Pedagogy: Brave Space, Free Speech

Arao, B. and 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 Facilitations, ed. Landreman, L.M. Sterling, VA: Stylus Publishing, pp. 135-150.

Bacevic, J. (2023) ‘No Such Thing as Free Speech? Performativity, Free Speech, and Academic Freedom in the UK’, Law and Critique 36, pp. 1-19.

Koopman, S. and Seliga, L. (2021) ‘Teaching peace by using nonviolent communication for difficult conversations in the college classroom’, Peace and Conflict Studies 27:3, pp. 1-29.

Martinez-Cola, M w English, R., Min, J, Peraza J, Tambah, J, Yebuah, C. (2018) ‘When Pedagogy Is Painful: Teaching in Tumultuous Times’, Teaching Sociology 46:2, pp. 97-111.

Malcolm, F. (2021) ‘Silencing and freedom of speech in UK higher education’, British Educational Research Journal 47:3, pp. 520-538.

OR Books (2025) Norman Finkelstein in Conversation with Cornel West and Nadine Strossen on Free Speech and Gaza. 7 August. https://www.normanfinkelstein.com/norman-finkelstein-in-conversation-with-cornel-west-and-nadine-strossen-free-speech-and-gaza/ (Accessed: 23 Sept 2025).

Palfrey, J. (2017) Safe Spaces, Brave Spaces: Diversity and Free Expression in Education. Cambridge, MA and London, UK: The MIT Press.

Verduzco-Baker, L. (2018) ‘Modified Brave Spaces: Calling in Brave Instructors’, Sociology of Race and Ethnicity 4:4, pp. 585-592.

Methodology: Interviews, Autoethnography 

Hume, A. and Young-Loveridge, J. (2011) ‘Using professional colleagues as interviewers in action research: Possibilities and pitfalls’, Waikato Journal of Education 16:3, pp. 111-124.

Kalekin-Fishman, D. (2017) ‘Interviewing colleagues’ in Practicing social science: sociologists and their craft. Milton Park, UK: Routledge, pp. 81-88.

Introduction 

This report builds upon my proposal to introduce concepts and strategies of ‘brave space’ discussions within the classroom, which germinated from the difficulties I recognised within my own and my colleagues’ teaching experiences. In an increasingly polarised world, stoked by the incendiary models of digital media platforms, which encourage conflict and disagreement as central to our everyday lives, I ask: how do we navigate difficult conversations in the classroom? How do we encourage disagreement without shutting down discourse? How do we avoid cancel culture? My intervention aims to provide staff training in the form of a workshop that teaches about brave space pedagogies through practice-based strategies and also draws on ritualised practices to employ within the classroom. 

Context

As a lecturer of cultural studies in the BA Fashion, Jewellery and Textile programme, as well as in BA and MA Fashion Histories & Theories, an aspect of my role is to facilitate seminars which explore gender, bodies, sexuality, colonialism, racism and histories of power, oppression and resistance. Social justice and decolonial theory are at the core of my own teaching areas and strategies, my own positionality as a British-Canadian woman of the Korean diaspora shapes my research interests. Lately, my classroom conversations have been filled with difficult and emotionally fraught perspectives that have questioned gender/sex identifications, histories of racialised violence in America, and so on. I found that I did not have the tools in my pedagogical training to thoughtfully cater to these alternative (and sometimes problematic) positions. This intervention thus offers staff training as a discursive workshop and suggestions for ritualised practices which encourage challenging conversations in the classroom by using theories of the ‘brave space’.  

1. Workshop

Facilitated by a convenor of ‘brave space’ workshops, this will comprise a taught component which explores the histories and theories of safe space and brave space (as highlighted in ‘Inclusive learning’ section), expansive discussion, and practical exercises, including difficult scenarios to navigate in the classroom using persona pedagogy. This framework employs strategies to overcome exclusionary biases without having to reveal one’s own identity (in case of threat), developing instead an archetypal persona to perform in a range of scenarios to better explore the systemic asymmetries through varied identities (Thomas 2022, 1-3).

2. Rituals Practices 

These would be discussed as strategies to employ in the classroom on a day-to-day capacity. The repetition of which would establish familiarity with common goals and ideas about conversation within the classroom. This would then be folded into everyday pedagogy, rather than as a contained workshop. 

