the other students in the room seemed to be focusing on the commands they just learned. This of course will vary from group to group but in this occasion the time in between demonstrations were productive periods, sometimes silence and space in a class are a positive. 
  • You applied differentiation well; I noticed in the lesson plan “cushions?” which you did demonstrate, and this was an additional command if there was time. Differentiation has been applied throughout as different things that can be done with one command.  
  • Digital sessions can be quite tiring, you did mention at around 11:10 that is good to take regular breaks. Could it be worth mentioning this at the start of the class? At the start of the session, you could also offer two different break patterns and ask which one the students would prefer? 
  • Is there a handout in the file they downloaded with shortcuts for commands? This could be a further aid for students when troubleshooting.  
  • Are students shown examples of the final outcome? It is worth considering if this would be an additional visual aid for them to better understand what they are aiming to achieve.  

Part Three 

Observee to reflect on the observer’s comments and describe how they will act on the feedback exchanged: 

I had never considered that while I am helping others it gives the others time to practice. This is good to know and makes me consider that a slower pace can be a positive thing. I will consider this in the future, and ensure that I am giving plenty of time for practice.  

I had the cushions in my lesson plan as an option, as its quite a fun one to do but wasn’t sure if there would be time. Also I do like to mix things up a bit for myself, as doing the same thing over and over becomes so tedious and I am better at engaging with the group when there is some variety involved! Going forward I will think about adding more variety and differentiation within my workshops to keep interesting! 

Regarding the breaks, good suggestion so the students know. I have always struggled a bit with communicating much more than the technical content in my sessions, as I feel safe with that. Also good suggestion to give them some options and let them choose. 

Regarding the shortcuts, I did have some print-outs to give away, but I need to make some more or think about creating a new one. Thank you for the reminder to do this! 

I tend to shy away from showing examples of final outcomes because I don’t want to influence what they create, I’m also self conscious to show to any of my own work, something I’ve always struggled with. But Emilia also suggested when talking through in person that I could just even show a picture or photo of a real shop or examples of interiors for some kind of context, which I agree with. 

Posted in Theories, Policies and Practices | Tagged | Leave a comment

Case Study 3 – Assessing learning and exchanging feedback 

Introduction & Background 

I assess learning and exchange feedback in three contexts: in the workshop during supervised studio hours, during timetabled technical consultations and taught sessions. Within these contexts I am limited to assessing and giving formative feedback verbally, often one to one. 

Evaluation 

The main challenge in these contexts is that students sometimes simply follow the advice/instructions without understanding why these were given in the firsts place. This means that the way in which I give information and feedback sometimes does not encourage the students to problem solve and develop their critical thinking. I want to best support students to ask the “why?…what?…how?” questions “which aid deeper thinking and reflection” (Race, Brown and Smith, 2005,p. 150).  I believe a solution to this is a two-pronged approach in which I embed further questions into my teaching to better enable self-directed learning.

Moving Forward 

Asking further questions: This method helps students further reflect on their experience of making and their work. Race, Brown and Smith suggested that further questions are often in a cluster (2005, p.150). These are open ended questions which lead to further reflection.  Some examples are “what worked least well?”, leading to “What have I learned from that?” to “What do I plan on doing it differently in future?” (Race, Brown and Smith, 2005, p. 151). Going forward I will endeavour to include these cluster questions in all contexts in which I assess and give feedback. For example, asking the class why we are following these stages to reach the outcome, i.e. why are we piercing this section first? My aim is that these questions will lead to more successful self-directed learning.

Self-Directed Learning: Lars Lindström states that “self-directed craft forces the student to think for himself, to learn self-reliance instead of merely following directions and so on” (2012, p.174). I agree with this statement, which is why I am currently embedding further questions in my practice in all three contexts mentioned above. I am also working on a handout that contains further questions which relate to the design and making process which I will give to students. For example, in a consultation when a drawing is presented that does not show how the jewellery piece connects, I will guide the student to the cluster of questions that starts with; How does it connect? What materials is it made of? From previous experience how do these materials connect? Have these connections been successful? If not, why? They can initially use the handout to support self-directed problem solving, in time they will no longer need to refer to it as they will have established the habit of asking further questions when designing and thus further developing their critical thinking.

