Introduction, Context and Challenges

I am Unit Leader and Lecturer for Fashion Histories, on MA Fashion Cultures and Histories at LCF. Although an HPL, I lead this unit, communicating with guest speakers, giving two lectures and taking students on external visits. The Unit promotes critical thinking about historical narratives. I have a co-tutor who assists at intervals. I am present at all lectures, liaising with speakers in advance. Students produce a cultural review and an essay. See proposal and figure 1 for additional context.

I have been the Unit Leader for three years and completed an iteration of the MA ten years ago as a mature student. This positionality helps me empathise with students. Additionally, my position as an intermediary between staff, the course leader and students, and HPL status, impact on my intervention. This acknowledges limitations, as well as small windows of opportunity (Shen and Sanders, 2023). I have greater involvement with this cohort than my other teaching and some input in the scheme of work and session framing.

I will develop lecture slides with greater consideration for diverse representation and inclusive formatting. This model will be communicated to guest lecturers. I will plan external visits and the space of the classroom with inclusivity in mind. Students are asked to think critically about historical research, who is represented and who is missing.

As in figure 1, I was given freer rein last year and considered diversity and inclusion in themes and speakers, drawing the latter from outside the university. This appeared to be successful judging by positive student engagement with each other and activities (see PGcert Unit 1 Case Study 2), post-lecture discussion with guests, student independent use of archives in their assignments and positive comments from colleagues.

However, my intervention responds to recent changes and feedback from the student survey, course committee and the external examiner’s report. Comments indicate that students were unclear of the unit purpose and found multiple speakers and visits overwhelming. This has been hard to reconcile with my positive observations and may relate to students seeing themselves as consumers (Flodén, 2017). Flodén (2017) advocate that feedback prompts change but is also guided by experience and the maintenance of academic integrity.  

This overlaps with changes in LCF policy on the use of external speakers. As a result, the course leader has reshaped a brief, written the scheme of work and selected speakers, who now all come from LCF.

Inclusive Learning: Actions and Reasons

Diversity of representation (Hall, et. al. 2013), as well as forward planning (blog 1) and prompts to critical thinking, promote inclusivity for an international cohort (fig. 1) that includes mature students. It accounts for student disabilities, which are often not visible (blog 1 and UAL EDI Report, 2024). I aim consider all abilities in advance to construct a learning experience best for everyone, without singling students out, pre-empting and removing barriers to learning (blog posts; Garrett, 2024; UAL 2018). This includes anticipating access, stairs/elevators and travel time for external visits.

Intersectional factors may disadvantage students, producing awarding gaps (see blog posts; Crenshaw, 1991). UAL data is dominated by undergraduate performance and practice-based courses, making it hard to assess the impact of gender bias, LGBTQ+ and mature status for my MA. See figure 1 for typical demographics. The UAL EDI Data Report (2024, p. 17) highlights a slight increase in home undergraduate mature students to 14%, while 76.2% of students are female identifying (p. 28) and 23% now identify as LGBTQ+. How these factors intersect on the academic MA remains unclear.  

I am predominantly informed by formal and informal student feedback, assessment grades and my closer relationship with this small group. On the Unit, there have been no significant gaps, students overwhelmingly attain A or B grades.

As guest lecturers now come only from within the department, opportunities for students to experience diverse authoritative positionalities, are limited. Diversifying speakers can work towards overcoming epistemic injustice (Rekis, 2023), increasing potential for students to feel represented, while potentially introducing discordant views (Henderson, 2019). The limitation to home speakers places additional significance on lecture content as the site of inclusive representation (Hall et. al., 2013).

I aim to ask lecturers to consider broadening represented identities in slides and/or discuss why some groups are missing, in order to embed an inclusive approach across the Unit (Maloney, 2020). This is directed by PGcert materials and the ‘protected characteristics’ enshrined in law (Gov.uk), but I acknowledge that what is considered a marginalised group depends on my positionality and that of speakers. This approach more specifically addresses the groups who have frequently been excluded from the white, female, western framing of fashion history.

