My PGCert Journey

I loved this second workshop, not because it was better than the first, but because it introduced me to bell hooks, who already inspired my pedagogical and personal growth.

Before the workshop, we were assigned two readings on two topics: “Aims of Art Education” and “Learning Outcomes as a Debate.” This reflection will focus on the former reading, “Talking Art as the Spirit Moves Us” by bell hooks (1995).

Gloria Jean Watkins (1952-2021)[1] adopted the name bell hooks in honour of her grandmother, Bell Blair Hooks and used lowercase letters to shift the focus from her identity to her ideas. She was an African-American writer, teacher, feminist, critic, and intellectual dissident, internationally recognised for her work on love, race, gender, art, history, feminism, media, and social class. Widely regarded as a feminist activist and cultural critic, she established the bell hooks Institute at Berea College in Kentucky, where she began a professorship in residence in 2004.

This article, along with Teaching to Transgress (1994), which I discovered while researching bell hooks, has reinforced my belief in the importance of fostering critical thinking in my teaching. It has challenged both my own learning journey and that of my students by encouraging us to question our assumptions, recognise and embrace diversity—whether in our individual needs, strengths, challenges, or those of the people we design for and with. This idea deeply resonates with my approach to teaching. As a User Experience Design lecturer, I encourage my students to truly understand the people they design for and with, considering their needs, preferences, and how to work ethically and inclusively. I emphasise the importance of designing with empathy, but also with intellectual rigour, extending beyond empathy itself.

Shifting to a more inclusive approach enriches our learning experience, the impact of student’s works and the lives of the people they design for and with. Brené Brown[2], in remembering hooks influence on her teaching, reads a quote from one of the paragraphs in Teaching to Transgress (2014) where hooks in reference to Freire’s work talks about “education as the practice of freedom” as a practice where “students are not the only ones asked to share, to confess.” hooks continues, saying, “Engaged pedagogy does not simply seek to empower students. Any classroom that employs a holistic learning model [like we do at LCC] will also be a place where the teachers grow and are empowered by the process. That empowerment cannot happen if we refuse to be vulnerable while encouraging the students to take risks”. Brené Brown refers to this passage as a eureka moment when, in her first teaching experience, she was afraid of losing control of her students and ended up losing complete control of her classroom, gaining complete trust. I seek to do that.

I found this super inspirational and I ended up buying Teaching to Transgress. In my class, I try to enact this radical space of possibilities by encouraging my students to question and critique everything they are told, including what I tell them, their briefs, and the institutional systems they work with and for.

In Friday’s class with my students, this emphasis on critiquing emerged when we challenged our assumption with a group discussion about what impacts students’ learning, which is part of the brief they’ll work on this year. One student mentioned that it would be great if there could be zoned areas, such as a sensory-deprived space, making space with tools and machinery of every kind for students to go and do things when they want, a more creative social area where controlled music could be played in the background etc. Another student replied that achieving that flexibility in public spaces is impossible. We discussed this space of (im)possibilities – how systemic institutional decisions and priorities impact the way we design buildings for students and staff and the way they are perceived by us. I found this reminiscent of Bearden’s example brought about by hooks to illustrate how systemic oppression normalises harmful design biases across a variety of, in my case, design students who are or should be specialist in this field. I urged them to question the system, to stand up against poor management and design choices, and not to let these limitations stifle their creative ideas or inclusive values. I encouraged them to find ways to overcome these challenges and transform the impossible into the possible. I want to bring more of this rebellious spirit to my class and enable my students to feel safe but also brave not only in speaking out but also in speaking up (Arao and Clemens, 2023).

(Total word count: 756)

---

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bell_hooks

[2] Brené Brown, on bell hooks https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m6ZL-YxSrDQ&t=113s

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. and Clemens, K., 2023. 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.

hooks, b., 1994. Teaching to transgress. Routledge

hooks, b., 1995. Talking Art as the Spirit Moves Us. In Art on My Mind: Visual Politics. Illustrated edition. New York: New Press, p.101.

Object-Based Learning (OBL) (500 words – actual words 595)

I focused on Empathic Modelling (EM) (Nicolle and Maguire, 2003; Poulson et al., 1996). EM aims to help participants experience and understand different disabilities to inform inclusive design. In it, participants use modified objects or environments to simulate conditions like visual impairment, mobility limitations, or hearing loss. Nicolle and Maguire (2003) explain that the goal is to develop empathy for users with diverse needs.

