My PGCert Journey

Contextual Background (c.50 words):

There are many key challenges when assessing Y2 BA students studying UXD. For this blog, I will focus on the large number of students in class, the part-time contract, and the inability to give periodic one-to-one feedback. For context, students sit around the class in small groups of tables containing approximately 5 to 6 people each. The space between tables is insufficient.

Evaluation (c.100-200 words):

To address these challenges, I have implemented several strategies. For example, the unit I taught in Block 1 was thirteen weeks long and had several checkpoints for assessment. These included:

Table peer assessment: Students mainly completed peer assessments throughout block 1 in weeks 5, 9, 10, and 11. Only week 5 was a low-stakes assessment (Russell, 2010) as it provided early feedback to inform later assessments.

Half-Term Online Progress Check Form: Around week 7, I asked students to fill in an anonymous online form indicating their process stage. This was helpful, especially this year, as it enabled me to see their progress and what needed reinforcing.

Tutor feedback: This gives students a sense of reliability, an unbiased opinion, and honest criticism. Throughout the term, I offered in-person feedback and one-to-one appointments outside studio hours, which all students appreciated.

Combined peer and tutor feedback: In week 11, we held roundtable Crits (Doidge et al, 2000), during which students and tutors provided input. We asked them to write feedback on Post-it notes as their peers presented their research poster designs and allowed a few minutes afterwards for sharing. They shared some feedback, and tutors offered their comments.

Self-assessment: In week 12, I asked them to conduct a self-assessment exercise based on this unit’s Learning Outcomes.

As reflected in their mid-term feedback, peer crits received mixed feedback from students:

Moving forwards (c.250-350 words)

Russell (2010) highlights the importance of providing more opportunities for formative and medium-stakes feedback through a fair workload distribution and various assessment stakes. They link the different assessments and interconnect modules through feedback, which “helps students see relationships from one module to another and also see that feedback from one module can be used to support their learning in another” (Ibid). This made me realise that in my practice, although I use mainly medium-stake feedback (formative), I start the peer crits later than suggested (though I constantly give 1-to-1 feedback). Therefore, starting next term, I plan to introduce scheduled feedback sessions earlier on, i.e., week 2 or 3, starting with a low stake and moving on to medium ones.

Race (2001) talks about the importance of assessment diversification, suggesting a mix of self, peer and group assessment and using different formats such as posters, presentations, portfolios of evidence, artefacts, etc to achieve this. However, during a few TPP workshops, one colleague, Chuck, talked about their approach to Crits and how they enable students to a) choose the presentation format (videos, slides, illustrations, verbal, muted etc..) and b) choose the type of feedback they want to receive (sandwich, gossip, silent etc..). This resonated with me as it offered new insights on making Crits more inclusive, accessible/welcoming and fun. Together with the Inclusive and Development Crits guidance by the Arts SU (2024), these resources and insights will inform future directions for Crits during formative assessments.

Crits remain both a challenge and an opportunity for students and teachers and that’s why we should all work toward a balanced “studio ecology so it becomes more conducive for moral good” (McDonald and Michela, 2019, p.30).

(Total word count: 578)

References (additional to word count)

Arts SU, Inclusive and Development Crits report 2024. Accessed on 17 March 2025, at https://www.arts-su.com/news/article/6013/Crits-and-Inclusive-Learning-at-UAL/

Clark, H.H. and Brennan, S.E., 1991. Grounding in conversation. Perspective on socially shared cognition, pp.127-149.

Doidge, C., Sara, R. and Parnell, R., 2007. The crit: an architecture student’s handbook. Routledge.

McDonald, J.K. and Michela, E., 2019. The design critique and the moral goods of studio pedagogy. Design Studies, 62, pp.1-35.

Russell, M., 2010. Assessment diagrams from ‘Assessment Patterns: A Review of the Possible Consequences’ from the ESCAPE Project (supported by JISC). University of Hertfordshire.

Session/artefact to be observed/reviewed: Lesson plan/Slides/Activity

Size of student group: 39

Observer: Karen Matthewman

Observee: Antonella Nonnis

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 (Completed by Antonella)
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 content is presented during the Friday morning session of week 2 for the Enquiry in Design for User Experience unit. It is the first unit of the 2024/25 academic year for second-year students enrolled in the User Experience Design BA (Hons) course. The previous Wednesday, students received a brief requiring them to conduct non-participant observations of individuals at the ‘Who Am I’ exhibit at the Science Museum. They are tasked to document how people interact within the space and with each other, critically reflecting on their engagement and interactions in the exhibit’s physical and digital realms. They are to analyse both primary and secondary data, visualise and synthesise their findings, identify pain points where interactions with digital and physical spaces could be enhanced, propose design solutions, and document and curate the design processes.