Inclusive learning

John Palfrey’s Safe Spaces, Brave Spaces asks ‘[m]ust a community tolerate intolerance?’ (2017, 16), arguing that it is crucial for free expression to be upheld alongside principles of diversity, equity and inclusion. Situated in a time of student activism in the aftermath of BLM and MeToo, Palfrey discusses how there is growing polarisation between a traditionalist way of thinking which uses ‘free speech’ to justify antagonistic language, and worst xenophobia and hate speech versus student activists who sometimes deploy cancel culture to ensure ‘a faster route to social justice’ (Palfrey 2017, 1). A further critique of free speech lies in its historical foundations which have privileged those in power, and more often affects (negatively) those who have been historically marginalised and oppressed.  

Safe spaces were created in the 1990s by women’s and LGBT movements. However, activist Minnie Bruce Pratt revealed that one’s notion of ‘safe place’ was rooted in one’s own history, identity, and privilege; she recognised safety in early women’s movements were defined by ‘white, heterosexist notions that sought safety and security for a few women at the expense of many women’ (Fox and Ore 2010, 629). Inclusive learning thus needs to consider the intersectional privileges of safety, for as Fox and Ore highlight ‘safe space discourse continues to operate within a normalizing gaze of a white, masculinist, middle-class subject, rendering queer subjectivity in a most simplistic and reductive manner’ (2010, 631). The safe space is now reiterated in the classroom and in our own PgCert discussions to assume that a universal safety is achievable, but we seldom question the term or what it means. Safety has also become conflated with comfort (Fox and Ore 2010, 632).

According to Arao and Clemens (2013), ‘authentic learning about social justice often requires the very qualities of risk, difficulty, and controversy that are defined as incompatible with safety’ (139) That is, recognising oppression, hearing stories of pain and struggle, holding accountability, feeling guilt and hopelessness are the embodied by-products of understanding oppression, and should not be negated. Safety (and/as comfort) can shield privilege. Drawing on Wise (2004), Arao and Clemens argue that deploying safety as a condition of cross-racial dialogue about racism is the ultimate expression of White privilege, particularly as Whiteness once again, gets to articulate how these conversations should unfold (Wise 2004, 15 IN Arao and Clemens 2013). We should acknowledge that our institutions have never been safe for those oppressed by supremacy systems.  

The brave space then emerges from Boostrom’s (1998) critique and assertion that learning not only involves risk, ‘but the pain of giving up a former condition in favour of a new way of seeing things’ (399). By drawing on a framework of courage, Arao and Clemens note the process of actualising the brave space includes: establishing ground rules, employing collectivist approaches – which reflects the practices of IP Session 1 – to develop discussions around social justice. Additionally, my own intervention would not only outline these histories, but also establish rituals, habits, everyday practices to build collaborative conversations. In these practices, I am reminded of Foucault’s ideas about discipline, who theorises how our everyday actions, in reiterative replay reinforce identities and/or beliefs (see Foucault 1995 [1977]). Erica Keswin’s defines rituals as ‘something which we assign meaning and intention […] a regular cadence […] goes beyond its practical purpose’, the latter meaning that there is a symbolic or signifying meaning (2022). By developing unifying rituals that move beyond what is practically necessary, a bond is forged to enhance teamwork, and hopefully an atmosphere of challenging but collective learning.

Reflection

My discussions with Amberlee encouraged me to draw upon ritual practices and persona pedagogies to further shape the brave space intervention. We spoke about how workshops can silo learning into contained moments, that we can forget about, separated from our everyday classroom practices. This is certainly the case in my own learning, as my requirements to learn fire safety rules or GDRP regulations on the ESS platform, never become fully absorbed until I need to apply them. Rituals, in contrast, are regular, helping to build ‘psychological safety, purpose, and performance’ (Keswin 2022). Within these reiterative practices, we can become habituated in the intentions and beliefs of our actions, which can be applied to building and moderating challenging classroom conversations. Amberlee also encouraged me to to inject as much play into the intervention as possible, which I understood as a form of experimentation with the staff training. One exercise that I thought about was how medical students play out scenarios to diagnose patients. Employing persona pedagogy, the staff training could have us perform different identities to work through challenging classroom moments, working collectively to consider and converse about the best practices. 