The PDF below shows the timed session plan and proposed activities.

The slides show the workshop’s content from start to finish.

I asked my peers to work in pairs. One person would wear the prop, participate in the task, and think aloud about their experience, while the other would be the guide/observer, documenting the experience by taking notes.

People seemed to enjoy the activities (see Figs 1, 2, 3), although the pair who simulated hand arthritis and tactile sensitivity loss did not fully immerse in the experience. This was likely due to how the buttons were taped to the joints, suggesting the need to either reconsider this task or assist the prop users in adequately positioning the props. They mentioned that holding small objects would have been more challenging.

After the activity, we took time to reflect critically on the experience. I asked my peers three questions to encourage provocative discussions, stimulate critical thinking, and challenge current pedagogical practices and attitudes toward diversity.

After discussing the second question, only one member identified a limitation, expressing negative feelings toward the practice, as it tends to ‘other’ people with disabilities. This critical reflection helped me transition into presenting my next slide, which I prepared based on previous experiences where people often struggle to identify limitations. This sparked a discussion about both the benefits and limitations of the practice. To address the final question, one peer suggested conducting more (prep/primary/secondary) research to move beyond superficial empathy. This was a valuable point, as approaches that rely solely on empathy can be limited (Spiel, et al., 2017). I also proposed that our attitudes and strategies to differences could be a tool for becoming better human beings, not just better designers. We then briefly looked into the medical and social models of disabilities, summarising the difference between the two and closing the argument on why inclusive design is essential

The final discussion was very reflective. Then, it was time for written feedback (Figure 4).

During discussions, a question arose about whether this method is still used today. Aside from that, all feedback was positive, with some describing the session as “very informative = medical vs social models,” “very reflective,” a “good exercise to discuss and impact,” and “experiential.” Participants noted that the session was “easy to understand,” “very accessible,” and opened up to a broader question. It touched on a “big question but offered a quick way to think about it.” Peers mentioned that it “makes you think more deeply about the students’ experiences” and that it was “a really great way to prompt thinking.” Additionally, it was noted that working in pairs was effective, as both roles felt relevant. Peers felt the roles “were important” and “allowed me to think about my role and my responsibilities in inclusive design.” Finally, the session provided “good critical learning.” Moving forward, I plan to rethink the physical disability task or assist the prop users in adequately positioning the tape and buttons. Empathic Modelling has proven successful at provoking critical thinking. As a starting point for reflection, this approach highlighted EM’s limitations and challenged current pedagogies. The proposed learning outcomes were achieved, which was all I could have hoped for.

References

Bennett, C.L. and Rosner, D.K., 2019, May. The promise of empathy: Design, disability, and knowing the “other”. In Proceedings of the 2019 CHI conference on human factors in computing systems (pp. 1-13).

Nicolle, C. and Maguire, M., 2003, June. Empathic Modelling in Teaching Design for All. In HCI (4) (pp. 143-147).

Silverman, A.M., 2015. The perils of playing blind: Problems with blindness simulation and a better way to teach about blindness.

Spiel, K., Frauenberger, C., Hornecker, E. and Fitzpatrick, G., 2017, May. When empathy is not enough: Assessing the experiences of autistic children with technologies. In Proceedings of the 2017 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 2853-2864).

Poulson, D., Ashby, M., Richardson, S.,1 996. Technology Initiative for Disabled and Elderly People. In USERfit: A practical handbook on user-centred design for assistive technology. ESCE-EC-EAEC.

Contextual Background

In my teaching experience, I worked with many neurodiverse cohorts, including students diagnosed with autism, dyslexia, ADHD, bipolar disorder, and social anxiety. Many also manage additional responsibilities such as caregiving and employment alongside their studies. Traditional teaching methods often do not fully accommodate neurodivergent learners, leading to participation anxiety, sensory discomfort, and communication challenges. This case study reflects on my strategies to create an inclusive environment that supports neurodivergent BA Y2 students at LCC while ensuring equitable engagement and access to learning opportunities.

