This was a fantastically interactive workshop. In the discussion about semiotics, I enjoyed the discussion with my group about ‘stereotypical’ research images, bringing my right back to my Chemistry GCSE coursework, and how I still felt that process was what we are told to think as ‘proper’ research.
The poem exercise was an unusual one – we were tasked with looking through transcripts of interviews and creating a poem from choosing selected bits of the text. Lots of interesting story arcs came up! Using these creative tools can make the research and thinking really eye-opening. Your positionality is always part of this process.
PgCert groupwork – poem creation from transcript data
Coding
Advice from the session: Going through the text and highlighting what you think is important. Text, images, sounds. Coding is the first steps in making the text manageable, helping you make sense of what you’re looking at. What is the data telling me about this particular area of interest? In practice: Highlighting text, using Nvivo (qualitative data software), printing out different people in different colours. Try and put themes into words (be more descriptive at the time) instead of just using one word.
Presentation Practice
The five sentences were a really good help, and really guided me into chunking my project into different headings. My problem is I need to be more succinct and less waffly! I think at this stage as I have no data and just a head full of theoretical ideas and plans, it all still sounds so wishy washy. I’m hoping once I start analysing, the presentation will be easier to navigate.
I should begin by starting this post that although I have booked in a date for my intended focus group, I haven’t started any kind of analysis. This post is intended to help me consider my options. I came across these terms in the participation form, so I felt it best to begin investigating the terms before I send out the form.
Type of research: Face-to-face focus group (up to 5 students, 1 hour, 4 questions plus any prompts)
Understanding your own positionality is vital in finding the most appropriate research method. As Braun and Clarke (2006: 80) state: “At this point, it is important to acknowledge our own theoretical positions and values in relation to qualitative research… What is important is that the theoretical framework and methods match what the researcher wants to know, and that they acknowledge these decisions, and recognize them as decisions.”
What is my positionality? Student-centred learning, putting the students in the driving seat, experiential learning, and cyclical learning (I am learning as much from students in the way they respond to tasks and teach each other, as they are from my teaching).
Cyclic learning
Thematic Analysis
This is a qualitative data method that involves reading through a data set – in my case, transcripts from the focus group – and identifying pattern and reading from across the data.
Identifying patterns is important, particularly in responses from students at different stages. Thematic analysis also enables involving research participants at the analysis stage – this is quite an important factor in my positionality of student-centred learning, particularly around student ownership.
Thematic analysis is flexible and good for novice researchers (such as I am!), but it could also mean the qualitative data from the focus group could be interpreted in different ways, with decisions on that is less or more important to focus on. While it would be good to see any more patterns forming across different groups, that could be considered in a second cycle of research.
Braun and Clarke (2006: 81) – ” Thematic analysis can be an essentialist or realist method, which reports experiences, meanings and the reality of participants, or it can be a constructionist method, which examines the ways in which events, realities, meanings, experiences and so on are the effects of a range of discourses operating within society.”
In this case, the society on different levels – the student community with students as individuals with individual needs, the overall society of the BA Theatre Design course, and the society of practical collaborative working.
Step 1. Transcribe data from focus group Step 2. Create an initial set of codes (in a codebook) to represent the meanings and patterns. Identify interesting excerpts and apply codes to them. Step 3. Collate codes with supporting data. Group the coded excerpts together. Step 4. Group codes into potential themes (and sub-themes).
Step 5. Review and revise. Ensure each theme has enough supporting data and is distinct. How do the themes come together as a narrative? Step 6. Write the narrative. This should contain fully thought out themes, and communicate to the readers about the validity of the research. Why was it worth researching, and what does it help to uncover? It should make an argument for the claims you present.
Braun and Clarke (2006: 87) – Phases of thematic analysis
Braun, V. and Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), pp.77–101.
Narrative analysis
This is where researchers use narrative analysis to understand how participants construct a story and use a narrative in their responses. The data is reduced to a set of core narrative. The researcher then interprets the construction of that narrative. Narratives can be found in:
journals
letters
conversations
transcripts from interviews/focus groups
and any other narrative analysis format.