In my group presentations, it was recommended that I could speak about previous mistakes. I think this would be a great opportunity to highlight how our intentions may not match up to our practices as they unfold, discussions within the team about how they may have confronted these same scenarios can help us to think about more effective strategies to moderate those challenging perspectives. It was also flagged up that rules around accepting disagreement were important; Amberlee also suggested that depersonalisation was important – drawing from the academic research and theory to enrich students’ contributions, which I always try to instil. One further recommendation was that I could encourage discussions that may take place in the workplace, which include scenarios of disagreement and risk – teaching diplomacy in conversational skills is also important. 

Action

I will develop this staff training programme as part of the upcoming Action Research Project, deploying the approaches within the contained setting of my cultural studies team. I aim to analyse the practice through semi-structured interviews with the team that I will collect before the sessions begin, after the workshop, and after the first semester of teaching to reflect upon the introduction of the strategies in classroom practice. If there is a wider need for the training, I will hopefully introduce it to the wider contextual study teaching staff. 

Evaluation of process

This process has allowed me to review literature on brave space and persona pedagogies, which have been fairly new terms to me prior to the PgCert programme. These readings have illuminated critical reflections on how we use or understand ‘safe space’ in the classroom, situating it within a historical context and critiques of universalism. The metric of the practice ‘working’ would be harder to qualify – although I would be taking semi-structured interviews, the real success would be following difficult conversations in the classroom, and to see whether these teachings helped. 

Conclusion

This process of reading, developing a programme, presenting (to multiple audiences), revising, reading further, and writing up this report has allowed me to synthesise my knowledge with an actionable plan and edit this according to audience suggestions. Working through these reflections was an almost collaborative process, which considers the wider classroom settings beyond my own experiences (of seminar focuses), which has been helpful. I have learnt new pedagogies, including persona and brave space. 

Works Cited

Arao, B. and 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. Sterling VA: Stylus Publishing, LLC., pp. 135-150.

Boostrom, R. (1998) ‘“Safe Spaces”: Reflections on an Educational Metaphor’, Journal of Curriculum Studies 30(4), pp. 397-408.

Foucault, M. (1995 [1977]) Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison, trans. Sheridan, A. New York: Vintage Books.

Fox, C.O. and Ore, T. E. (2010) ‘(Un)Covering Normalized Gender and Race Subjectivities in LGBT “Safe Spaces”, Feminist Studies 36(3), pp.629-649. 

Keswin, E. (2022) ‘How to Create Powerful Workplace Rituals’, IDEO U, 20 Sept 2022. Available at: https://www.ideou.com/en-gb/blogs/inspiration/how-to-create-powerful-workplace-rituals?_pos=5&_sid=598964a17&_ss=r (Accessed: 10 July 2025)

Palfrey, J. (2017) Safe Spaces, Brave Spaces: Diversity and Free Expression in Education. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. 

Thomas, C. (2022) ‘Overcoming Identity Threat: Using Persona Pedagogy in Intersectionality and Inclusion Training’, Social Sciences 11, pp. 1-15.

Wise, T. (2004) ‘No Such Place as Safe’, Columbia University, 23 July 2004. https://www.cc-seas.columbia.edu/sites/dsa/files/handbooks/Tim%20Wise%20Reading.pdf (Accessed: 10 July 2025)

The Telegraph is a known as a conservative or right-wing publication, and this tone was quite evident in the assigned YouTube clip called ‘Revealed: The charity turning UK universities woke’. From the dramatic soundtrack to the upper-class cadence of the narrator, there was an overarching scepticism toward AdvanceHE’s Athena Swan initiative and the findings of the University of Cambridge as institutionally racist. Dr. Vincent Harinam argued that the statistical evidence was not conclusive (Orr, 2022). I am dubious about Harinam’s assertions, as decolonial scholarship would define the university as an institution of coloniality, which was constitutive of racism, however some of the critiques about anti-racism and diversity policies are echoed in Sara Ahmed’s On Being Included. 

‘Decolonising’ seems to have replaced diversity and anti-racism in a rebranding attempt that funnels money into initiatives that silo the project (of anti-racism, decolonialising, diversity) into departments or teams of diversity. One of Ahmed’s arguments is that when we institutionalise diversity it can become a performative speech act, wherein the recognition itself seems to absolve the institution, while simultaneously doing the bare minimum: ‘we have institutional racism!’, which she parallels to an addicts’ confession, as if the recognition will be the first step to absolution (Ahmed, 2012, pp. 55). Last session’s assigned reading by Ramadan highlighted how ‘BME academics continue to be positions at the bottom of the ladder vis-à-vis contract-types, seniority and salary bands’ (Ramadan, 2021, p. 34), then this week’s review of the UAL Anti-Racism policy offered evidence to the point as the document encouraged more staff hiring at the level of Visiting and Associating Lecturing (UAL, 2021). UAL recognises that it is institutionally racist, but does the bare minimum. What about senior management? What about full-time positions which hold job security? Racism is reinforced through unequal distributions of power, so recognising how power is distributed through racism is probably a good place to start dismantling. 