Evaluation of Current Strategies

To accommodate students’ diverse needs, I have implemented several inclusive strategies:

• Language Sensitivity: I avoid ableist language (Bottema-Beutel et al., 2021) and encourage students to do the same.
• Environmental Adjustments: Modify the room lighting and minimise background noise to assist students with sensory sensitivities.
• Flexible Attendance and Breaks: Allowing students to take breaks or leave the room as needed without penalty.
• Accessible Content: Provide advanced slides with high readability formatting (16/18pt fonts min, high contrast, clear layouts, alt text) (LCC, Teaching Hub, 2022).
• Alternative Participation Methods: To ease participation anxiety, encourage doodling, quiet participation, and anonymous feedback (Harris, 2022).
• Group-Based Learning: Implementing small-group critiques and peer feedback instead of class-wide critiques to reduce performance pressure.
• Use of Translation Tools: Allowing students, particularly those from non-English-speaking backgrounds, to use translation apps.

These approaches have improved accessibility for many students, yet challenges remain. Some students still struggle with attendance, engagement, and collaboration, particularly in group activities where communication breakdowns occur. Additionally, ensuring inclusivity for neurodivergent and multilingual students while maintaining an engaging classroom environment for all remains an ongoing challenge.

Moving Forward

Neurodiversity advocates emphasise shifting from interventionist approaches to ones that value diverse cognitive profiles (Glass, Meyer, and Rose, 2013). To create a more inclusive learning space, I aim to implement additional strategies aligned with Universal Design for Learning (CAST, 2018), such as by providing varied ways for students to interact with the learning material, including choices in activities, level of challenge, and feedback mechanisms, and allowing students to demonstrate their knowledge through different methods like writing, speaking, creating projects, or using assistive technology.

1. Enhancing Student Agency Through Dialogue

I plan to initiate open individual and group conversations with students, in person or online, to gather feedback on how they experience the class environment. This aligns with Milton, Martin, and Melham’s (2016) advocacy for co-creating autistic-friendly spaces. Encouraging student agency to shape their learning environment will provide insight into adjustments that can benefit the entire cohort.

2. Implementing Multi-Modal Learning Approaches

Expanding multimodal learning tools, such as video lectures with captions, visual aids, and interactive activities, will cater to students with varied learning styles and language proficiencies. This approach also aligns with Kolb and Kolb’s (2010) theory on ludic learning spaces, which support experiential and flexible learning.

3. Improving Classroom Design and Accessibility

Physical classroom constraints remain barriers, such as poorly placed screens, lack of temperature control, and inadequate space for all students. While institutional constraints limit immediate changes, I will advocate for more flexible learning environments that prioritise student comfort and accessibility.

4. Strengthening Peer Support and Group Collaboration

While small-group discussions have helped reduce anxiety around participation, communication breakdowns remain an issue. To address this, I will:

• Assign clearer group roles to ensure equitable contribution.
• Implement structured peer mentoring to support students who struggle with social interaction.
• Develop guidelines for effective group work, integrating frameworks like IDEO’s collaborative design principles.

Reflection on Future Practice

By embedding student feedback into my pedagogical approach and integrating research-backed inclusive strategies, I aim to cultivate an environment where neurodivergent and multilingual students feel valued. Balancing accessibility with engagement is an ongoing challenge. Still, by leveraging Universal Design for Learning principles and maintaining an open dialogue with students, I can continue refining my teaching practice to effectively support diverse learners.

(Totals word count: 634)

References

Arao, B. and Clemens, K., 2023. 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.

Bottema-Beutel, K., Kapp, S.K., Lester, J.N., Sasson, N.J. and Hand, B.N., 2021. Avoiding ableist language: Suggestions for autism researchers. Autism in Adulthood.

CAST (2018). Universal Design for Learning Guidelines version 2.2. Available at: http://udlguidelines.cast.org (Accessed: 05 January 2025).

Glass, D., Meyer, A. and Rose, D., 2013. Universal Design for Learning and the Arts. Harvard Educational Review, 83(1), pp.98-119.

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

Kolb, A.Y. and Kolb, D.A., 2010. Learning to Play, Playing to Learn: A Case Study of a Ludic Learning Space. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 23(1), pp.26-50. Milton, D., Martin, N. and Melham, P., 2016. Beyond Reasonable Adjustment: Autistic-Friendly Spaces and Universal Design. Pavilion.