Examples of personal narratives:
Topical Stories – a restricted story about a specific moment in time e.g. Interview question “tell me about a time when you overcame an obstacle”
Personal narrative – from a long interview or a series of long interviews that give an extended account of someone’s life
Entire life story – constructed from observations, documents and interviews.
Semi-structured interviews allow for participants to explore narrative freedom (as opposed to heavily structured interviews which restrict the potential for narrative and any tangents that the participants want to explore).
Transcription of the interviews should not just about the face-value words, but also the interim filler words (such as ‘um’, and ‘er’), and pauses, in order to explore how the interviewee responded holistically.
Coding the responses can be deductive (finding pre-determined codes e.g. beginning, middle, end) or inductive (finding the codes as you go, with each story being a narrative block). It is possible to combine deductive and inductive coding.
Grounded theory is an inductive approach where new theories are derived from the data, as opposed to traditional hypothesis-deductive approaches of research, where you come up with a hypothesis and then try to prove/disprove it,
The iterative Grounded theory method
Grounded theory should be used when there is no existing theory that explains a phenomenon, or if there is an existing theory but the data is incomplete.
Data collection and data analysis are cyclical – data is collected more than once, and continuously analysed in a cycle. Everytime the data is collected and analysed, it becomes closer to becoming a theory.
Data collection is called ‘theoretical sampling’ – recruit a small group to begin with, and plan to recruit more at a later date. Interview people, transcribe, and begin analysis… Step 1. Open coding – break up the transcripts into individual excerpts Step 2. Group the excerpts together into codes. Step 3. Go back to the field and collect more data. Step 4. See how the new data compares to the codes collected so far. The new data may contradict the codes or give you more details on the codes that you have. References: Step 5. Axial coding – finding the axis that bring the codes together into categories. Step 6. Collect more data. Step 7. Continue to refine codes and categories even more. Step 8. Selective coding – define one core category that ties all the different categories together. This is the basis for the final theory.
Positives:
Theories are derived directly from real-world participants in real world settings Findings are tightly connected to the data Theories are collected without preconceived hypothesis, allowing the data to guide you.
Negatives:
There could be difficulty in recruiting participants, especially if you are looking for new participants to recruit. You are limited by the people you can reach out to in cyclical data collection. Data can be time consuming to collect. Data could be difficult to track.
I like the idea of using Grounded Theory analysis in the future to build a bigger holistic picture on the same topic. The input of teachers and industry professionals will be vital in considering what, if at all, is important, in technical assessment.
Very happy to be a sounding board, particularly when I share a similar theme to another PgCert student. How delighted I was to be part of Lauren’s journey where she piloted some questions on me. Her blog post about our exchange is here: https://laurenc123.myblog.arts.ac.uk/2021/11/08/piloting/
The questions were presented to me, and for the first time in a long time, I heard myself be really passionate not only about my subject, but about the complimentary skillset to the different degree subjects that I teach. I teach large groups – whole classes – at a time, as well as individuals. Why, if I’m teaching large classes, can I not feed back to the tutors about successes? The tutors don’t ask about them, or about any concerns. I’m on the same grade as a lecturer – should I not have a shared responsibility for assessing the needs of a student rather than blindly delivering?
How do I measure what I teach?
From Lauren’s blog post commenting on the mock interview I took part in, with me as the interviewee: “I had a total light bulb moment towards the end of our conversation. It flowed on from the question about what technical involvement could look like. The interviewee highlighted the benefit it would have to them as a marker seeing the student perspective on what they had taught- their reflection of what they have learned from you and your window into that. This was something I had not considered- I had never thought about being involved in the marking process as a way to improve your own practice, and to use it as a useful tool to challenge your perceptions of knowledge exchange that has taken place. In my mind I was more focused on perhaps the potential benefits for the students that this was a really interesting unexpected perspective. I really hope my other interviews provide we with more unexpected insights.”