Conclusion

I believe the conjunction of both approaches above will help me best support students. I do hope that in time this is successful, and students can apply their critical thinking skills to their work with more ease and in turn build their knowledge base of materials and techniques.  

References 

Knowles, M.S. (1975) Self-directed learning: A guide for learners and teachers. New York: Cambridge, The Adult Education Co., c1975. 

Lindström, L. (2012) ‘Aesthetic learning about, in, with and through the arts: A curriculum study’, International Journal of Art & Design Education, 31(2), pp. 166–179. doi:10.1111/j.1476-8070.2012.01737.x.

Smith, B. (Brenda M.), Race, P. and Brown, S., 1950 Feb 1- (2005) 500 tips on assessment. 2nd ed. London; New York: Routledge. 

Posted in Theories, Policies and Practices | Tagged | Leave a comment

Experimental Design Micro-teaching

Experimental Design Micro-teaching

Summary of feedback and reflection

This sessions aim is to provide students with a way of creating a drawing and sample in a short space of time. This also enables “students to be independent learners through their development and testing of their own experiences, reflections, ideas, investigations…” (Hardie, 2015, p.20).

The handout’s intention was to better communicate the task and support the students. In the feedback it was mentioned that the handout had simply been given out which led to it not being used. It was also mentioned that images with examples of the final outcome would have been useful at the start of the session (these were in the handout but not seen until later on). The feedback above highlighted something crucial, that although all the information needed was there it was not looked at because I did not draw attention to it and explain its purpose. This is such a simple change to implement, but one that I believe will make a big difference in my teaching going forward.

There was also conflicting feedback on whether it would be best to give the handout at the start of the session as a guide or the end of the session for reference. I believe it would be better to give the handout at the start of the session and to explain it and encourage students to read through it before starting the tasks.

There was also feedback on how to develop this exercise further, by developing the use of different colour wires. These have different gages and properties and thus are more useful at different stages, so there is a clear direction for me explore i.e. handing out the wire at different stages of the task to highlight a design addition such as a connection between pieces.

It was also encouraged to push the exercise further in terms of making different variations of the same object, perhaps with different purposes. It was also suggested to not just engage with the object visually (look at it and draw it) but to interact with the object in different ways such as touch and sound, and to see how this further expands on the interpretation of the object. In object-based learning (OBL), a variety of “pedagogical approaches” are used “as powerful tools for learning” (Hardie, 2015, p.4). I will research ways of implementing OBL in my sessions, which other participants did do ad it was very revelatory.

The feedback also noted that the participants found the exercise useful in terms of keeping the participants engaged in experimenting and exploring instead of focusing on having a perfect outcome. Lastly it was noted that there was a good balance on guidance and individual freedom in the task and that this led to participants feeling supported in their experimentation.  

I am really pleased that the task was successful in its original aim and that the participants enjoyed it. I have many points to reflect on, develop and apply to this session going forward.

References

Hardie, K. (2015) ‘Innovative pedagogies series: Wow: The power of objects in object-based learning and teaching ’, Innovative pedagogies series: Wow: The power of objects in object-based learning and teaching, pp. 1–25. doi:https://s3.eu-west-2.amazonaws.com/assets.creode.advancehe-document-manager/documents/hea/private/kirsten_hardie_final_1568037367.pdf.

UCL (2022) Teaching & object-based learning, UCL CULTURE. Available at: https://www.ucl.ac.uk/culture/schools/teaching-object-based-learning (Accessed: 17 March 2025).

Posted in Theories, Policies and Practices | Tagged | Leave a comment

Case Study 1 – Knowing and responding to your students’ diverse needs

Introduction

On the BA Fashion Jewellery and MA Artefact course we have a diverse student group. Supporting the learning of international students who have English as a second or third language when delivering specialist technical workshops using technical terminology that they have not yet been exposed to can lead to gaps in understanding and learning. This barrier to learning is accompanied by different factors such as but not limited to previous educational experiences and learning styles.

Evaluation

International students, comprise most of the students on the two courses I work with. As Allan states “some students struggle with English…and find their taught sessions a challenge” (2016, p. 19). I have put in place reasonable adjustments to facilitate accessibility to resources, as Allan suggests on page 29, including sharing course content in advance (through Moodle), using a lot of images (in PowerPoints and handouts), highlighting in bold key words in text, providing a glossary of technical terms at the start of the course with corresponding images, providing clear guidance throughout the session. I still think that more can be done as some students still struggle with using the technical terminology, knowing the name of different tools and following demonstrations.