LCC, Teaching Hub, 2022. Making Accessibility a Habit: Power Point. https://lccteaching.myblog.arts.ac.uk/make-accessibility-a-habit-power-point/ Accessed on 05/03/2025

The session began with a creative icebreaker. We were spread across four tables, and we selected postcards that resonated with us and explained our choices to the group. My selection – a serene sea scene with an undercurrent of lurking danger, with broken coloured streamers floating around – mirrored my love for the sea and the sense of uncertainty I feel navigating my current role at UAL. Hearing others explain their choices provided insight into their perspectives and artistic practices, fostering a sense of community and shared purpose.

We transitioned into a timeline activity, exploring pivotal moments in higher education (HE) history and their impact. Reflecting on these events highlighted the delayed nature of systemic reforms, sparking a shared frustration about the pace of change. Later, group discussions around social justice were lively and uncovered shared understandings of equality, equity, and representation while emphasising the importance of considering marginalised perspectives and advocating for systemic change. 

These were particularly relevant to my teaching context. Balancing the demands of teaching, research, and student support within limited contractual hours (3 days a week) often feels overwhelming. This year, the pastoral care aspect has been especially challenging as I navigate the complex needs of diverse students with little formal training. I strive to create an inclusive learning environment by adapting resources and offering flexible support, but systemic constraints often hinder these efforts. 

The importance of inclusive and positive/encouraging language in teaching, highlighted during our discussion of task 1’s assigned readings, where we all reshuffled around five tables and grouped with peers assigned to the same reading, resonated deeply. I frequently grapple with how best to communicate effectively, positively and inclusively, especially in feedback or critique scenarios, where I noticed most of my students lack engagement, I guess, primarily because of language barriers around understanding and communicating.

We broke to have lunch and regrouped around the now five tables. I remained seated in the last seat I moved to for task 1. We were given a one-page reading on the “charismatic lecturer” and discussed this again together among the whole class, reflecting and debating lively about whether we sympathised with Stephanie or Max more and why, what stood out in the text etc.,  then moved to look at the handout showing the dimensions of the Professional Standard Framework, in particular the highlighted criteria for descriptor one, and were reminded that TPP (unit 1 of PGCert), is accredited against these criteria enabling us to gain AFAHE when completed. Lastly, we were given an example of a case study but did not do the mind map on the slides, so we discussed the TTP Checklist more than we probably should have done :).

Moving forward, I aim to apply the insights gained from this session to refine my approach to social justice in teaching by a) expanding my knowledge: to inform my practice, I will delve deeper into the theories of pedagogy and intersectional social justice introduced in the PGCert course, b) enhancing inclusivity: continue prioritising inclusive and thoughtful language in all student interactions while exploring additional ways to adapt resources to meet diverse needs, c) seeking support: advocate for systemic improvements, such as access to lecture recordings, ergonomic, flexible, adaptive and sensory inclusive teaching spaces, and manageable student-to-staff ratios, d) professional development: explore training opportunities that focus on supporting students’ socio-emotional well-being and more effectively managing pastoral care demands.

Despite systemic challenges, this session underscored the importance of fostering a just and equitable learning environment and reflecting on practising a fair, just and inclusive feedback tango. By building on these reflections and advocating for change, I hope to better support my students and my own professional growth.

Lastly, I loved meeting new colleagues, hearing about their experiences, and making new connections. Knowing that other colleagues experience and feel the same about specific topics and aspects of working at UAL is comforting, and it makes me look forward to the next session! I’m glad I was offered the chance to do this last year 🙂

(Total word count: 668)

The second task asked us to read one paper of our choice from the “Teaching at UAL” reading list. I chose “On the spectrum within art and design academic practice” by Luca Damiani (2018), a practicing artist and a UAL lecturer that provides a glimpse into his artistic practice and neurodivergence and how the two entangle in his creative expressions.

While Damiani’s exploration of his personal neurodivergence offers valuable insight into the experiences of a neurodivergent artist and educator, my expectations of the text differed. In my opinion, there are some critical gaps in how the neurodiversity paradigm could be expanded, particularly in supporting neurodivergent students in art and design education. One area of discomfort comes from the language used of “disorder” in the context of neurodiversity (Kapp, 2020). 