If I cannot see what the student has retained from what I have taught, then I need to do something about it. If I cannot measure competency, I cannot guarantee safe passage of skills in a dangerous industry – height, weight, electricity, chemicals, time management, welfare – these are all things that can do serious damage. Without any form of assessment, it it impossible to see whether a student will be able to survive immediately after graduation, or even how to conduct themselves in a part-time theatre job or work experience. I need to able to see if a student has made any glaring errors or dangerous decisions that are not picked up on by tutors who have spent several years without working industry knowledge. These “soft skills” as some academics delightfully call what I teach, are the skills that will keep a theatre design graduate safe from harm and able to pay the rent.
How how have I only got to the stage this week of nailing the real question? My action plan now looks like a hilarious disillusioned guide if a) I had the perfect question lined up and b) were in a perfect bubble-like situation.
I’ve been so focused on this logbook idea, that I hadn’t realised I was attempting to find the answer before I’d even begun. I think this is why I referred to it as my ‘hypothesis’ in my original ethics form. If I am going down to the interpretivist route, then I shouldn’t be entertaining a hypothesis.
Rachel Jones (PgCert student), saying it how it is in the group tutorial, made it clear that she thought I had arrived at stage 2 (or the second cycle of action research) and that perhaps I should reconsider the original question. What exactly am I trying to find out in order to introduce the log books?
Lightbulb moment
Original question: How is the student experience impacted by the addition of a technical theatre skills logbook in practical teaching and learning activities?
New question: How might the BA Theatre Design student experience be impacted by the concept of technical assessment in technical theatre skills?
I would like to know:
If the students feel technical assessment is a useful measure, or adding unwanted pressure
What might any other positives or negatives be?
What the students think the assessment might present itself as (e.g. holistic unit assessment or standalone technical assessment
Then I might work towards a second cycle of research by undertaking the different suggested methods, which may include this log book.
I am particularly nervous -in a recent course meeting with BA Theatre Design, the course leader questioned why students want to learn particular technical skills. The course leader said they should be focussing on learning to be a designer, not learning practical skills. I have built up a great enthusiasm and appetite for technical skills with the Theatre Design students to the stage that they are keen to learn more and more. My response was to informally/formally recognise these skills, which is why this project means so much. Now the course leader is worried that the practical skills are an unwelcome distraction from their academic work, yet a straw poll of students suggests that they truly appreciate being able to communicate in different theatre languages to ultimately improve their set and costume design work.
The pushback on the notion of technical learning will likely have a knock on effect of the importance (in the course leader’s views) of technical assessment, so it’s extremely important I gather as much student-viewpoint qualitative data as possible before even thinking about approaching teaching staff. I see many cycles of this action research in the future. If I can join up the dots with other technicians in other colleges who are either looking into technical assessments (e.g. Lauren in our current PgCert cohort) or are currently undertaking them – in a technician role rather than a technician being paid extra do do academic marking – then that will make future cycles more successful.
Stress levels high. Trail line from Brighton to London still disastrous. UAL internet patchy. Nowhere quiet on campus to be for the workshop. Still, this session is a highlight of the week – I know how valuable it will be.
The advance reading (mostly done on trains on my 2-hour x 2 daily commute) was super useful. I had chosen the Vaughn reading on focus groups (notes are up on workflow), as this is now my focus from all the research methods. I had considered a more creative method of research, but taking the time to be self-reflective about my skills and interactions with my students (the participants in the research), I opted for a focus group study. I am more comfortable with talking, I am (usually) an active listener, and I have good rapport with students. I am not very confident in being creative (how strange to be teaching in an art school) unless we are exploring creative problem solving. Any ‘creative’ work I make usually ends up being extremely derivative. I think I am still working more with a scientific mind, which is quite jarring in an art school environment. Perhaps my research thinking began as positivist, but actually needs to be interpretivist.
I had read an interesting piece of research about a wide range of assessment methods to see how my project might be liked to anything currently in existence elsewhere in a UK HE (https://teachingexcellence.leeds.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/sites/89/2018/10/PUGHcompendiumcomplete.pdf) – notes are up on workflow. I began to find elements in this reading that worked in other HE institutions that I could confidently say could be applied to informal assessments at Wimbledon College of Arts. The small stumbling block would be if my research and application was met with disapproval from course leaders.