I want students to understand that their identities and experiences are relevant and welcomed, both in the classroom and as subjects of study.  I also remain aware that factors of identity may significantly shape how students think about the world and interpret assignments (blog 2). Attempting diverse representation risks stereotyping and tokenism, but I am reassured by peer feedback (fig. 2 and verbal comments). While I can guide lecturers, I cannot control their content.

While I have some misgivings about positionality statements (blog post 3), this is implicit in week 1, in which my co-tutor and I discuss who we are and how we came to study and teach fashion history. I am also mindful of my positionality in terms of my role as facilitating the student experience and the relative power I hold within the classroom as a more experienced guide (Bayeck, 2022; Addison, 2014). The discussion of positionality is embedded in prompts for students to think critically about history and themselves as researchers. As across the blog posts, I reflect on my privileges, noting as in critical race theory, that my work will include biases, which I work to surface, while drawing this to the attention of students as a way to think about their own research.

Feedback and Reflective Responses

Tutorial feedback suggested including a reflective student exercise to gauge the impact of my intervention, drawing on Gibbs’ (1988) model. I may progress with this, but am tentative. The external examiner suggested a written student reflection but this hasn’t been included in the scheme of work or metnioned by my Course Leader. Multiple avenues for feedback exist and the challenge is rather in responding. I will consider introducing a simplified reflective exercise in the final group tutorial, depending on my reading of students needs at this time. I don’t want students to confuse this with a brainstorming session and they need to focus on imminent submissions. It was also suggested that I make students co-learners and alternate in my role as a facilitator and practitioner. I will keep this in mind, especially in my contributions to guest sessions, seminar activities, group discussion and off-site visits.

Tutorial feedback suggested ways slide material could be made more inclusive. This was useful, specifically in noting resources about Alt text (Harvard online). While I aim to make my slide material as inclusive as possible, I am tentative about being too prescriptive for other staff and offering a template. As they are senior staff with PGcert and PhD training, a level of trust is warranted. I intend to summarise key aspects (e.g. font size and background colour) and include a link to further guidance (Harvard and Oxford websites; LCC Teaching Hub). I will formulate a template for this instructive e-mail to lecturers, which will need to be agreed with the Course Leader.

Tutor feedback made me newly situate my actions in light of institutional and national frameworks and policies. I will further investigate and critique policy and my alignment, such as those of Advance HE and UAL’s Access sand Participation Plan. Section 3D of the Plan links to my intervention in aiming at ‘decolonising teaching and learning, belonging and compassionate pedagogy and assessment for social justice’ (p. 17).

Peer feedback suggested that I include videos and activities to overcome restrictions in speakers (fig. 3). My Course Leader now requests that all speakers include one key reading and 5-6 suggested readings. I am wary of overloading students and the need to encourage their engagement with academic sources. I do see opportunities for developing  class activities to promote more active engagement with resources and I will review the course reading list. Prompted by peer comments I discovered Bellet’s (2023) text, which may inform my future approach to teaching fashion history. Comments also made me more conscious of who has written the resources we suggest to students (fig. 2 and verbal comments)

Evaluation, Future Actions and Conclusions

I intend to roll out most of these ideas, although I will consider the extent to which some notes on supporting materials and additional opportunities for feedback can be put into action. Guidance for speakers is circumscribed by my Course Leader. My position as an intermediary can sometimes be difficult to manage and my intentions can’t always be exercised. Based on recent communication and planning, some guest speaker guidance may be limited to verbal suggestion.

Given that these actions respond to changes in the unit and student feedback, it will be interesting to hear responses to these changes in formal ways (e.g. course committee meeting) and through my observation of the classroom. I will continue to think about other ways I can collect evidence of the intervention’s impact.

Responding to speakers from the previous PGcert cohort, I will also focus on the organisation of seating of the classroom (Nehyba, 2021) and perhaps explicitly introduce the idea of discomfort in historical research (Zembylas, 2020).

Having now met with my co-tutor, I may draw ideas from them and generate a more discursive atmosphere in the classroom. They can also be a source of feedback for the intervention.

I will think more about how I manage slides, notably, the amount of text on slides and how this functions in class but also as a resource on Moodle.