Moving Forwards

Provide learning materials in advance: I continue to provideall learning materials one week in advance, which is line with UAL guidance on accessibility. I would also like to create video content soon, such as recordings of demonstrations to share in advance. I do wonder is this will make a difference to how many students choose to access this information before class.

Provide a glossary of terms: Students are provided with an illustrated glossary of jewellery terms and tools as part of their jewellery workshop induction. I find that as with most handouts these don’t get looked at again after this session. It was highlighted in my microteaching session that I didn’t explain or give time for the handout to be looked at before starting the session, going forward I will implement this in my classes.

Provide examples of good work: I have samples for all the core skills sessions I deliver. These include samples of each step (when applicable) and of a finished piece/sample that meet all the learning outcomes set at the start of the class. I will include more examples of these samples on Moodle going forward.

Consider recording your sessions: Some students record part of my sessions such as demonstrations. Going forward I would like to try recording a session and making it available for students on Moodle, this is a long-term plan that requires co-ordination with other departments such as digital learning.

Conclusion

Following UAL guidance from the disability inclusion tool kit, I am responding to the diverse needs of my students and looking at better supporting international students. I will start recording demonstrations prior to classes and uploading these with the other updated resources as discussed above on Moodle when I resume teaching core skills classes next term.

References

Allan, B. (2016) Emerging strategies for supporting Student Learning: A practical guide for librarians and educators. London: Facet Publishing, p. 19-31.

University of the Arts London (2019) Canvas.arts.ac.uk. Available at: https://canvas.arts.ac.uk/documents/sppreview/3550bb2f-db31-4a28-8223-6a13d80001e7 (Accessed: 31 January 2025).

University of the Arts London (no date) Disability Inclusion Toolkit, Canvas.arts.ac.uk. Available at: https://canvas.arts.ac.uk/sites/explore/SitePage/45680/disability-inclusion-toolkit (Accessed: 31 January 2025).

University of the Arts London (2019) Using Moodle for Access and Inclusion, Canvas.arts.ac.uk. Available at: https://canvas.arts.ac.uk/documents/sppreview/62ea1f01-8ad6-4691-a420-e90767dc280f (Accessed: 31 January 2025).

University of the Arts London (2019) Recording taught session, Canvas.arts.ac.uk. Available at: https://canvas.arts.ac.uk/documents/sppreview/7694686e-ff31-4cb0-a92a-ff3fe7e3d3c6 (Accessed: 31 January 2025).

Posted in Theories, Policies and Practices | Tagged | Leave a comment

Reflective Blog Post 3 – Rosenburg, M.B. (2005) Nonviolent Communication: A Language of Life

I read chapter three of Rosenburg’s, Nonviolent Communication: A Language of Life, in preparation for observing a peer. In this chapter they distinguish between observation and evaluation. They refer to this as NVC, short for Non-Violent Communication.

They state that “NVC is a process language that discourages static generalizations; instead, evaluations are to be based on observations specific to time and context” (Rosenberg, 2005, p. 26).  This means to remove your personal opinions and feelings from the process of observing and base it only on what is taking place within that specific time and context. In a teaching observation context this would mean observing solely what is happening in the classroom e.g. there are 10 students present; half of the students achieved the learning outcomes set at the start of the class.

As Rosenburg writes “For most of us, it is difficult to make observations of people and their behaviour that are free of judgment, criticism, or other forms of analysis” (2005, p. 28). This seems rather obvious but in practice this means making a conscious effort to only observe the time and context.

There is also a focus on the language used, the example given by Rosenburg is “Hank Smith has not scored a goal in 20 games” versus “Hank Smith is a poor soccer player” (Rosenberg, 2005, p. 32). The first statement is based on statistical facts, they do not show any opinion whereas the second is a statement made based on judgement and opinion. If the second statement was given as feedback it would not be constructive and would likely be hurtful to the observee.

References

Rosenberg, M.B. (2005) Nonviolent Communication: A Language of Life. CA: Puddledancer Press, pp. 25–35.