The literature review exercise was particularly useful – a self-reflecting guidance on the usefulness of reading. The prompt questions really helped me work out why the reading into assessment methods was a useful thing, while also working out what it couldn’t offer so I could explore readings to fill in the gaps.
I enjoyed the conversation about neutrality – it’s always been a worry in my day-to-day work that I’m not as neutral as I ought to be, considering my positionality is in such strong belief that holistic skill learning enables a greater chance of employment. Cousin (2008:32): “Data, writes Schostack (2006: 68), is not “something like a found object on the beach, a piece of driftwood.” Many contemporary qualitative analysts, like Schostack, now accept that however they have gathered it, their data can never be neutral. Data gathering is always a selective process in which we privilege some sources and discard or exclude others. Most qualitative researchers also accept that their analysis and write-up are deeply influenced by their own positionality.”
There were some excellent moments to use my colleagues as a sounding board for my project, particularly in the last portion of the day where we had 30 minutes each to talk about our projects and test out come questions. I was delighted when my classmates understood my project and were delighted about its concept. This is quite the confidence builder. This coupled with my students this week asking their academic tutors to be assessed on the portions I teach is heartening.
STREAMLINING FURTHER
Yup. Still doing far too much. I have gone from four research pieces (a pre-event survey, a focus group, a post-event survey, and a staff observer survey) to one – a meaningful focus group. Hopefully I will a good number of student volunteers for this, so I could potentially be selective with the most opinionated students (if such a thing is allowed…). The 4am panic thoughts of ‘how on earth am I going to fit it all in’ have reduced, and are at their normal levels. The SiP feels more manageable, and I’m getting more reading in.
An interesting observation came up (outside of the workshops and tutorials) with a fellow PgCert colleague – we are both technicians – that each individual technician holds a number of individual niche skills, that we begin to redefine our own job role rather then let our job role define us. Gone are the days where technicians are in a support role. We are technical teachers (with a great number holding teaching qualifications) who place students at the centre of our practice. The energy from the students spurs us on when course mismanagement and poor communication grinds us down. I think this is why we both are looking at methods of engaging further with students through the medium of assessment (formal and informal).
POSITIVIST VS INTERPRETIVIST RESEARCH
I began with a YouTube A level sociology explanation video as my starting point in understanding the difference between positivist and interpretivist research theories. I studied sociology As Level once upon a long time ago, but seemingly have forgotten about research methods. I am more confident understanding that I don’t want a scientific approach to my research, particularly as I’m looking at gaining a good rapport with participants as I examine their opinion-based anecdotal evidence. I know that some elements are out of my control, so although I have a hypothesis that the outcome will be that students are in favour of informal technical assessment, I am very keen to explore their thoughts in a less-structured way. I will remove the hypothesis from my research thinking in order to to remove any leading questions. I am interested in why students might not want informal technical assessment as much as why they do want it. Cousin (2008) states: “Much of the time you want to be thinking with the data as much as you are thinking from it”. The data is the student opinion, using the interpretivist research methodology. My regular practice of consulting students with regards to their own learning journey is almost a precursor to this research project; I ask students what they would like to learn (that I can reasonably provide) and do my utmost to provide it, while orientating it towards their unit learning outcomes. I think that by involving students at decision making stages, it paves the way for good relationships and engagement. The students want to attend the T&L sessions because they suggest them, so they may continue to want to be informally assessed on it too.
REFERENCES
Cousin, Glynis. Researching Learning in Higher Education : An Introduction to Contemporary Methods and Approaches, Taylor & Francis Group, 2008. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/ual/detail.action?docID=380854.
Kent-Waters, J., Seago, O., Smith, L. and Pugh, S. (n.d.). LITE 2017 Teaching Excellence Project Leader Report LEEDS INSTITUTE TEACHING EXCELLENCE for A COMPENDIUM OF ASSESSMENT TECHNIQUES IN HIGHER EDUCATION: FROM STUDENTS’ PERSPECTIVES. [online] Available at: https://teachingexcellence.leeds.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/sites/89/2018/10/PUGHcompendiumcomplete.pdf [Accessed 24 Oct. 2021].