Damiani uses the terms “Asperger syndrome” and “autism spectrum disorder” throughout his reflection – terms often tied to medical models of disability. This medical framing, focusing on diagnosis and deficits, contrasts with a neurodiversity perspective that emphasises neurological variations rather than pathology (Bottema-Beutel et al., 2021). Neurodiversity views conditions like autism not as disorders but as natural variations in human cognition and advocates for a shift from deficit-based models to strength-based perspectives. By shifting the focus from intervention and correction to acceptance, empowerment, and an inclusive support system, teachers can better align to a neurodiversity paradigm.

While Damiani does touch on the unique strengths neurodivergent individuals might bring (such as heightened focus or alternative ways of thinking), focusing on the diagnostic labels and “traits” of autism risks unintentionally reinforcing the notion of autism as an inherent problem. This might undermine the positive identity neurodivergence can offer, potentially alienating some neurodivergent students who don’t identify with the medicalised narrative of disorder or high and low functioning.

Further, Damiani’s exploration of neurodivergent artists and his own practice raises a common narrative about autism (the “high functioning” type): that many autistic individuals are “geniuses” in specific domains, such as art or technology. While this narrative can be empowering, it risks reinforcing the stereotype that neurodivergence is only valuable if it leads to exceptional abilities. This places undue pressure on neurodivergent students to meet high expectations or prove “geniuses” in creative fields, potentially overlooking those who may not excel in traditional measures but contribute in more subtle, equally valuable ways.

Damiani’s personal perspective as an individual with Asperger syndrome provides valuable insider insights. Still, the paper could be further enriched by incorporating perspectives from a wider spectrum of neurodivergent voices. For instance, nonconventionally verbal autistic individuals may face different challenges than those defined as “high-functioning,” and addressing their needs requires different interventions and supports.

By adopting a neurodiversity perspective in education, I hoped the text would encourage a focus not only on understanding neurodivergent experiences but also on structural and pedagogical modifications to ensure that autistic students can thrive in learning environments. This could include insights from existing neurodiversity-inclusive practices or scholarship (e.g., the work of Steven Kapp¹, Damian Milton², Dinah Murray³, etc.), which provide valuable frameworks for inclusive pedagogy.

In essence, engaging with existing scholarship or frameworks around neurodivergent-inclusive practices – such as the work on Universal Design for Learning (UDL) (CAST, 2018) or neurodivergent-led education initiatives (Glass, Meyer and Rose, 2013) – would help anchor Damiani’s insights in broader, systemic approaches to inclusive art and design education.

Lastly, Damiani shares insights into his own neurodivergent experience and how it shapes his practice but discusses a few practical tools or concrete changes that could make the learning environment more accessible for autistic students in academic settings. While he offers a reflective narrative about sensory overload, need for routine, and difficulties with social interactions, the piece stops short of providing actionable guidance on how educators and institutions can actively support neurodivergent students in real-world academic environments.

(Total word count: 631)

Footnote

1. Kapp, S.K., 2022. Models of helping and coping with autism. In The Routledge International Handbook of Critical Autism Studies (pp. 255-269). Routledge. ↩︎
2. Milton, D., Martin, N. and Melham, P., 2016. Beyond reasonable adjustment: autistic-friendly spaces and Universal Design. Pavilion. ↩︎
3. Murray, D., 2020. Autistic People Against Neuroleptic Abuse. Autistic Community and the Neurodiversity Movement: Stories from the Frontline, pp.51-63. ↩︎

References:

Bottema-Beutel, K., Kapp, S.K., Lester, J.N., Sasson, N.J. and Hand, B.N., 2021. Avoiding ableist language: Suggestions for autism researchers. Autism in adulthood.

CAST (2018) Universal Design for Learning Guidelines version 2.2. Available at: http://udlguidelines.cast.org (Accessed: 05 January 2025).

Damiani, L.M., 2018. On the spectrum within art and design academic practice. Spark: UAL Creative Teaching and Learning Journal, 3(1), pp.16-25

Glass, D., Meyer, A. and Rose, D., 2013. Universal design for learning and the arts. Harvard Educational Review, 83(1), pp.98-119.

Kapp, S.K., 2020. Autistic community and the neurodiversity movement: Stories from the frontline (p. 330). Springer Nature.