Overall, the Inclusive Pracitces Unit has supported my pre-existing activities and thinking. Specifcally, it promted me to consider disability more boradly in how this is difined and how barriers are mitigated where possible for the benefit of all. It was also enlightening to consider the impact of faith in the way students understand the world and prcoess ideas. I found the practical advice on slide presentation especially useful, clarifying the need for such practices as well as techniques.

Bibliography

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

Advance H E. Accessed 9^th July 2025 at < https://advance-he.ac.uk/guidance/teaching-and-learning?gad_source=1&gad_campaignid=22666561193&gbraid=0AAAAA-AtO0UvHUYpABBr0ElHFEya7dDqa&gclid=CjwKCAjwprjDBhBTEiwA1m1d0g7bG3XiQ16d3PbffSu2ZeMLdFlZXfvP8ocic9d-uqDAdtEud7q6ZBoC13AQAvD_BwE>

Bayeck, R. Y. (2022) Positionality: the interplay of space, context and identity, Journal of Qualitative Methods, 21 pp.1-9

Bellet, A. (2023) New approaches to decolonizing fashion history and period styles. New York: Focal Press.

Byrne, R. : ‘How to add and edit alt text in PowerPoint presentations’. Accessed 8^th July 2025 at < https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rm5f4Zlrj_I>

Crenshaw, K. (1991) Mapping the margins: intersectionality, identity politics, and violence against women of color, Stanford Law Review, 43(6) pp. 1241-1299

Flodén, J. (2017) ‘The impact of student feedback on teaching in higher education’, Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 42(7) pp. 1054-1068.

Garrett, R. (2024) ‘Racism shapes career: career trajectories and imagined futures of racialised minority PhDs in UK higher education’, Globalisation, Societies and Education, 23(3) pp. 683-697

Gibbs, G. (1988) Learning by doing: a guide to teaching and learning methods. Oxford: Oxford Polytechnic

Gov.uk, Types of discrimination (‘protected characteristics’). Accessed 8^th July 2025 at <https://www.gov.uk/discrimination-your-rights>

Hall, S., Evans, J. and Nixon, S. (2013) Representation. Milton Keynes: The Open University

Harvard, Digital Accessibility: ‘Write Helpful Alt Text to Describe Images’. Accessed 8^th July 2025 at <https://accessibility.huit.harvard.edu/describe-content-images>

Harvard, Digital Accessibility: ‘Presentation’. Accessed 8^th July 2025 at < https://accessibility.huit.harvard.edu/presentation>

Henderson, E. F. (2019) ‘The (un)invited guest? Feminist pedagogy and guest lecturing’, Teaching in Higher Education, 24(1) pp. 115-120.

LCC Teaching Hub, ‘Make accessibility a habit’. Accessed 8^th July 2025 at < https://lccteaching.myblog.arts.ac.uk/make-accessibility-a-habit-power-point/>

Maloney, A. (2020) ‘Power and privilege’, blog post, FACE (Fashion Academics Creating Equality). Accessed 9^th July 2020 at <https://www.chead.ac.uk/fashion-academics-creating-equality-face-blog-piece-power-and-privilege/>

Nehyba, J. (2023) ‘Effects of seating arrangement on students’ interaction in group reflection practice’, The Journal of Experimental Education, 91(2) pp. 249-277.

Rekis, J. (2023) ‘Religious identity and epistemic injustice: an intersectional account’, Hypatia, 38, pp. 779-800

Shen, Y. and Sanders, E. B. N. (2023) ‘Identity discovery: small learning interventions as catalysts for change in design education’, vol. 9, Design and Interdisciplinarity, pp. 127-144.