While the thought of doing a PhD sounds exciting (and from the feedback received in my tutorial there was enough content to do so), I think I’d rather concentrate on a really good PgCert SIP, and keep the action research an ongoing long-term goal.
I’ve been too ambitious. And it only emerged, to my shame, during the tutorial. My fear was there wasn’t enough content for the SIP if I didn’t include absolutely all thought. Vikki managed my expectations perfectly to get me to narrow down my overall question and research sources.
As I was presenting, I heard myself from an outside perspective (especially considering I had talked for the first 20 minutes before the tutorial with other participants and they had `demonstrated a very defined and narrow topic of research), and finally settled on a narrower focus. And therefore, the people I will involve in the research will also be smaller.
My research will now focus on: “What is the impact of introducing an informal record of achievement in practical technical theatre skills?“
One lightbulb moment was when I was asked whether the action research would be developed by me alone or developed with students. Having had the experience of developing sessions (curricular and extra-curricular) with students before and noticing the positive impact it has had, it is a no-brainer for me to continue this practice in action research. I am lucky to have the trust of students on the BA Theatre Design course to enable them to be honest in expressing their views – positive and negative – in order to (hopefully) receive honest and accurate views. Students are opinionated, angry, and are fired up (particularly post-online only teaching).
In the tutorial, I was particularly drawn to Ian Fleming’s SIP (of introducing meaningful professional practice), and also his personal student-centred teaching practice ethos. He also liked my idea of a technical skills logbook, and I am delighted to share this idea for anyone to develop if they wish. I am also delighted he is another Mental Health First Aider as student welfare is super high up on the list of importance.
As the anticipated technical record achievement relies on observing experiential teaching and learning activities, one reading mentioned by Ian was David Kolb’s 1984 ‘Experiential Learning Cycle’ which I will investigate, along with information on the ‘Institute for Experiential Learning’ website. Having searched the online UAL library catalogue, there sure is a lot of experiential learning literature available!
Readings: Jean McNiff – Action Research for Professional Development McNiff, J. (2020) ‘Action Research for Professional Development’ [electronic resource]. https://www.jeanmcniff.com/ar-booklet.asp
I found this to be a very useful practical guide for how to get started and maintain momentum in action research. AR is such a new topic for me, so I was delighted to read something so accessible. I’m really excited about the idea of self-reflection. Up until now I’ve been a bit ‘all guns blazing’ in the name of improving student experience without stopping to take stock and look at things rationally. Perhaps there just hasn’t been the time. By remembering that AR is a self-reflective process, it will ensure focus on my chosen topic. I have been dreaming about solving particular T&L problems for some time, and I’m looking forward to looking at one particular topic in a holistic way, making sure it has the capacity to be developed over time.
Jones et al – Documenting classroom life: how can I write about what I am seeing? Jones, L., Holmes, R., McRae, C., and Maclure, M. (2010) Documenting classroom life: how can I write about what I am seeing? Qualitative Research, 10:4, pp. 479-491 https://journals-sagepubcom.arts.idm.oclc.org/doi/pdf/10.1177/1468794110366814
This was an interesting reading into observation in the classroom, and how observations can be curated and managed. I am intrigued by any hidden bias that may be brought with into the observation task, regardless of how neutral we aim to be. The group conversation I had with my colleagues in the session talked about the written vs oral tradition in note taking and storytelling, and how by writing up words from the oral tradition we are formalising events and stories. Perhaps there is space for some things to remain oral, although I’m not entirely sure how in a research context. What matters to the observer, and what are they looking for? What is tacit knowledge and where is the attention going? One things’s for sure, and that is that I’m going to have to get better at being a neutral but keen observer.
July 2021 Ideas presentation
Thoughts post workshop:
The topics within my original plan of action research were far too wide, and on Frederico’s advice I have narrowed it down. It does neatly form a continuation from my work in the curriculum design unit, progressing into action research. I plan to narrow down my field of research, but continue to use play as a method of research. [I’ve been really inspired by Monica Vilhauer’s text on Understanding Art: The Play of Work and Spectator (Vilhauer, Monica. (2018) Gadamer’s Ethics of Play: Hermeneutics and the Other, Lexington Books) as play forms such a centralised role in how I plan for experiential teaching and learning activities. Who is spectating, and who is playing – who and how are we learning? I’m learning constantly from students and what they feel is important to them. My aim is to keep students ‘playing’ and participating and retaining muscle memory in technical skills, adapting my teaching and learning activities].