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

I have been working with this class since September 2024 as Y2 Lead – their main point of contact.

What are the intended or expected learning outcomes?

For students to grasp the implications of conducting ‘covert’ research involving people (including benefits and limitations), understanding research ethics, areas of ethical concerns, practicalities of doing ethical research, and ethical concerns for this unit.

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

At the end of the slides, students did an outside class activity called ‘Point of view’

• Participants: Individual work
• Time: ~ 30 minutes (15 mins of writing) + in class discussion

As a class, we went to the Typo cafè and observed other people.

I asked students to use a notebook with 3 separate pages to free-write from at least three different perspectives about the space around them.

They were not allowed at any time in the writing to mention directly what perspective they are writing from and what their viewpoint is or to use any word given in the prompt. Instead, they had to use their five senses and try to imagine writing about the environment as if they were a different person.

Later, when we returned to class, I asked students to take one of the pages they thought was their strongest and hand it to me. I then mixed up all the pages and discussed what point of view they thought each was written from and why.

The aims of this activity are clearly explained to students before the activity starts, such as:

• Look at the same space and group of people, but adjust your viewpoint.
• Recognising your prejudices and assumptions is essential to being open to other people’s points of view.

Students can learn a great deal about how their life experiences influence their perception of others and what it might be like to experience things from others’ perspectives. However, they must also grapple with the concept that unbiased research is impossible. It is important to recognise one’s own biases.

Are there potential difficulties or specific areas of concern?

Many students are unfamiliar with the key concepts expressed, and they find it challenging to consider ethical implications when designing UX. UX design is all about improving people’s experiences by getting to know them, their needs, strengths, knowledge, challenges, etc., and conveying experiences that are meaningful, fair, respectful, beneficial, and resonate with people instead of being exploitative, individualistic (based on design preferences), or universalistic (based on dominant norms).

Some students have low language proficiency and encounter difficulties during sessions. I strive to alleviate this through clear communication, although conveying tasks and concepts can sometimes be challenging.

How will students be informed of the observation/review?

N/A

What would you particularly like feedback on?

I would greatly appreciate any thoughts on maintaining students’ focus and supporting those with lower language abilities. I would also welcome any feedback on simplifying language (I recently thought of providing a glossary for the key terms used throughout the unit and perhaps translating them into the main languages spoken in class – any thought on this ?  ), the content itself, how it is structured, and the exercises.

How will feedback be exchanged?

Verbally, via Teams, and written.

Part Two (to be completed by Karen)

This was such an interesting and wide-ranging discussion, Antonella, wasn’t it? We talked about this very unusual and at first sight very simple task given to students to aid their understanding of UX and spaces, but it also contained a lot of hidden complexity.

We talked about its similarity to the microteaching task, in that you inherited quite a ‘straight’ uncritical activity form your course but enhanced it through injecting into it a level of criticality, reflection and connection to literature and ethics which made the experience much more interesting, but probably also a little harder to fully digest for some students.

We talked about the fact that completing an ethics form and going through an ethical process had been removed from the BA student course, which might be a little troubling as there are real ethical dilemmas involved in such covert research as well as ethical approval being a really useful learning process for the students to go through.

We talked about the possibility of a more developmental ‘formative’ ethics process with maybe one A4 page with key aspects of ethics covered. This is what happens on the ARP unit of the PGCert so I suggested it would be good for you to look at the ARP ethical action plan template.

We also talked about the difference between the students that really understood and embraced the process and those who struggled more, especially with the vocabulary.

We discussed the possibility of a glossary being given in advance as there were quite a few key concepts that might be a little more complex.

I suggested providing not only a definition for the words in the glossary but also a sentence with the word in context so the students could see how it is used. We also agreed that it was not your role to provide translations and there is no guarantee they would be correct. Students could see the concepts used and translate as needed.

We acknowledged the need for more scaffolding of knowledge and difficult concepts at this level while also encouraging more agency in students. Supports like the glossary should help in this process.