This discussion filters down through so many aspects my lived experiences, from getting rejected from funding to the casually racist remarks about Chinese international students from staff (which I witnessed in a staff symposium last week) to being the expert on race. I could go on and on and on. These beliefs are so ingrained in the public thinking that its casual nature often slips by me until after the event. In our recent class we discussed how the data metrics often don’t match up to the policies, but what about the data that is not quantified, or not easily quantifiable. Imagine if I were to report every microaggression that I witnessed, how could I even do that? I don’t even know who to report that to. Then I think about the labour that one would have to endure to report this constantly, instead of trying to forget it. I wonder if we could create a microaggression box – an anonymous comment box for every time someone said something in the school to them (maybe a plausible intervention). 

Works Cited

Ahmed, S. (2012) On Being Included: Racism and Diversity in Institutional Life. Durham and London: Duke University Press.

Orr, J. (2022) Revealed: The charity turning UK universities woke. The Telegraph [Online]. Youtube. 5 August. Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FRM6vOPTjuU (Accessed on: 5 June 2025)

Ramadan, I. (2021) ‘When faith intersects with gender: the challenges and successes int eh experiences of Muslim women academics’, Gender and Education 34(1), p. 33-48

UAL (2021) Anti-Racism Action Plan. [Online] Available at: https://www.arts.ac.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0032/296537/UAL-Anti-racism-action-plan-summary-2021.pdf (Accessed on: 5 June 2025)

It has become increasingly clear to me this year that the tensions of our contemporary political climate are entering into the classroom. Teaching in an arts institution has previously allowed conversation in my taught seminars and classrooms to unfold without much controversy, sometimes seemingly like an echo chamber of liberal leftist ideas, in this year I have witnessed more conflict – varied opinions that brought more heated debate, and worst into the classroom. Yet, the solution is not to quash these conversations from occurring as they exist in the world, but it would be useful to develop strategies for brave spaces, where we could hold oppositional views in a co-existing space, to unpack and develop our understanding of these viewpoints with empathy. This intervention begins with a workshop about facilitating brave spaces for teaching staff. 

‘Safe spaces’ have been co-opted by dominance and privilege, to in many ways, deny accountability for social justice or quiet discomforting conversations and feelings. Arao and Clemens describe how White privilege can use the framing of safety to mitigate how issues of race and racism should be talked about. ‘People of color are then expected to constrain their participation and interactions to conform to White expectations of safety – itself an act of racism and White resistance and denial’ (Wise, 2004 in Arao and Clemens, 2013, p. 140). It is necessary to recognise that conversations about privilege and accountability may cause discomfort, thus ‘brave spaces’ have defined a newer framework of social justice in learning that may cause discomfort. My intervention includes introducing a workshop for facilitators to explore how to implement these practices in classroom, particularly strategies of how to mitigate and moderate difficult conversations. 

Works Cited

Arao, B. and Clemens, K. (2013) ‘From Safe Spaces to Brave Spaces: A New Way to Frame Dialogue Around Diversity and Social Justice’ in From The Art of Effective Facilitation. Ed. by Lisa M. Landreman. Abingdon: Routledge. pp. 135-150.

Additional Sources

Center for Research on Learning & Teaching, University of Michigan. Hot Moments. https://crlt.umich.edu/taxonomy/term/113 (Accessed on: 27 May 2025)

Palfrey, J. (2017) Safe Saces, Brave Spaces: Diversity and Free Expression in Education. Cambridge, MA and London, UK: MIT Press.