My curriculum design unit was all about ‘formalising the informal’, forming timetabled technical teaching sessions that focused on practical processes and skills building. The plan aims to empower students by asking them to devise content in order to bring their stories and voices to the foreground. By continuing the plan into action research, I hope to use these practical performance making sessions into creating tangible evidence of technical skill retention, by way of signing off witnessed skills in a skills ‘flying hours’ logbook. This is all working towards employability, and I hope to approach industry to research as to whether this would be a useful method of skills assessment for potential staff.
Session concept mapping
This was such a useful way to work through what my problem context is, and how I intend to investigate it. Key things leapt out such as ‘community of practice’, ‘confidence building’, and ‘experiential learning’. I have always been a ‘safe space’ where students are able to talk freely because I do not assess work. Would formalising the informal by introducing technical (informal) assessment be rewarding for students, or a removal of the sense of my neutral safe space?
As a member of the technical teaching staff, my focus has always been on practical matters that support academic units. My specialist area focuses on technical theatre and stagecraft. For example, BA Theatre Design students will learn in their academic units how to communicate a piece of set design, and this unit often comes with a performance outcome. What I teach students is how to get their design from the drawing stage to a performative outcome. I have specialist skills in stage and production management, and an established industry career as a theatre lighting and sound specialist. I have been teaching technical theatre skills for around 10 years, and I have been in industry in a number of different technical roles since 2007.
What do I think students need?
Although we are not in a drama school (or ‘conservatoire’) setting, students still need the practical experience of making shows. Some students only have one academic project performance per year, which is not enough to sustain muscle memory or experience processes that will enable better communication in a performance or production setting.
Students need opportunities to build their confidence, skills, and opportunities to form communities of practice. Currently students work in ‘silos’, only coming together for a collaborative unit in the second year or if they undertake independent projects. I believe there would be better student experience if practical skills were maintained in a cross-course, cross-year co-delivered or technically guided way.
What do I think students want?
From the many conversations over my time teaching at Wimbledon, students want more technical skills, and more opportunities to flex their technical muscles. They are currently restricted by the number of academic performances they can achieve each year.
from hierarchy into a community of practice
The moment students step into my classroom (the theatre), I treat them as professional colleagues. This is intended to bring confidence and ownership of their work and their skills. They undergo intense in-house safety training (given by technical staff), and technical training session to assess their comfort levels in practical skills. All students are supported, with varying degrees of management (some needing more support than others). I believe there is a role for everyone in the performance industry, and encourage students to give everything a go, even just to the stage where they have basic understanding of the work required for that particular process.
Employment
Some students graduating from performance design degrees have gone into the industry as stage management or lighting/sound personnel, with several key skills achieved through working as technical and stage staff on performances, either at Wimbledon College of Arts or in employment/work experience.
There is currently no measurement of technical skills for students if they are not studying a more technically-focused degree (for example, BA Creative Technical Theatre).
I am very much driven by experiential learning – this is my own background – and I come from a position of working towards employability, aiming to get students to be knowledgeable in as many practical areas for the improvement of their chosen career path; I, and they, are keen to understand the many different theatre languages, processes and communication for better industry experience.
Action Research project
While I understand I can’t change the world overnight, I would like to play a part in improving the student experience (and with it, inclusion, equality and empowerment). I wish to equip students with more confidence in their technical abilities. For my SIP, I am hoping to research informal ongoing technical assessments by way of a skills ‘flying hours’ record book would be an appropriate method. This would be a tangible document to present to industry managers to show the record of their witnessed (by UAL staff) technical skills. I would investigate as to whether these informally assessed skills would be recognised or bear any weight to the academic teaching staff/unit assessments. I hope to interview current and recently graduated students, industry technical recruiting managers, academic staff, and current UAL technicians to investigate the scope of informal technical assessment.