It was an interesting and reflective conversation- one of many we have had along the way in the TPP unit. Please keep challenging yourself, your students, your learning and the institution.

Karen Matthewman

Part Three

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

Karen, I really appreciated our discussion! It was fascinating and wide-ranging, and it helped me reflect deeply on my teaching approach. The task I designed for students initially seemed quite simple, but as we explored it, it became clear that it carried layers of hidden complexity. Your insights have given me valuable perspectives on how to refine the session further, particularly in making the critical and ethical dimensions more accessible without overwhelming students.

Key Takeaways & Planned Actions

Our conversation reinforced the importance of explicitly addressing the ethical challenges involved in covert research and highlighted the significance of conducting ethical research in general. The lack of an ethics form for the BA course raises concerns, as students continue to face real ethical dilemmas in their research. I plan to introduce a formative ethics process, possibly using a simplified A4 ethics form to highlight key considerations. Referring to the ARP ethical action plan template will be a helpful starting point for this design. I initiated this process last year with a different course leader, where we collaborated on creating an ethical form to enable Y3 students to conduct research with people while adhering to ethical procedures; however, since this was not formalised through an ethics committee, the current course leader has discarded the idea. I can understand this decision, as I’m unclear why we don’t have a proper ethical procedure in place for BA courses at LCC. Many colleagues allow students to collaborate with individuals, including vulnerable populations, which makes me question why we pursue this without ethics. This greatly frustrates me at LCC as it undermines my core values, and I’m genuinely struggling with it. I will advocate for this, but I’m uncertain how much influence I can exert.

You highlighted how I had taken a ‘straight’ activity and deepened it by integrating critical reflection, ethical considerations, and connections to literature. While this makes the experience richer, it also makes it harder for some students to digest. To mitigate this, I will focus on providing clearer scaffolding throughout the process. This means breaking down complex ideas into more manageable segments and ensuring students have reference points to support their understanding.

One of the key issues we discussed was the variation in how students engaged with the process. Some embraced it fully, while others struggled, particularly with vocabulary. To support these students, I will introduce a glossary of key terms in advance. Based on your suggestion, I will not only provide definitions but also include example sentences demonstrating each term in context. I really liked this idea instead of providing a translation in different languages of key terms! This will help students grasp both meaning and application without relying on direct translations, which may not always be accurate and scaffold student’s agency.

Our discussion reaffirmed that while students need structured support, they also need to develop agency in their learning. The glossary and ethics scaffolding will serve as supports rather than replacements for their own critical engagement. By giving them the tools to navigate complex concepts independently, I hope to strike the right balance between guidance and self-directed learning.

This conversation has reinforced the importance of both clarity and critical engagement in my teaching. Moving forward, I am excited to implement the ethics scaffolding, refine the session’s structure, and provide better linguistic support for students. I appreciate your encouragement to keep questioning and improving, both for myself and for my students. Thank you for your thoughtful insights and for challenging me to push these ideas further!

Session/artefact to be observed/reviewed: Workshop plan

Size of student group: 6 – 8

Observer: Antonella Nonnis

Observee: Matthew Carless

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 (completed by Matt)

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 an introductory session for the MA film cohort to introduce those taking the cinematography pathway into the Alexa Mini LF camera system. The session is a full day, from 10am – 5pm.

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

It will be the first time I meet the group in their time on the MA, after this where possible I will work in a supporting role with some of their lecturers. Usually I only see the MA cohort for 1-4 sessions a year, due to my commitments on the BA’s and the amount of students, unfortunately I’m not as available as I’d like to be to support these MA courses.

What are the intended or expected learning outcomes?

• The student will understand how to use and handle all of the equipment available from UAL for their course work
• Students will feel confident using PL lenses and how to correctly set up the WC4 hand unit to remotely control the lenses and camera
• Students will have basic understanding of how to operate the Alexa Mini LF in both a static and handheld operating modes
• Students will have a basic understanding of how to physically work together in a camera team
• They will understand how to set up and safely use what lighting provision is available for their coursework

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

In the final exercise of the day, they will work as a team to film and light some basic setups. While they are setting up I will move around the room and support them as needed, adding in some context/giving ideas to how equipment is used on set. In the past some students requested to take this footage with them so they can practise colour grading/editing this in their own time. This has been driven by student requests in the past and not an assigned task by myself.