In our previous module, our class read The Charismatic Lecturer in session, which was about two lecturers, Stephanie and Max. The latter was framed as a ‘charismatic lecturer’, versus the description of Stephanie which referenced her engagement with the Church of England (or something similar) (Macfarlane 2004). An interesting discussion unfolded about our own implicit biases, but there seemed to be a class preference for Max. One colleague described Stephanie’s penchant for religion as undermining her credentials. Of course, this thinking is supposed to be unacceptable under the Equity Act, but yet Higher Education (HE) and its foundational principles of rationality are underpinned by secularism. This concept is complicated. In decolonial and critical race theory, secularism and rationality was not devoid of religion, but rather, its introduction through modernity and the Enlightenment was shaped by Christianity. Appiah makes mention of this, citing Columbus and how the history of Christianity is the history of people killing each other (Appiah 2014). Perhaps less explicit in that video was that Christianity served as a justifying moral principle to propel colonialism, and moreover, that our concept of Man and humanity overrepresents an Anglo-European version of personhood that was built from displacing a relation between God and Man onto Self and (Racialised) Other (see Wynter 2003). Equality and human rights, in my cynical purview, were always precarious principles, although I am terrified to see how fragile they actually were/are. 

I was frustrated to watch the video from Trinity University where the interview subject described how he had to laugh and display images of his daughter to prove that he was normal. I noticed that the YouTube video did not even include a name for the interviewee (Trinty University 2016). I’m so sick of not being enraged, of controlling my behaviour, because dehumanising people is a violent act, so why wouldn’t it be met with reactions that identified and mirrored that? `             

Back to the introductory point: secularism is what underpins the university, and this was evidenced in Rekis’s research about epistemic injustice/exclusion. It was an illuminating essay that made me think deeply about my own assumptions of religious testimony in the classroom, and made me recall a seminar experience where two students began to debate issues around gender, sex, and sexuality through religion: specifically, Christianity and Islam. I tried to steer the conversation away from religion, as I reminded the students this was not a theology class, but Rekis maps out how religious experience has been excluded in the academy as a form of epistemic injustice, so now I’m wondering whether religious approaches should be legitimised in Cultural Studies as decoloniality also acknowledges other worldviews. No clear answers on my end, just more questions though (Rekis 2023).

Works Cited

Appiah, K.A. (2014) ‘Is religion good or bad? (This is a trick question). YouTube [Online] 16 June 2014. Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X2et2KO8gcY. [Accessed 12 May 2025]

Macfarlane, B. (2004) Teaching with Integrity: The Ethics of Higher Education Practice. New York: Routledge Falmer.

Rekis, J. (2023) ‘Religious Identity and Epistemic Injustice: An Intersectional Account’, Hypatia 38: pp. 779-800.

Trinty University (2016) ‘Challenging Race, Religion, and Stereotypes in the Classroom’, YouTube [Online]. Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0CAOKTo_DOk [Accessed on 12 May 2025]

Wynter, S. (2003) ‘Unsettling the Coloniality of Being/Power/Truth/Freedom: Towards the Human, After Man, Its Overrepresentation – An Argument’, CR: The New Centennial Review 3, 3: pp. 257-337.

On Intersectionality

I write this blogpost in the wake of the UK supreme court ruling that clarified the terms ‘woman’ and sex’ in the Equality Act as referring to biological women and biological sex (Carrell 2025), which was a hugely disappointing regression for trans- and women’s rights. Despite the beliefs of Trans Exclusionary Radical Feminists, the category of ‘woman’ as a social construct is a foundational feminist argument that seeks to destabilise the constraints and ideologies applied to women as historically contingent (see Scott 1986). At the heart of this ruling seems a move toward privileging the bodies and power of a system of global hegemony defined by heteropatriarchal, racial capitalist values. As I was watching our assigned videos and hearing this news, I couldn’t help but think that our value as a person in this framework of the world is determined by our fitness to produce capital. If one is not able-bodied, they are deemed an unproductive worker. If a woman is not having children, they are no longer productive to the needs of the nation-state in the production of labouring bodies (for more on this see Rubin 1975). Or if a racialised person is seeking equity, they are told they are asking for too much.    

What struck me in the conversations with Ade Adepitan and Christine Sun Kim was their exceptionalism, particularly in the discussion with the para-Olympians. Their respective interviews highlighted their intersectionalities between disability, racialised identities, and perhaps gender, but it was not lost on me that both of these people were highly successful in their respective fields. I struggled with this, as I also grappled with Kim’s discussions of accessibility, communication, and visibility; Kim articulated how her desire to be visible was represented in the increased scale of her artworks. The model minority was a stereotype created by the white elite in the 1960s to encourage Asian Americans to succeed by merit (Yu 2006). This has created further separation of collective action. Communication seemed to be a common thread in the last two videos, with a desire to fit into a hearing, and a cis-gendered gay community respectively. Adepitan spoke about how making societal adjustments for people that were not able-bodied could allow people to shine and live up to their potential.