Posted in Theories, Policies and Practices | Tagged | Leave a comment

Record of Observation or Review of Teaching Practice Observed by a PGCert Peer

Session/artefact to be observed/reviewed: Core Skills Disk Cutting and Doming BAFJ Yr1

Size of student group: 20

Observer: Clare Bannister

Observee: Emilia Netto

 
Note: This record is solely for exchanging developmental feedback between colleagues. Its reflective aspect informs PgCert and Fellowship assessment, but it is not an official evaluation of teaching and is not intended for other internal or legal applications such as probation or disciplinary action.

Part One
Observee to complete in brief and send to observer prior to the observation or review:

What is the context of this session/artefact within the curriculum?

This is a core skills session (Technical skills session) that is accessed by the academic team. This session is on disk cutting and doming, focusing on the above as well as soldering.

How long have you been working with this group and in what capacity?

This will be my second term teaching core skills to this group, this is shared amongst different technicians. This session is shared, I will be delivering one and my colleagues the other two.

What are the intended or expected learning outcomes?

To gain an understanding of disk cutting and doming and its application to jewellery design and making.

To gain an understanding of disk cutting and doming as a technique.

To improve on measuring, cutting, doming, soldering and finishing metal

What are the anticipated outputs (anything students will make/do)?

They will be given a copper two small copper squares and some wire, and they will cut, dome, solder and make an ear wire for the piece, making a singular earring.

Are there potential difficulties or specific areas of concern?

The pieces being finished in class within the three hours allocated are always a challenge, especially with first years. We also have limited tools so there will likely be some waiting when it comes to sharing tools such as the disk cutter. Retaining student attention sometimes can be also challenging, especially with group C which is the most challenging year 1 group.

How will students be informed of the observation/review?

The students will be informed verbally at the start of the class.

What would you particularly like feedback on?

I would like feedback on student engagement, how I have managed my time and if it was effective, whether the presentations and demonstration were clear and easy to follow, and in areas for improvement in my delivery.

How will feedback be exchanged?

Feedback will be shared either face to face after the class or online on teams within a few days of the class taking place.

Part Two

Observer to note down observations, suggestions and questions:

This was a co-taught session with Emilia’s colleague taking the lead on the presentation part of the session, with Emilia demonstrating and supporting the practical elements of the workshop.

Handouts with instructions and basic health & safety reminders were already delivered to the students via Moodle before the start of the class.

The session started within 10 minutes of the scheduled start time and the student turnout was 18 out of 20

The students were encouraged to take photos and document the tools needed for the session at the start. There was an introduction with an emphasis on health and safety & PPE.

Screens were present at the front and back of the classroom, according with the direction of the seats at the workshop stations.

Emilia demonstrated drilling & disk cutting with clear instructions and allowing enough time for students to photograph or video what she was doing. She was also clear about not wanting for her face to appear in the videos, which set clear boundaries.

Most students held their phones around and over Emilia to video the demonstration as it was difficult to see, due to the nature of the workshop and not a live camera/video link being available, and the number of students trying to witness the exercise.

When equipment proved to be faulty within the demonstration for doming, she explained what may have happened to cause the equipment to be faulty as an example of how and why equipment should be used with care, before finding undamaged equipment to continue with.

When explaining how to place the body when using the more hazardous equipment safely she made a reference to ‘chicken arms’ as a way for students to easily remember how to position their arms

Emilia delivered all demonstrations clearly, confidently and time effectively and when the students were in the making part of the workshop, she worked around the room helping students and reminding them about PPE. She was encouraging and patient with students who needed help.

There was a moment when there were a lot of students waiting to use bits of equipment and she managed it by suggesting some take a break while they wait or by finding extra pieces of equipment for them to use.

I could not see any obvious areas for improvement from what I observed.

Part Three

Observee to reflect on the observer’s comments and describe how they will act on the feedback exchanged:

It was great to have Clare observe my teaching, since I haven’t had a class observation in a couple of years. As we have different specialisms, it was also beneficial that Clare was not familiar with the processes covered as to ascertain how clear the instructions given were. The feedback regarding instructions being clear was very reassuring.

