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.