Inclusive practices in these interviews seemed to imply a levelling of the playing field, allowing people with disabilities and their intersectional identities to overcome systemic discrimination. These expressed desires, however, seemed to reinforce the hierarchies of our capitalist society, where our virtue is defined by our productivity. Is it too radical to dismantle these systems altogether? In my own lived experience as a racialised woman, I have developed a sense of perfectionism to mitigate systemic bias, for it has never been enough for someone like myself to be mediocre or to merely exist. This is so tiring, can we not just exist? In my own teaching practice, I draw upon decolonial frameworks that map and outline these drives toward capitalist success through coloniality/modernity, illuminating how institutional practices reinforce such ideologies. 

To answer the last part of the blog task: our teaching team provides lecture slides days in advance, with layouts on a blue background to assist students with colour blindness. A 2023 report from UAL noted that 15.3% of the student body has a declared disability, with a ‘particularly large percentage of dyslexic and neurodivergent students’ (Careers and Employability at University of the Arts London, 2023). My own research interests lie within material culture, so I teach with tangible objects, and touch-based senses which employs multisensory learning. 

Works Cited

Careers and Employability at University of the Arts London (2023) Evidence – inquiry into employment and career support for young disabled people leaving education and entering the job market and workplace. Careers and Employability YDP0017. London: University of the Arts London. Available at: https://committees.parliament.uk/writtenevidence/124755/pdf/ (Accessed: 19 April 2025).

Rubin, G. (1975) ‘The Traffic in Women: Notes on the “Political Economy” of Sex’, in R.R. Reiter (ed.) Toward an Anthropology of Women. New York and London: Monthly Review Press, 1975: pp. 157-210.

Scott, J.W. (1986) ‘Gender: A Useful Category of Historical Analysis’, The American Historical Review. 91.5: pp. 1053-1075.

Carrell, S. (2025) ‘Legal definition of woman is based on biological sex, UK supreme court rules’, The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/society/2025/apr/16/critics-of-trans-rights-win-uk-supreme-court-case-over-definition-of-woman (Accessed on 18 Apr 2025)

Yu, T. (2006) ‘Challenging the Politics of the “Model Minority” Stereotype: A Case for Educational Equality’, Equity & Excellence in Education 39. 4: pp. 325-333.

Contextual Background 

I work on the Unit 10 module for dissertations across the Fashion, Jewellery, and Textile programme. To ensure parity, we use a process of double assessment: the primary supervisor is the first marker, and this is marked in relation to a secondary grader. If there are major discrepancies or disputes, the assessment is forwarded to a third marker, sometimes fourth. In this 24/25 co-hort, there was one dissertation that was marked with an A, B, and third mark of C – illuminating the problems of parity, judgment and subjectivity in the process.  

Evaluation 

What I have learned from this process and my own shifting patterns of assessment is how much the assessor’s experiences and relations shape the final mark. For example, in my first year, I abided by standards that were comparable to my own undergraduate education from a school that had a bell curve, and did not have more than one or two papers at an A. I was insecure about my authority, thus instead of reaching diplomatic conclusions about the final assessment, I was dogged about my opinions, perceiving discrepancies as a comment about my skillset. Now, in my fifth year of assessment, I rely heavily on diplomacy and the secondary eyes of experienced and inexperienced assessors. I always try to reach a medium ground. In the case mentioned now, however, I was the primary supervisor, and my own expert knowledge in the field compelled me to try to push the grade higher.  

Moving forwards 

Having now read more pedagogical theory on assessment itself, I am moving forward with an increased sense of ambivalence. I write about this in my final blog post, through Barrow’s work particularly, understanding how assessment acts a tool of discipline, that may or may not lead to the student’s resistance against the institution itself (2006). Oftentimes assessment reflects how the instruction was understood (see Barrow, 2006; William, 2011, p. 3); in the case of the dissertation, this would have taken place over the whole course of Cultural Studies, where we taught critical reading and research skills. There are also institutional power dynamics – constituted by colonial histories – which reward linguistic achievements (Broadfoot, 1996, p. 30), disproportionately undervaluing students that do not have English as a first language. Moving forward, I will ask more questions. 