Are there potential difficulties or specific areas of concern?

Something that is always an issue for any of my technical sessions is the difference of experience of students before they arrive. As we only have one day, there is a lot to look over within this time. This being an MA many students have a lot of prior experience, but some are taking this to completely move career paths and have never held a camera before. With this in mind I try to keep a steady pace so everyone can follow what each item is and why it’s important. Often I dip into my experience as a practitioner and give context to where/why/how these items are used on set, or ask the students to give me their own examples to the class.

How will students be informed of the observation/review?

N/A

What would you particularly like feedback on?

Any advice on how to best settle into the session to help calm or put the students at ease? This is something I observed in my micro-teaching and it felt very alien to me, so I’ve been wondering if this would be an idea to include, to help focus the students/be a good icebreaker.

In regard to the issue with students’ difference in experience stated above, I will task those who have more experience to help support the others in the morning. Then in the afternoon when they are practicing with the camera, I ensure everyone switches rolls (Operator, AC, on Camera, Grip etc) and try to make sure they all try everything at least once.

Some prior feedback from the academic team I have had is to lose the lighting element at the end as I am trying to squeeze too much in. I’d always rather be prepared with more content than needed, so in case we have more time/I can adjust the sessions on the fly. Often with MA teams the skills gap is so wide I need to set some students’ other work in the afternoon so I can focus on the students who need my support the most.

Looking forward to your thoughts 🙂

How will feedback be exchanged?

Completing ROI forms and having a video discussion in March.

Part Two (completed by Antonella)

Observer to note down observations, suggestions and questions:

Matthew’s Intro to Alexa Mini LF workshop is well-structured and engaging, effectively balancing technical instruction, hands-on learning, and teamwork. The session provides students with a strong foundation in camera operation and cinematography, ensuring that they understand the Alexa Mini LF and develop collaborative skills essential for industry practice. The interactive approach and adaptability to different student experience levels are particular strengths, making the session both informative and engaging. Below is a breakdown of the key strengths and areas for potential enhancement.

Strengths of the Lesson Plan

1. Clear Structure & Logical Progression

The session follows a well-organized flow, beginning with foundational camera setup in the morning and transitioning into practical applications in the afternoon. This structure allows students to build confidence before working more independently.

2. Hands-On Learning & Active Participation

The workshop effectively prioritises experiential learning, ensuring students actively engage with the Alexa Mini LF rather than passively absorbing information. Exercises such as rigging from sticks to handheld and lens mapping practice reinforce technical skills through direct practice.

3. Consideration of Different Learning Levels

The session acknowledges students’ varied experience levels and promotes peer-supported learning. A tiered learning approach was suggested, where more experienced students could begin exploring lighting concepts earlier while others focus on mastering camera fundamentals. Matthew already implements this informally but structuring it explicitly in the lesson plan would enhance its effectiveness.

4. Realistic Industry Application

The final lighting recreation exercise is particularly effective. It challenges students to replicate professional lighting setups, fostering problem-solving skills and teamwork. Even when the lighting segment is omitted due to time constraints, students still gain a strong understanding of camera exposure and its relationship to lighting.

5. Use of Learning Resources

Integrating faculty-produced guides and external resources (such as the Alexa Mini Build Visual Guide and lens mapping video) provides students with valuable supplementary materials.

Areas for Enhancement

1.     Instructional Delivery Adjustments

Step-by-Step Handouts Guides & Visuals: I can see that you offer this in your slides. However, to help those who struggle with multitasking and understanding, concise, one-page handouts with key setup instructions can alleviate the pressure of keeping pace with the build, particularly for those unfamiliar with the equipment and terminology or with dyspraxia. They can also help them remember what they have done afterwards. Additionally, multitasking requires a significant cognitive load; although students are fresh at the beginning of the session, this could help them maintain focus and autonomy.

Annotated slides pics: While you have provided a general step-by-step guide on the slide, which students find very helpful, breaking those steps further with annotations that display actions, directions, movements, and labels of parts might simplify these steps.

Label physical components: While this may not be practical, labelling the items and components directly could assist students unfamiliar with the equipment and the terminology used.

Glossary Handouts/Posters: Defining key terms such as CCM-1, EVF (MVF-1), WC4, EF Cine Lenses, EI, codec, exposure triangle, and lens mapping would enhance retention and understanding. You could print the glossary on large A1 to A2 poster-sized sheets distributed across 3 to 4 locations in the room for easy access at any time.