I was also reassuring to read that I was adaptable to the challenge we often face of there not being enough equipment or tools for all students to use at once by “suggesting some take a break while they wait or by finding extra pieces of equipment for them to use”. This is a challenge that I have been finding alternatives for since started teaching at LCF last year.

We do emphasize the use of PPE due to the high risk of injury associated with many of or practices in the workshop and encourage students to photograph the process and tools used for their own reference and technical journals.

The “chicken arms” reference is one I have used for years; I find that describing an action/process/or tool by giving an informal/funny description helps the students remember the information I am trying to pass on.

I do agree with Clare that the demonstrations are “difficult to see” due “to the nature of the workshop… live camera/video link (not) being available, and the number of students trying to witness the exercise”.

I have written my first case study on the challenge above. I have contacted digital learning for support in facilitating this late last year and have been assured that we will have an overhead camera available to use next academic year.

In the meantime, I have been looking at other solutions I can put in place to better support students. This includes putting together handouts with step-by-step close-up photos of the processes taught. Going forward I intend on pre-recording demonstrations going forward and playing these to the students before a live demonstration. This is something that as a department we need to look at more closely and find better solutions for.

Posted in Theories, Policies and Practices | Tagged | Leave a comment

Case Study 2 – Planning and teaching for effective learning

Introduction and Background

Within the third year of the BA Fashion Jewellery cohort, we have a diverse group of students with different levels of technical ability and experience, many of which have English as a second or third language. Teaching technical core skills, making small samples via technical demonstrations to large groups in the workshop, has presented several challenges in delivering complex information with it being fully understood.

Evaluation

Currently all technical core skills classes start with a PowerPoint with examples of the technique being taught and its application to jewellery with images. This is followed by a step-by-step demonstration on the jewellery bench in which I talk through the process of that specific technique. However, due to the number of students per session and the pieces being small, it is hard for students to see the process in detail and understand the information being delivered verbally as I have my back to most of them when demonstrating on the bench. The students then replicate this process to make one or more samples.  The sessions are three hours long so there is a lot of technical information which for many students is brand new being delivered at a fast pace in a short period of time.

Moving Forward

PowerPoint slides with process photos: For my first core skills teaching session this term, Married Metals, I will present an additional PowerPoint with a step-by-step breakdown of the process of making the married metals sample. I will photograph the married metals process with alternative tools and assemble the photos into a PowerPoint with descriptions and the tools used, to create a more accessible step-by-step guide. This will provide further clarity on the technique and allow students to see the process closeup. After presenting this PowerPoint I will then do the demonstration, my intention is that they will have more context as to how the process is taking place. The PowerPoint will be shared on Moodle alongside other information on the session so students can re-visit it as and when needed.

Overhead camera/live recording set-up

Overhead cameras and other mobile cameras are used in other departments at LCF that require students to see a process on a machine or workshop up close. I have requested one from digital learning but there is a long waiting list and unfortunately this cannot be put in place this academic year. I have also attempted to use my phone in conjunction with Solstice to project myself demonstrating but this didn’t work.

Pre-recording demonstrations

I have also considered pre-recording demonstration to present to the cohort and explaining the process/technique this way prior to also doing a demonstration in class. I have not had the time to put this in place but do hope to do so soon. This footage would be available on Moodle and or SharePoint for students to access before, during and after the session.

Conclusion

I found that presenting a step-by step PowerPoint did somewhat improve the student’s ability to understand and see the technique of married metals more close-up. Some students in class mentioned how helpful the step-by-step photos had been.

Interestingly in my following session a student filmed me demonstrating and shared it with the cohort, it highlights a need for recording/documenting the demonstration process for students. I believe there is more to be done in this regard, and I look forward to implementing more alternatives to improve our students learning experience.

References

University of the Arts London (2019) Recording taught sessions, Canvas.arts.ac.uk. Available at: https://canvas.arts.ac.uk/documents/sppreview/7694686e-ff31-4cb0-a92a-ff3fe7e3d3c6 [Accessed: 31 Jan 2025].

University of the Arts London (2019) Using Moodle for Access and Inclusion, Canvas.arts.ac.uk. Available at:https://canvas.arts.ac.uk/documents/sppreview/62ea1f01-8ad6-4691-a420-e90767dc280f [Accessed 31 Jan 2025].

Posted in Theories, Policies and Practices | Tagged | Leave a comment