Broadfoot argues that the debates for the reform of assessment practices reveal the ‘tension that exists between, for example, educational goals defined by industry and those of teaches’ (1996, p. 25). In my classes, the students largely prioritise practice-based learning, as their tutors in those pathways emphasise their vocational training. CSM as an institution is a source of talent for the fashion industry, which is an industry that seems to prefer obedient and uncritical workers. As someone who has worked in it, I saw first-hand how critical research skills, and understanding theory was necessary to make a strong practitioner. I witnessed too many problematic moments with designers and creative directors appropriating marginalised cultures, reinforcing sexism in the workplace, and misunderstanding capitalist directives. Assessment thus offers a check point to critical self-evaluation, but also reinforces capitalist relational dynamics of competition, ranking the students in an order that would reflect their plausible success in industry. It also can shape the possibilities for future trajectories as academics, should they want to pursue a postgraduate degree. 

Going forward, I think assessment of praxis would be an interesting step to push for, but unfortunately these lie in administrative conversations, which I have not been privy to. In the meantime, I think the opportunity for the students in the Unit 10 dissertation lies with the formative feedback, as it offers encouragement or critical intervention. 

Moving forward for me, is not necessarily about resolving this problem of parity, but rather I am seeking to understand how assessment works on an ideological level, so I can better understand and inform myself about how to practice assessment through critical engagement. There is not a clear quantifiable process for this, but rather to assert my own decolonial aims and practices as intervention into the institutional policies. This is how I aim to move forward.

References (additional to word count) 

Barrow, M. (2006) ‘Assessment and student transformation: linking character and intellect’, Studies in Higher Education, 31:3: pp. 357-372.

Broadfoot, P. (1996) Education, Assessment, and Society: A Sociological Analysis. Berkshire: Open University Press. 

William, D. (2011) ‘What is assessment for learning?’ Studies in Educational Evaluation 37: pp. 3-14.

 

Session/artefact to be observed/reviewed: BA Design for Art Direction, Year 2, Semester 2, Art Direction Unit, Briefing and workshop

Size of student group: 55

Observer: Christin Yu

Observee: Adam Gibbons

 

Note: This record is solely for exchanging developmental feedback between colleagues. Its reflective aspect informs PgCert and Fellowship assessment, but it is not an official evaluation of teaching and is not intended for other internal or legal applications such as probation or disciplinary action.

Part One
Observee to complete in brief and send to observer prior to the observation or review:

What is the context of this session/artefact within the curriculum?

This is a unit briefing session which will include a short check in, some information about the unit theme, timetable, and learning outcomes, followed by workshop tasks, led by myself with a colleague, Erik Hartin co-facilitating. In the latter part of the session, there will be a shared reading and discussion, followed by questions.

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

This is my first session with this group since their first semester of year 1.

What are the intended or expected learning outcomes?

Familiarisation with the brief, introduction to active ludic research methods, agreement on terms of sessions

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

Students will make notes on the session and feed back orally.

Are there potential difficulties or specific areas of concern?

Variety in language ability within the cohort, and variety of challenge in the language of the material we are exploring, my unfamiliarity with the group and any disabling factors which might affect certain students or groups of students.

How will students be informed of the observation/review?

Students have been informed in advance via email, and will be reminded orally in person.

What would you particularly like feedback on?

Clarity of instructions and ability to involve a range of participants.

How will feedback be exchanged?

Either in written form or through a conversation.

Part Two

Observer to note down observations, suggestions and questions:

As we entered the classroom, it was noted that there was a tight turnaround between the two classes, without much time for the physical preparation required to set up the classroom itself. I thought that you did a great job at imagining and executing a plan to accommodate this, as you offered the students an opportunity to engage with an icebreaker activity, while simultaneously setting up AV and reorganising the tables in a circular manner around the room itself. This physical layout was conducive to group conversation, as the students in each micro-cluster were able to view each other, while also having visual access to the screens and the convenors. 

There was a strong utility of communication practices, such as raising hands to signal a taught session or instruction was about to occur. It was a helpful opportunity to see how respect and boundaries can be established in the classroom, without being paternalistic or overly disciplinary. This was also highlighted and illuminated in the slide that established respectful practices, which was inclusionary in tone, and participatory – allowing the students to interject and add. 