2. Balancing Demonstration & Student Engagement

While Matthew prefers a “build together” approach, a “show one step – students do one step” method may improve retention, especially for those struggling with multitasking. Providing a printed step-by-step guide could help students follow along at their own pace and serve as a reference later.

3. Enhancing Reflection & Feedback

Currently, the session lacks a formal reflection section at the end. Incorporating a structured conclusion where students share their biggest takeaway, challenges faced, and remaining questions could strengthen learning outcomes. Collecting written feedback (via forms or digital tools) would help refine future sessions based on student input.

Final Thoughts

Matthew’s workshop is highly interactive, well-paced, and engaging, providing students with a strong foundation in cinematography. By formalising some of his existing practices—such as tiered learning, structured reflection, and improved visual aids—he can further enhance the clarity and effectiveness of his teaching. This feedback aims to build on the strong foundations already in place and support the continuous improvement of an already well-structured session.

Part Three (completed by Matt)

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

I have really enjoyed the process of completing the observation for this module. I was paired with Antonella, an academic from LCC, whose specialism is in User Experience Design. Before we began our meeting, we were both concerned that, coming from such different fields, we wouldn’t know how to help each other. However, we both agreed that this was actually a huge advantage, as we could approach each other’s work with fresh eyes.

I had asked Antonella to review my workshop plan for the MA Film Introduction to the Alexa Mini LF course, which I run once a year. A copy of this plan can be found here:

Workshop Plan 

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Wtm55e9X1wDt5ofAljJXiTNCNFE5nOiRBaeDPPGq3so/edit?usp=sharing

She made some great points on how I can improve my session:

• Add aids to the visual guides: In part of my lesson plan, I have created a follow-along photo guide. Although this can be useful for students with a background in the field, Antonella felt some students might struggle to understand what is being referred to in each picture. She proposed adding annotations to highlight the specifics of what I wanted the students to focus on.
• Build a handout/guide for the Alexa Mini LF assembly: Building on the above point, she suggested turning this visual guide into a more comprehensive build guide for the Alexa Mini LF. Instead of just using it as a reference on the day, students could have access to a guide that helps them build and tick off the different components as they go. This step-by-step handout should be both physical and digital so students can access it in the workshop and afterward.
• Create a glossary of acronyms and a list of components: She also suggested creating a glossary of acronyms and components for the students. During our discussion, she pointed out that many students may not be familiar with some of the terminology used in the session. To ensure all students are on the same page, I could produce a glossary and include it in the linked information already available for my session, alongside any other third-party resources.
• How to support a wide range of needs in my workshops: After describing my session, Antonella mentioned that some students may feel overstimulated by the amount of information. The above points were ways to help alleviate this, giving students control over how to access information after the session (handouts, glossary, etc.).

Incorporate time for reflection: She also suggested adding a reflective exercise to the session. This would give students the opportunity to think back on what they have learned and how they might apply it moving forward. This advice, which I also received from my tutor in other feedback, is something I’ve been exploring separately. I’ve noticed a pattern in the reading I’ve done that promotes reflective practice, which I am already trying to implement into my work.

To conclude, Antonella provided some wonderful insights and ideas on how I can expand the accessibility of my workshops. There is a common thread throughout what I teach, and I’m always fighting against the need to cram too much in. My discipline is very technical, and there are always many things to fit into each session, alongside the creative application. Her comments have helped me see how I can better impart this information to my students so that every student gets the most out of my sessions.

Session/artefact to be observed/reviewed: Lesson plan/Slides/Activity

Size of student group: 39

Observer: Matt Careless

Observee: Antonella Nonnis

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 (Completed by Antonella)
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 content is presented during the Friday morning session of week 2 for the Enquiry in Design for User Experience unit. It is the first unit of the 2024/25 academic year for second-year students enrolled in the User Experience Design BA (Hons) course. The previous Wednesday, students received a brief requiring them to conduct non-participant observations of individuals at the ‘Who Am I’ exhibit at the Science Museum. They are tasked to document how people interact within the space and with each other, critically reflecting on their engagement and interactions in the exhibit’s physical and digital realms. They are to analyse both primary and secondary data, visualise and synthesise their findings, identify pain points where interactions with digital and physical spaces could be enhanced, propose design solutions, and document and curate the design processes.

