Online tutorial with:
Kwame Baah, Jade Gellard, Jess Curtis, Antonella Norris and me. Antonella didn’t present her ARP due to issues she encountered with the logistics and complex scheduling of her project.
Who: Jess Curtis: Lecturer in Design for Performance, School of Media and Communication London College of Fashion, UAL.
ARP Aim: Developing representation and creating a resource of figurative references for use relevant to the course. Ethical imperative to build a more global, diverse and realistic representation of images used in costume development relevant for course content
Planning and methodology: Jess presented her planning as a series of vivid graphics to reflect her timelines and thinking, captured on the digital platform Miro. She stated that, in doing this level of planning, it had given her a greater sense of her own positionality, revealed a potential to overcome barriers, and helped her understand the impact of this research on her practice and the dynamics of the lecturer-student relationship.
She said she was still a little stuck on the final title – at the time of discussion, she was working with Diversity in Bodies or representation in costume design. I thought both of these titles lacked impact and did not reflect the dynamism of her ARP. When Jess spoke about her project, she used the phrases ‘the performing body’ and ‘the diverse body resource’, both of which reflected the vitality in her research project.
Feedback:
She confirmed that she interviewed actors from diverse cultural and physical backgrounds in order to build the visual resource, then tested it with pilot sessions, gathering conversational feedback, questionnaires/ forms in the classrooms with colleagues and students.
Kwame: How has she analysed her data? confirm methods.
Jess said she had transcripts and was undertaking physical analysis – thematic analysis. How do you represent without bias? She confirmed that she was investigating protected characteristics such as pregnancy, but that this would make the resource very extensive, which it needs to be to be truly effective. How far can you go with this?
Jess confirmed that all images are used with consent through ethical permissions, rights etc.
Kwame stated that Bias is good, so she can start to evaluate particpatory action research. He also recommended adding some research references, such as anchors and pseudoacademics (NB I did not know what this meant).
My thoughts:
Her planning and the realisation of her ARP is EPIC. It is contextual and has a legitimate plausibility. I am excited for Jess with this research project.
Who: Jade Gellard: Specialist Technician (Learning and Teaching) Contour.
ARP Aim: Developing a handout for use within technical workshops for Contour Students, that has improved imagery and messaging that is current and understandable by international students. Designed to be a portable teaching element to fit any room.
Methods: A mock-up of the handout has been used to test quantitative and qualitative data has been gathered through feedback on the old handout vs the new handout.
Jade confirmed that she had looked to Zygotsky’s zone of proximal development to underpin her thinking (* this is the crucial learning space between what a learner can do alone (actual development) and what they can achieve with guidance from a more knowledgeable person (potential development). She also stated that her data analysis on the student feedback wasn’t complete, but she was aiming to respond and amend the handout in the new year.
Feedback:
Kwame: Inlcude visual analysis and highlight the differences in what you are seeing in terms of student preference. This gives it mobility and flex, so you could consider and project what might happen in 5 years.
Jess commented that within her presentation, she was using infographics in line with guidelines from UAL’s disability team, also considering industry standards.
My thoughts: I feel in awe of Jade’s thinking and how she has developed such an relevant, well-considered project.
Who: Sarah Harkins : Associate Lecturer, Architecture and Spatial Design, 3D Design, UAL School of Pre-Degree Studies, Foundation in Art and Design.
ARP Aim: Enhance the student experience, by improving the learning spaces; empowering student voice and creating a legacy.
Methods: Consent forms and questionnaires for participation in the activity were issued in class to both cohorts of the architecture and spatial design students on 08.12.25 and 09.12.25. Feedback to questions was given in words and (some drawings). My planning was a lot less glossy and digital than Jess and Jade’s. As an avid note-taker, I work in standard school exercise books to keep all my notes. So I storyboarded my presentation by hand in my notebook. Data has been gathered, but no analysis has been done yet. My aim is to (hope is to complete the analysis before the final presentation, with a future plan to present the findings back to the students (and probably with more cycles of action and participation to build and strengthen the thinking/conversation – haven’t finalised this yet).
Feedback:
Jess stated that she thought the student engagement forms were thoughtful. She asked if I had considered whether there would be biases involved with my teaching in the spaces? Need to mitigate that in data analysis. She enjoyed seeing some visual responses as well as words. Had I considered how to analyse the drawings? Could KB recommend reading around how to begin that? She also recognised that its good to present the data findings back to the students and still engage their ‘voice’, where they critically analyse their learning spaces. It’s a good confidence-building (for students) activity, as there are direct and peripheral values in activating their agency.
KB: recommends summary and approach divided into 3 sections – things done immediately, things done within the (academic) year and things done in the future. When analysing the data, consider what immediate changes can happen so that students get a sense of progress in their participation. Consider mapping the students over a day (SH research reference – Sarah Wigglesworth and Jeremy Till’s mapping of a dinner party).
Next steps:
- Analyse drawings – KB to recommend reference.
- Mitigate biases – research & action – can this happen through direction or location? SH to consider.
- Generate summary and approach defined by time sensitive sections – things done immediately, things done within the (academic) year and things done in the future.
- Map students as part of data analysis?