UAL, EDI (Equality, Diversity and Inclusion) Annual Report 2024. Accessed 8^th July 2025 at < https://www.arts.ac.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0022/480901/EDI-annual-report-2024.pdf>

UAL, EDI (Equality, Diversity and Inclusion) Data Report 2024. Accessed 8^th July 2025 at <https://www.arts.ac.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0030/472836/UAL-EDI-data-report-2024-PDFA.pdf>

UAL (2018) Religion and belief: supporting inclusion of staff and students in higher education and colledge: Section 3: Student inclusion: access, experience and learning. Accessed 8^th July 2025 at <https://s3.eu-west-2.amazonaws.com/assets.creode.advancehe-document-manager/documents/ecu/Religion_and_belief-Section_3-Student_inclusion-access_experience_and_learning_1579783006.pdf>

UAL Access and Participation Plan 2025-26 to 2028-29. Accessed 9^th July 2025 at < https://www.arts.ac.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0030/458346/University-of-the-Arts-London-Access-and-Participation-Plan-2025-26-to-2028-29-PDF-1297KB.pdf>

University of Oxford, ‘Creating accessible PowerPoint Presentations’. Accessed 8^th July at < https://www.ctl.ox.ac.uk/creating-accessible-powerpoint-presentations>

Zembylas, M. (2020) Affect, race, and white discomfort in schooling. London: Routledge

Figures

Fig. 1 Slides from Peer Presentation of Intervention Proposal

Fig 2 Peer Feedback: Tokenism

Fig. 3 Peer Feedback: Additional Materials

The resources centre on the way racism and the reiteration of white dominance is social, cultural, ideological and institutionalised, creating barriers for people of colour such as in career progression (Garrett, 2024; Sadiq, 2023) and education (Bradbury, 2019; Channel 4, 2020). The effects of racism may be exacerbated by the intersection of further marginalised identities such as gender, class and disability (Garrett, 2024; Goode, 2019). Disadvantage is established in early life and while progress has been made, racism and white privilege are perpetuated because it is comfortable for white majorities to remain inactive (see examples fifty years apart: Channel 4, 2020 and Elliot, 1970, 1985).

Alice Bradbury (2019) exposes structurally instituted racial biases that disadvantage bilingual pupils who becomes constructed as a problem, while their achievements might be claimed as successes of a liberal system. This chimes with Garrett’s (2024) note about racial minorities as ‘poster children’ for diversity, reminding me not to other minority students.

Most advocate presuming racism and white supremacy (Sadiq, 2023; Bradbury, 2019; Garrett, 2024). This is a key tenet of Critical Race Theory. Garrett (2024) quotes Joseph-Salisbury’s (2019) description of the ‘web of whiteness’, while her blog quotes Sara Ahmed to summarise ‘white men’ as an institution or ‘regulative norms’ (Garrett, 2025). Ahmed describes whiteness as ‘a habit…which becomes a background to social action’ (2007, p. 149), a habit I foster consciousness of and question in teaching.

This background relies on representation. Asif Sadiq (2023) states, ‘if you can’t see it, you can’t be it’. Garrett similarly stresses ‘imagined futures’, what people feel is accessible. This hints at the ‘social imaginary’ coined by Charles Taylor (2004), which foregrounds lived experience in how people understand their social positioning (O’Neill, 2016). I will broaden the identities visible in my lectures and question if their presentation remains filtered through my worldview. This relates to UAL guidance on enhanced visibility (fig. 1)

James Orr (2022) and his interviewees criticise CRT: Arif Ahmed rejects the concept that ‘we are all racist’ and criticises inclusive initiatives as wasteful, while Vincent Harinam denies racism at Cambridge University. At UAL, this remains visible in attainment gaps and is acknowledged as a focus for improvement (figs. 2 and 3). The cost and inefficacy of EDI training is also highlighted by advocates, but Sadiq (2023) proposes localised, group-led and experiential approaches. Following this, I aim to make teaching memorable through inclusive group interactions.

Orr’s interviewees are people of colour, which is leveraged by the Telegraph, while illustrating that worldviews are culturally shaped. Their defensiveness signals discomfort about threats to the ‘status quo’ of ‘white racial control’ (DiAngelo, 2020; Zembylas, 2020). Guessing at the identity and views of others can be informed by racialised culture, however well meaning (Sadiq, 2023). It also potentially masks racial discourse that is not bound by physical characteristics and could work to exclude and devolve white responsibility, which is essential for change (DiAngelo, 2020). Sadiq and Orr worked for the Telegraph, while Sara Ahmed and Orr’s research focuses on phenomenology. This highlights the instability of assumptions about identities, and those of discourses which they accompany.