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

I have been working with this class since September 2024 as Y2 Lead – their main point of contact.

What are the intended or expected learning outcomes?

For students to grasp the implications of conducting ‘covert’ research involving people (including benefits and limitations), understanding research ethics, areas of ethical concerns, practicalities of doing ethical research, and ethical concerns for this unit.

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

At the end of the slides, students did an outside class activity called ‘Point of view’

• Participants: Individual work
• Time: ~ 30 minutes (15 mins of writing) + in class discussion

As a class, we went to the Typo cafè and observed other people.

I asked students to use a notebook with 3 separate pages to free-write from at least three different perspectives about the space around them.

They were not allowed at any time in the writing to mention directly what perspective they are writing from and what their viewpoint is or to use any word given in the prompt. Instead, they had to use their five senses and try to imagine writing about the environment as if they were a different person.

Later, when we returned to class, I asked students to take one of the pages they thought was their strongest and hand it to me. I then mixed up all the pages and discussed what point of view they thought each was written from and why.

The aims of this activity are clearly explained to students before the activity starts, such as:

• Look at the same space and group of people, but adjust your viewpoint.
• Recognising your prejudices and assumptions is essential to being open to other people’s points of view.

Students can learn a great deal about how their life experiences influence their perception of others and what it might be like to experience things from others’ perspectives. However, they must also grapple with the concept that unbiased research is impossible. It is important to recognise one’s own biases.

Are there potential difficulties or specific areas of concern?

Many students are unfamiliar with the key concepts expressed, and they find it challenging to consider ethical implications when designing UX. UX design is all about improving people’s experiences by getting to know them, their needs, strengths, knowledge, challenges, etc., and conveying experiences that are meaningful, fair, respectful, beneficial, and resonate with people instead of being exploitative, individualistic (based on design preferences), or universalistic (based on dominant norms).

Some students have low language proficiency and encounter difficulties during sessions. I strive to alleviate this through clear communication, although conveying tasks and concepts can sometimes be challenging.

How will students be informed of the observation/review?

N/A

What would you particularly like feedback on?

I would greatly appreciate any thoughts on maintaining students’ focus and supporting those with lower language abilities. I would also welcome any feedback on simplifying language (I recently thought of providing a glossary for the key terms used throughout the unit and perhaps translating them into the main languages spoken in class – any thought on this ?  ), the content itself, how it is structured, and the exercises.

How will feedback be exchanged?

Verbally, via Teams, and written.

Part Two (completed by Matt)

Observer to note down observations, suggestions and questions:

Hey Antonella 🙂

Firstly I just wanted to say thank you for being my partner for this observation, I thoroughly enjoyed looking through the lecture notes you sent me. It looks to me like a wonderfully thought out module which is very engaging for the students.  I think we covered this well in the recorded meeting the other day but below are the few ideas I had that we spoke about.

Maintaining Student focus – Breaking up the information

Something that I think might be helpful within the main body of the lecture is to break this up with some physical activity to help solidify the students’ understanding of this information. The slides you have presented are wonderfully informative, however I think depending on the learner this could possibly feel overwhelming if they are new to the ideas.

Something that I think might help to settle some of this information and the group is to split them off into smaller teams after the first 30 – 45 minutes of the lecture and prompt them to discuss some of the content.

Exercise idea – 15mins/20mins

Split the class into smaller groups, get them to discuss and write down a list of the ethical concerns. Then they have to try and think up how you can practically mitigate this, again matching this to what they have written down.

You could then open up the discussion by getting each team to name a concern and how they would mitigate it. You would then be able to cover the next few slides of information in a more conversational way, as you move into defining the practicalities of conducting research.

Thoughts on language used

To me the slides you have presented are clear and well written, however there might be a bit too much information presented on them at one time. I think splitting this into two separate handouts (personally I would go physical if possible and put them on moodle ofc) one a glossary of terms as you have suggested, but another with some of the facts/legislation on.

With any dates/legislation etc I think for the students it would be best to be able to come back to this at a later date and review. By losing some of the information on the slides it puts more focus on your verbal points in the moment.

A glossary of terms I think also would be an exceptional idea! Students often are not as equipped with the terminology they need and adding this as an asset I think would be a great addition to the lecture. If this is available on moodle beforehand as well, those who chose to use it might have a better retention from the session.