To promote and make visible the benefits of learning about technical production skills-based learning that isn’t immediately obvious on the academic curriculum. In my dream curriculum, all unit project briefs are written as a collaboration between relevant academic and technical staff in order to achieve greater understanding of practical knowledge and how it can improve their academic contributions.
Has there been any positive examples?
Yes. Year 1 BA Theatre Design tutor is successful at consulting technicians around project briefs. They recognise that technicians aren’t merely ‘support’, that they have valuable skills to teach and were keen to suggest methods of implementing technical teaching in the classroom in a co-delivery model.
Successful examples include:
Co-delivered production meetings (effectively co-delivered technical and academic tutorials in preparation for real-life or speculative productions) where the academic tutor would focus on design form and function and I would focus on feasibility and practicability in order for students to design successfully within a set of defined parameters.
Technical sessions on constructing sound pieces in order to communicate a design intent. I was left to construct the teaching outcome and learning method (based on the unit learning outcomes). The academic tutor remained in the classroom throughout. This co-delivery model has been invaluable for support, increasing student knowledge, as well engaging in the session to enliven discussions. Although these sessions do not go towards assessment, they provide an avenue for students to investigate different areas of theatre design, introducing new languages and processes into their areas of research.
Key words post-tutorial
Informal learning
Student-centred practice
Life-long learning
Skills-based learning
Agency
Creative problem solving
Real-world applications
Further thoughts
Seeing my positionality as a humanistic approach to students (giving students trust and respect to get the work completed in my absence due to my occasional temporary absence), finding connections between peoples’ work and their lives.
Document successful outcomes into a clearly defined diagram of positive achievable outcomes in order to ‘sell’ technical involvement in academic project writing.
Terror management theory – what we’re learning and are we scared of learning at the same time? E.g. learning to use the flying system (danger of death, but a huge element of theatre design understanding).
Explore the dynamics between formal and informal learning. Explore the what the boundaries are, especially as formal learning is now moving towards a more experiential/hands-on/old methods of informality approaches.
During the microteach session, it had come to light that a member of our small group was a fellow technician, teaching within the sound arts specialism. My own background is within sound arts for performance, so it felt natural to organise a meeting with them to discuss teaching resources, academic co-delivery, and ongoing projects. (Curiously, when researching all about UAL before my arrival several years ago, I had discovered this sound arts course existed. I was a bit miffed to subsequently learn that there is virtually no cross-course collaboration in sound)
Sadly, I did not video record this meeting, but the one-to-one meeting allowed me to get to know my fellow student/colleague better, finding good common ground in skills as well as teaching approaches. We shared our current projects, and discussed the difficulties of delivering online. I talked about a specific successful sound project I had taught, and I asked my fellow student for guidance as to their own successful projects, and why they felt they were successful. That naturally flowed on to sharing useful resources and small beginnings of realistic plans to collaborate in the future.
This is useful in considering ‘communities of practice’. As Etienne and Beverly Wenger-Trayner suggest, ‘communities of practice’ can be found in several organisations, including in education, aiming to form a “broader learning system”, developing practice in key skills such as problem solving, seeking experience, mapping knowledge and identifying gaps (Etienne and Beverly Wenger-Trayner, 2015 Introduction to communities of practice) (available online here) (URL accessed 19/04/21)
Deadlines
I’m great at setting and managing deadlines of others, however, my own procrastination at times is self-destructive. A fellow student and Wimbledon colleague called me out of the blue to for a short discussion about time management. We both were open with each other about workload stress, and the processing and writing up of information, so much so that the much longed for Easter break had become mildly stressful. We decided to set ourselves in interim deadlines to send each other our case studies work in order to sustain energy and commitment.
I took part in all three of the Easter break organised writing sessions. Lindsay Jordan discussed the concept of ‘Morphic resonance’ (Sheldrake, R., 2009. Morphic resonance. Rochester, Vt.: Park Street Press) which was a sensation I had experienced but couldn’t define. I had also experienced this while teaching, asking students to complete a making task synchronously and completing the task alongside them. This is something I intend to continue doing, as keeping a sense of community is a vital part of my practice.