As an initial session in a module which explores the theme of ‘Comfort’, there were effective and affective demonstrations of the theme through the learning activities. One of the main exercises asked the students to initially work in their groups to order a stack of words associated with comfort and then to reconvene in the larger group to order them as well. I appreciated the discussion of organisational strategies beyond the chronological. There was a session that employed physical movements, which I noted in our follow-up discussion. The movement itself perhaps engaged with the student’s own positionality through an embodied physical experience. For some, it also placed them into discomfort – I noticed that the students were more apprehensive about getting up and moving about under the gaze of their fellow students. In my notes I asked: 

• What was the hopeful outcome of this exercise? 
  • Physical standing seemed to make the session more boisterous, but the directive was to gain order and participation, what skills did this develop? 
  • How can you alleviate some of the apprehension of participation? (This was perhaps when you discussed discomfort, which I thought was a valuable way to understand the theme itself!)

Finally, some last suggestions and thoughts arose from the description of terms that were crucial to final project. In the introduction of ‘digital assets’ and ‘publications’, I noted that I had trouble understanding what ‘assets’ meant. I wondered whether there was an opportunity to develop an activity alongside the definition which signalled whether the students understood the concept or not. How do you verify comprehension of taught terms and the project itself? 

Part Three

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

The feedback I received has been very helpful and affirming, particularly in relation to the structure and tone of the session. 

I set out to prioritise community building and connection between students in this first session of the unit, as well as between students and staff. This was the intention of using the themed icebreaker slide. Adopting the method of having a slide ready for students to engage with on entering the space has worked well this term on subsequent occasions as well, and it’s becoming a routine that students are more and more familiar with. It is a welcome formula to employ in relation to the obstacle of challenging room management/timetabling – one session always starting at the same time as one ends, and 100 people have to navigate two small entrances to the room – as well as timekeeping, providing meaningful activity for those arriving at the start, and alleviating pressure for students and staff. By planning not to make the beginning of the session too front loaded, thereby alienating any latecomers, this method contributes to an inclusive approach as well as providing an opportunity to engage with concepts related to the project.

It was also affirming to receive positive feedback around inclusive communication practices within the studio such as non-verbal communication and the Agreements and Aspirations slide that we explored as a group in a non-hierarchical way.

I’m pleased to hear that the teaching materials – the printed and laminated lists of terms relating to histories, materials, policies and innovations around the theme of comfort – provided such a range of possible interactions from students. The note about different ways of ordering them was helpful input, reminding me that I can keep exploring the other ways a single, simple teaching material can be adapted to fulfil various enquiries and learning outcomes. 

Considering the various dynamics that were observed, where students appeared more or less comfortable with different sections of the exercise, I’m mindful of the challenges described in Brian Arao and Kristi Clemens’: From Safe Spaces to Brave Spaces (2013), in which they report students making “a conflation of safety with comfort”.  In the chapter Conflictin Teaching Critical Thinking: Practical Wisdom (2010) bell hooks observes the conditions under which students find ways to enter uncertain territories, and in her book Imperfect Solidarities (2024) Aruna D’Souza makes an argument for the right to opacity via Edouard Glissant’s post-colonial theories.

Alongside these influences, I was reflecting that experiencing discomfort can be a gateway to gaining new perspectives and knowledge, as well as a theme to explore through both intellectual and embodied means and perhaps working towards the conditions for brave spaces should be an aspiration if the discourse is seeking to include an exploration of social justice.

I’ve been offered feedback on a couple of occasions that it would help to have a clearer sense of where tasks would lead participants, and this is an aspect of session planning that I’m trying to develop; improving the constructive alignment between brief, workshop task, learning outcomes and materials submitted for assessment.

The feedback about checking for comprehension is welcome, and I have gone on to follow up on this in subsequent sessions, as well as being more mindful of specialist vocabulary and encouraging students to highlight unfamiliar terms and bring them to discussions.

After filling out this form out to share ahead of the observation I was able to reflect more on what the learning outcomes for the session were: Knowledge, Process, and Communication.

• Students becoming familiar with terms related to the theme of comfort using various ordering methods
• Students entering into ludic group activities
• Students being able to explore and express ideas in small and larger groups
• Students becoming familiar with each other, their tutors and the structure of the unit

References:

Arao, B. and Clemens, K. (2013) From Safe Spaces to Brave Spaces: A New Way to Frame Dialogue Around Diversity and Social Justice. In: Landreman, L.M. (ed.), The Art of Effective Facilitation, Routledge  

D’Souza, A. (2024) Imperfect Solidarities. Floating Opera Press 

hooks, b. (2010) Teaching Critical Thinking: Practical Wisdom. Routledge