Handouts for forms

In the practicalities segment of this lecturer when you are giving information of the consent forms etc, do you have any physical examples in class? I think this would be really useful for the students to see an example during the session.

Class exercise

Something here which might be useful, is to hand out/give a digital example before the break of a piece of freewriting. On their break ask them to give this a quick read and for them to think about the form/way it is written, what it is etc. I feel this prompt will be useful to the students if they haven’t had much experience of doing this practice before.

Breathwork exercise?

Additionally you might want to seed the idea of using breathwork to center themselves before they begin to write/observe. Introducing the idea of a simple counting from 5 – 1 slowly in time with nose to mouth breathing as an exercise in finding stillness. I’ve seen this work quite effectively in class before to help bring collective clarity before they begin the task.

Thank you again for pairing with me for this exercise, I really enjoyed our chat the other day 🙂

Part Three (completed by Antonella)

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

Matt, I really appreciate the time you took to provide such thoughtful feedback on my teaching session. It was incredibly useful to hear your perspective, especially since you approached it with a fresh and constructive lens. Your comments reinforced some areas I was already considering for improvement, but you also pointed out things I hadn’t fully reflected on. This process has been valuable in helping me refine my session structure, enhance student engagement, and provide better support materials.

Enhancing Student Engagement and Focus

One of the key takeaways from your feedback was the suggestion to break up content-heavy sections, particularly in the ethics discussion, by integrating more structured interaction. I agree entirely that simply asking the class open-ended questions often results in only one or two responses, which doesn’t always encourage deeper thinking. Your idea of having small group discussions where students brainstorm ethical risks and solutions before we open it up to the class makes a lot of sense. I’m planning to incorporate this approach so that students have a chance to engage more critically before we bring the discussion back to a larger setting. I think this will create a more dynamic classroom environment and improve engagement.

Refining Instructional Materials

You pointed out that my slides contain a lot of text, which could overwhelm some students. I’ve been debating this myself, so your feedback reinforced the need to adjust my approach. To address this, I will condense the slides to highlight essential points and shift detailed explanations into a supplementary handout. This will allow students to stay more present in the discussion without feeling overloaded.

Providing Concrete Examples for Exercises

I loved your suggestion of giving students a real-life example of the free-writing exercise before they attempt it. This makes perfect sense, as some students may struggle to visualise what’s expected of them. I will provide a sample before the break, allowing them to review it in advance and gain confidence before starting their own work

Supporting Diverse Learning Needs

Your suggestion about a glossary of key terms was another really valuable insight. Even though I know these concepts well, it’s easy to forget that technical terms might not be immediately clear to some students, particularly those with different levels of prior knowledge or language barriers. I love the idea of creating a printed glossary that students can reference throughout the session. This would be a small but meaningful addition that could help ensure everyone is on the same page, regardless of their background.

Exploring the Use of Breathwork for Grounding Students

The idea of integrating breathwork as a way to help students ground themselves before engaging in deep reflection was really interesting. I hadn’t considered this before, but I see how a brief breathing exercise or mindfulness moment could help students transition into a more focused state, especially before observational work. While I’m not sure how students would react to it, I’m definitely open to exploring ways to incorporate this kind of centering activity. Even if just a few students find it helpful, it could be a great addition to the session.

Final Reflection

Overall, your feedback has been incredibly useful in helping me refine my teaching approach. Your suggestions align well with my goals for the session, and I feel that by incorporating more interactive discussions, refining instructional materials, and providing additional resources, I can create a more engaging and accessible learning experience. I’m excited to implement these changes and see how they enhance the session moving forward. Thanks again for your thoughtful input; I really appreciate it!

Contextual Background

In my teaching context, I work with diverse Y2 BA students, many of whom face language barriers that impact their learning experiences. The class comprises fluent English speakers and students for whom English is a second or third language. These language differences have frustrated both groups rather than fostering a fruitful cross-cultural exchange. Fluent students perceive additional explanations and pauses as unnecessary delays, while non-fluent students struggle to understand and engage. This pedagogical challenge has raised concerns about inclusivity, engagement, and the overall quality of teaching and learning.

Evaluation of Current Strategies

To address these challenges, I have implemented several strategies:

• Allowing students to use mobile phones for translation and note-taking.
• Permitting students to record conversations to review later.
• Providing general written feedback via email to ensure clarity.
• Encouraging classroom participation through structured discussions, where each table explains key concepts.
• Offering written summaries and visual resources to reinforce learning.
• Fostering an inclusive classroom culture by normalising language struggles and drawing on my own experiences as a non-native English speaker.