Considering positionality in a reflexive process of self-appraisal is useful in surfacing biases, but problematic when statements are demanded and undermine concepts of academic impartiality and integrity (Savolainen et al., 2023). Statements also potentially make people vulnerable in regimes where identities are policed. In class, I may highlight my positionality but also these issues and UAL as an institution, to promote student critical consciousness.

Figure 1. UAL Anti-Racism Action Plan, p. 4

Figure 2. UAL Attainment by Ethnicity 1st/2:1 12th June 2025

Figure 3. UAL Anti-Racism Action Plan, p. 12

Bibliography

Ahmed, S. (2007) ‘A phenomenology of whiteness’, Feminist Theory, 8(2) pp. 149-168

Bradbury, A. (2019) ‘A critical race theory framework for education policy analysis: the case of bilingual learners and assessment policy in England’, Race Ethnicity and Education, 23(2) pp. 241-260

Channel 4 (2020) The school that tried to end racism. Accessed 4^th June 2025 at <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1I3wJ7pJUjg>

Elliott, J. (1970) Eye of the storm. Accessed 30^th May 2025 at <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6gi2T0ZdKVc>

Elliott, J. / Frontline (1985) A class divided. Accessed 30^th May 2025 at <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1mcCLm_LwpE>

Garrett, R. (2024) ‘Racism shapes career: career trajectories and imagined futures of racialised minority PhDs in UK higher education’, Globalisation, Societies and Education, 23(3) pp. 683-697

Garrett, R. (2025) ‘How one tweet reveals the missed ethnic experience’, Blog Post, 21^st February. Accessed 4^th June 2025 at <https://rhi-mixedviews.blogspot.com/2025/02/one-tweet-reveals-mixed-ethnic.html>

Goode, J. (2019) ‘The classed, gendered and racialised subject’, in Goode, J. (ed.) Clever girls: autoethnographies of class, gender and ethnicity. London: Palgrave Macmillan. Pp. 17-46

Joseph-Salisbury, R. (2019) ‘Institutionalised whiteness, racial microaggressions and black bodies out of place in higher education’, Whiteness and Education, 4(1) pp. 1-17

Mangan, L. (2020) ‘The school that tried to end racism: review – a powerful lesson in white privilege’, The Guardian, 25^th June 2020. Accessed 4^th June 2025 at <https://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/2020/jun/25/the-school-that-tried-to-end-racism-review-white-privilege-unconscious-racial-bias>

O’Neill, J. G. (2016) ‘Social imaginaries: an overview’, in Encyclopedia of educational philosophy and theory. New York: Springer. pp. 1-6

Orr, J. (2022) ‘Revealed: the charity turning UK universities woke’, The Telegraph. Accessed 4^th June 2025 at <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FRM6vOPTjuU>

Sadiq, A. (2023) Diversity, equity and inclusion: learning how to get it right. TEDx. Accessed 4^th June 2025 at <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HR4wz1b54hw>

Savolainen, J., Casey, P. J., McBrayer, J. P. and Schwerdtle, P. N. (2023) ‘Positionality and its problems: questioning the value of reflexivity statements in research’, Perspectives on Psychological Science, 18(6) pp. 1271-1281

Taylor, C. (2004) Modern social imaginaries. North Carolina: Duke University Press

Zembylas, M. (2020) Affect, race, and white discomfort in schooling. London: Routledge

Appendix

Notes and Biographies of Authors and Speakers/Materials

From assumptions based on her profile on UCL’s website, Professor Alice Bradbury appears to be a white woman researching inequalities in education policy. She cites PhD supervision and impact on governmental policy as significant motivations.