Polly Savage’s The New Life: Mozambican Art Students in the USSR, and the Aesthetic Epistemologies of Anti-Colonial Solidarity (2022) examines the experiences of Mozambican bolseiros in the Soviet art education system during the 1980s. The text focuses on their training in Tashkent, Uzbekistan, and its impact on their artistic practices. The text delves into the complex dynamics of Soviet-Mozambican cultural exchanges, addressing both the imposition of hegemonic norms and the creative agency of Mozambican artists who navigated and reinterpreted these influences.

This was not my favourite reading from the assigned list. I initially struggled to engage with it, as the subject matter did not resonate with my interests, but once I started reading, I found it intellectually stimulating. The narrative highlights how socialist realism, the dominant artistic framework in the USSR, imposed figurative representations of the “ideal” socialist worker or revolutionary. My interest in avant-garde art movements, particularly Dada and Surrealism, amplified my discomfort with socialist realism’s ideological rigidity and resemblance to styles I associate with oppressive regimes and exclusionist art..

Walter Benjamin’s concept of the “aestheticization of politics” (1935) provides a useful framework for understanding this discomfort. Although Benjamin’s critique primarily addresses fascism, I find parallels in the manipulation of art under socialist realism. Where fascism used art to glorify irrational power and preserve the status quo, socialist realism glorified power structures grounded in Marxist-Leninist principles. While the ideological ends differed, the shared reliance on emotionally charged and visually monumental forms raises important questions about the manipulative potential of such visual strategies. For instance, Italian Futurism’s celebration of vitality and strength shares an aesthetic kinship with socialist realism, though the former embraced abstraction over figurative representation.

Savage’s discussion of how Mozambican artists adopted socialist realism also reveals the nationalist instrumentalisation of art in post-independence Mozambique. These works often glorified the anti-colonial struggle and FRELIMO’s vision of progress, showing how art became a tool for constructing a cohesive Mozambican national identity. This dual function—serving both socialist ideals and nationalist goals—struck me as a contradiction, reflecting a broader trend of political agendas co-opting art.

However, I also appreciated Savage’s nuanced portrayal of Mozambican artists as active agents rather than passive recipients of Soviet ideology. They adapted and reinterpreted socialist realism to reflect local struggles and cultural symbols, an act of creative resistance within a constrained framework. As highlighted in Figure 1, this subversive adaptation, (although limited by a nationalist proposition), reveals how art can negotiate power, identity, and aesthetics within anti-colonial solidarity and global socialist movements.

Savage also acknowledges the pragmatic motivations behind Mozambique’s alignment with socialist states. As Mekonnen notes, the Soviet bloc provided “the only narrow way of access to overseas” (Savage, 2022, p. 1083). This contextualises the bolseiros’ engagement with Soviet art not as pure ideological conformity but as a necessary strategy for cultural and intellectual development during a fraught political period.

Yet, the text’s broader political implications remain troubling. While Savage does not shy away from discussing FRELIMO’s authoritarianism in post-independence Mozambique, I felt this aspect could have been explored further. The centralisation of power under Samora Machel and the suppression of dissent arguably shaped the role of art as a nationalist tool. My discomfort with socialist realism partly stems from this context, where the government’s ideological goals limited creative autonomy.

Despite my initial resistance to the reading, it offered valuable insights into the tensions between form and content, freedom and propaganda, and modernism and realism.

Finally, Savage’s ideas have implications beyond art history, particularly for fields like UX design. Understanding the sociopolitical and cultural contexts of design is critical in creating inclusive, socially responsible, and culturally aware practices. The concept of “epistemologies of solidarity” encourages us to explore how design can reflect diverse values and struggles, fostering empathy and cross-cultural understanding. As a teacher, I already emphasise with these principles in my classes, urging students to critically consider how their work can empower marginalised voices or perpetuate existing hierarchies.

(Total word count: 655)

References:

Benjamin, W., 2018. The work of art in the age of mechanical reproduction. In A museum studies approach to heritage (pp. 226-243). Routledge.

Savage, P., 2022. ‘The New Life’: Mozambican Art Students in the USSR, and the Aesthetic Epistemologies of Anti-Colonial Solidarity. Art History, 45(5), pp.1078-1100.