These approaches have yielded mixed results. Students facing language barriers appreciate strategies such as the reiteration of concepts and peer support. However, as reflected in their mid-term feedback, fluent students sometimes feel disengaged: “I don’t love that at times we spend so much time talking in circles when we could be using that time for studio time/ checking in and seeing if we are on track for our work” or “i[sic] think its best to explain words or concepts once instead of asking if we know what it means each time“. This underscores the challenge of balancing different needs within the classroom.

Moving Forward

To enhance learning for all students while maintaining inclusivity, I am considering additional strategies informed by pedagogical research.

Arao and Clemens (2013) advocate for a transition from “safe spaces” to “brave spaces,” where discomfort is acknowledged as a necessary component of profound learning. By facilitating structured discussions surrounding linguistic challenges, and embracing racial, cultural, class, sex, identities, and beliefs differences (hooks, 1994), I aim to cultivate a classroom culture in which students partake in “courageous conversations” (Arao & Clemens, 2013, p. 135). This will assist students in recognising their peers’ difficulties rather than “othering” them (Kitchin, 1999).

Harris (2022) highlights how traditional definitions of participation can be exclusionary, particularly for introverted or non-native speakers. I plan to explore alternative engagement methods, such as:

• Allowing students time to formulate responses before speaking.
• Using anonymously written contributions via digital platforms.
• Encouraging reflective silence as part of the learning process.
• Implementing a buddy system for peer support.

These approaches align with research on introverted learning, which suggests that pressured verbal participation can be counterproductive (Harris, 2022).

To address comprehension issues, I propose recording sessions for students to review. This would support non-native speakers and those unable to attend. Additionally, integrating AI-based transcription tools could provide real-time captions, ensuring accessibility.

Drawing on Davies (2022), it is essential to recognise how structural inequalities create hidden barriers for students with language difficulties. The expectation of immediate verbal participation can disadvantage students who require more time to process language. Additionally, just as IQ testing in dyslexia assessments has been criticised for reinforcing systemic biases (Davies, 2022), standardised academic expectations may fail to accommodate multilingual learners.

Acknowledging these hidden challenges, I aim to shift the focus from verbal skills efficency-based thinking to inclusive practices. This means creating assessments that value diverse ways of demonstrating knowledge, such as multimodal assignments or group reflections that integrate spoken, written, and visual elements. Perhaps by moving away from a LO based assessment of communication of knowledge (Addison, 2014) “we will be better able to create pedagogical practices that engage [our creative and diverse] students, providing them with ways of knowing that enhance their capacity to live fully and deeply” (hooks, 1994, p.22).

Reflection on Future Practice

Implementing these changes will necessitate ongoing reflection and adaptation. While some students may resist shifts in classroom norms, research suggests that discomfort can foster growth (Arao & Clemens, 2013; hooks, 2014). By emphasising inclusivity, structured participation, and technological enhancements, I aim to create a more balanced and effective learning environment. Feedback from students and peers will be vital in assessing the success of these initiatives and refining them further.

(Total word count: 702)

References

Addison, N., 2014. Doubting learning outcomes in higher education contexts: From performativity towards emergence and negotiation. International Journal of Art & Design Education, 33(3), pp.313-325.

Arao, B., & Clemens, K. (2013). From safe spaces to brave spaces: A new way to frame dialogue around diversity and social justice. In The Art of Effective Facilitation (pp. 135-150). Routledge.

Czerniewicz, L., & Cronin, C. (Eds.). (2023). Higher Education for Good: Teaching and Learning Futures. Open Book Publishers.

Davies, M. (2022). The White Spaces of Dyslexic Difference: An Intersectional Analysis. In S. Broadhead (Ed.), Access and Widening Participation in Arts Higher Education: Practice and Research (pp. 143-156). Springer International Publishing.

Harris, K. (2022). Embracing the Silence: Introverted Learning and the Online Classroom. Spark: UAL Creative Teaching and Learning Journal, 5(1), 101-104.

hooks, b., 2014. Teaching to transgress. Routledge.

Kitchin, R., 1999. Creating an awareness of others: Highlighting the role of space and place. Geography, 84(1), pp.45-54.