Rhianna Garrett is a doctoral researcher investigating racialised minorities in academia at Loughborough University. Although the subject of research, her positionality as a doctoral student and woman with undisclosed heritage, may inform her approach and understanding of the experience of PhD research. This is made more explicit in her blog post:

Posted on twitter and linked blog reaction to the title of her thesis:

https://rhi-mixedviews.blogspot.com/2025/02/one-tweet-reveals-mixed-ethnic.html

Here, she discusses responses to her ethnicity and position in relation to whiteness and race as an externally attributed identity with particular complications for those of mixed heritage/intersectional racial identities. She notes proximity to white privilege and its exclusions and inclusions.

Dr Asif Sadiq is Chief Inclusion Officer at Warner Brothers and holds a business degree. He is an award winner, public speaker and has a British accent and is visibly a person of colour. He previously worked at the Telegraph. He has an Honorary doctorate from the OU. He previously worked for the City of London Police. Testimony says he speaks from personal experience. He has posted about how to support Muslim colleagues and police.

Professor James Orr teaches Philosophy of Religion and Ethics at Cambridge. He is Oxbridge educated. He previously worked in corporate law and is a key figure in the Conservative movement. He is a friend of J D Vance of the US Republican party. They share an interest in faith – Vance converted to Catholicism. Orr’s wife is an Anglican vicar. His research interests are in phenomenology and the works of Kant and Husserl.

The School that Tried to End Racism relates to a scheme overseen by Dr Nicola Rollocks of Goldsmiths, University of London and Prof. Rhiannon Turner of Queen’s University Belfast.

My intervention is to embed inclusive practices in planning an MA Fashion Histories unit, which comprises weekly 3 hour teaching sessions with guest lecturers plus external visits. It critically addresses themes of identity and culture, making inclusivity an explicit topic of discussion.

I am tasked with giving one lecture on queer histories (with menswear) and one on visual culture. I aim to represent marginalised identities in slides (Hall, et al, 2013), highlighting intersectional complexity, erasures and oppression (Crenshaw, 1991), while avoiding stereotyping (UAL). This allows diverse religions, race/ethnicities, sexualities, bodies and abilities to surface, offering foci for the identification of a diverse cohort (Barrow, 2006) and contributing to inclusive discussion that aims to avoid ‘epistemic injustice’ and self-silencing (Rekis, 2023; Malcolm, 2021). I will highlight the white, ‘Western’, able-bodied, Christian-inflected, gender biased, heterocentric development of the field and ask students to consider who wrote histories and reflect on their own positionality as researchers (Bayeck, 2022).

I will act as a consistent and approachable guide (Addison, 2014; TUAI: Campbell, Cole, Rahman), encouraging students to follow their own research interests with sensitivity and self-awareness. I will ask students to question terms like ‘queer’ and ‘menswear’, offering definitions and examples, before drawing on my research (Orr and Shreeve, 2017). I will ask guest speakers to take opportunities to highlight underrepresented communities and historical absences.

I will upload lecture slides and academic readings in advance, linking these in announcement emails. I will signpost EC/ISA Applications, Academic Support and citethemrightonline, aware of diverse prior academic experience (Biggs, 1993) and invisible needs/challenges (TUAI: Rahman, Gray, Ogunsiji). Consciousness of my positionality will inform my approach to students in tutorial and assessment feedback, which is important in student development (Barrow, 2006).

I will use a muted slide background and large clear font, while monitoring content volume. I will establish a regular break time and request that guest lecturers follow these protocols. I will communicate with off-site venues to ensure access in advance, while leaving ample time for travel.

Bibliography

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

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

Bayeck, R. Y. (2022) Positionality: the interplay of space, context and identity, Journal of Qualitative Methods, 21 pp.1-9

Biggs, J. (1993) ‘From theory to practice: a cognitive system approach’, Higher Education Research and Development, 12(1) pp. 73-85

Crenshaw, K. (1991) Mapping the margins: intersectionality, identity politics, and violence against women of color, Stanford Law Review, 43(6) pp. 1241-1299

Hall, S., Evans, J. and Nixon, S. (2013) Representation. Milton Keynes: The Open University

Malcolm, F. (2021) ‘Silencing and Freedom of Speech in UK Higher Education’, British Educational Research Journal, June, 47(3), pp. 520-538

Orr, S. and Shreeve, A. (2017) Art and design pedagogy in higher education: knowledge, values and ambiguity in the creative curriculum. London: Routledge

Rekis, J. (2023) ‘Religious identity and epistemic injustice: an intersectional account’, Hypatia, 38, pp. 779-800

TUAI (Tell Us About It)  Obediah Campbell, Dionne Cole, Navdeep Rahman, Candace Gray, Bunmi Ogunsiji. Accessed 26^th May 2025 < https://shadesofnoir.org.uk/artefacts/tell-us-about-it/ >

UAL (2018): Religion and belief: supporting inclusion of staff and students in higher education and colleges: Section 3: Student inclusion: access, experience and learning. Accessed 15^th May 2025 < https://s3.eu-west-2.amazonaws.com/assets.creode.advancehe-document-manager/documents/ecu/Religion_and_belief-Section_3-Student_inclusion-access_experience_and_learning_1579783006.pdf >

Religions/faiths/beliefs have been diminished, problematised and understood as fundamental (Appiah, 2014; Rekis, 2023; Ramadan, 2022). Definitions, interpretations and practices are diverse and contested, within and outside follower communities (Malcolm, 2021; Merry, 2006). Secular beliefs, such as veganism, have been unevenly understood as ‘lifestyle choice’ (McKeown and Dunn, 2021). Categorisations of race, sexuality and gender are culturally constructed (Machery and Faucher, 2004; Liss, 1998; Foucault, 1998 [1976]; Butler, 1999 [1990]) but have been differently understood in relation to choice. Supremacist understanding of race as fixed has been used in discriminatory discourse, while framing queer subjectivity as a lifestyle choice has also justified persecution. Contestation, confusion and prejudice can shape the provision of means to observe belief (McKeowen and Dunn, 2021, Jawad) and surfaces as microaggressions and hidden barriers (Ramadan, 2022).

In ‘Western’ contexts, secular discourses isolate religious belief as regressive in a modernist paradigm (Appiah, 2014; Ramadan, 2022), while elsewhere religion may be immanent in daily life, shaping a worldview (Rekis, 2023). For example, continuous ‘conscious[ness] of the ancestors’ in Ghanaian Asante culture (Appiah, 2014).

Religion can be racialised (Rekis, 2023; Singh, 2016), potentially exacerbating socioeconomic disadvantage. This emanates from historical colonialism (Appiah, 2014), continues to shape contemporary prejudice (Jawad, 2022; Singh, 2016), and influences taxonomic flattening of intersectional complexity (Crenshaw, 1991; UK Equality Act 2010). In universities, this is conducive to ‘epistemic injustice’, academics (or students) potentially being prevented or discouraged from speaking, impoverishing knowledge transfer (Rekis, 2023; Malcolm, 2021). It may relate to awarding gaps, but UAL attainment statistics do not include religion (fig. 1)

Intersections of faith, ethnicity/race and gender can become hypervisible through dress (Rekis, 2023; Ramadan, 2022). This has been associated with barriers, for example, hijab-wearing Muslim women’s participation in sport (Jawad, 2022) and academia (Ramadan, 2023). Alternatively, some hijab-wearing women note smooth career progression facilitated by institutional policy and family support (Ramadan, 2022). Mitigating biases, UAL’s policies were developed through consultation with diverse, representative external bodies (UAL, 2018). The female staff gender bias at UAL (fig. 2) may also dilute gender-based discrimination.

To address barriers, I will communicate the diversity and mutability of religions/beliefs, seeking to induce empathy and respect in class discussion (Merry, 2005), while asking students to critically consider multiple perspectives (Singh, 2016). Tolerance is a low bar, but respect is reciprocal in a context of trust in which different people and worldviews interact (George, 1999).

Socially devalued intersectional identities do not preclude privilege, while less visible factors such as sexuality, can be a locus of tension in ‘identity work’ (Snow and Anderson, 1987, p. 1348; Brown, 2015). I am alert to this in teaching students, because HE contributes to personal development and questioning (D’Emilio, 2013 [1992]).

Hypervisible minority status potentially induces pre-emptive avoidance (Rekis, 2023; Fricker, 2007) and religious students are a minority at UAL (fig. 3). I will sensitively encourage group participation and offer space to discuss lived experience and beliefs, aiming to overcome potential ‘locutionary silencing’ (Langton, 1993) and avoid ‘disengagement and self-quieting’ (Malcolm, 2021, p. 521). In teaching and assessment, I newly account for my secular positionality, understanding faith as integral for some students.

I will include ‘examples of different faiths’ (UAL, 2018, p. 9) in lecture material, ensuring these ‘avoid stereotypes’ and not making students ‘spokespersons’ for a religion or cause (ibid. p. 10). This reduces potential ‘stereotype threat’ (Steele, 2010), which inhibits students fearful of being identified with a ‘controversial’ value system (Malcolm, 2021 p. 529).

Bibliography

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

Brown, A. D. (2015) ‘Identities and identity work in organizations’, International Journal of Management Reviews, 17(1), pp. 20-40

Butler, J. (1999 [1990]) Gender trouble: feminism and the subversion of identity. London: Routledge

Crenshaw, K. (1991) Mapping the margins: intersectionality, identity politics, and violence against women of color, Stanford Law Review, 43(6), pp. 1241-1299

D’Emilio, J. (2013 [1992]) Making trouble: essays on gay history, politics, and the university. London: Routledge

Equality Act 2010, Section 9 ‘Religion or Belief: Explanatory Notes’ [Online]. Accessed at: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2010/15/notes/division/3/2/1/7

Foucault, M. (1998 [1976]) The will to knowledge: the history of sexuality. Vol. 1. London: Bloomsbury

Fricker, M. (2007) Epistemic injustice: power and the ethics of knowing. Oxford: Oxford University Press

George, R. (1999) ‘Democracy and moral disagreement’, in, S. Macedo (ed.) Deliberative politics: essays on democracy and disagreement. New York: Oxford University Press

Jawad, H. (2022) Islam, Women and Sport: The Case of Visible Muslim Women. [Online]. Available at: https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/religionglobalsociety/2022/09/islam-women-and-sport-the-case-of-visible-muslim-women/

Langton, R. (1993) ‘Speech acts and unspeakable acts’, Philosophy and Public Affairs, 22, 293–330.

Liss, J. E. (1998) ‘Diasportic identities: science and politics of race in the work of Franz Boas and W. E. B. Du Bois, 1894-1919’, Cultural Anthropology, 13(2), pp. 127-166

Machery, E. and Faucher, L. (2004) ‘Social construction and the concept of race’, Philosophy of Science, 72(5), pp. 1208-1219

Malcolm, F. (2021) ‘Silencing and Freedom of Speech in UK Higher Education’, British Educational Research Journal, June, 47(3), pp. 520-538

McKeown, P. and Dunn, R. A. (2021) ‘A “life‐style choice” or a philosophical belief?: The argument for veganism and vegetarianism to be a protected philosophical belief and the position in England and Wales’, Liverpool Law Review, 42, pp. 207-241

Merry, M. S. (2005) ‘Should educators accommodate intolerance? Mark Halstead, 1 homosexuality, and the Islamic case’, Journal of Moral Education, 4(1), pp. 19-36

Ramadan, I. (2022) ‘When faith intersects with gender: the challenges and successes in the experiences of Muslim women academics’, Gender and Education, 34(1), pp. 33-48

Rekis, J. (2023) ‘Religious identity and epistemic injustice: an intersectional account’, Hypatia, 38, pp. 779-800

Singh, S. J. (Trinity University) (2016) Challenging Race, Religion, and Stereotypes in the Classroom. [Online]. Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0CAOKTo_DOk

Snow, D. A. and Anderson, L. (1987) ‘Identity work among the homeless: the verbal construction and avowal of personal identities’, American Journal of Sociology, 92, pp. 1336-1371

Steele, C. M. (2010) Whistling Vivaldi and other clues to how stereotypes affect us. London: Norton

UAL (2018): Religion and belief: supporting inclusion of staff and students in higher education and colleges: Section 3: Student inclusion: access, experience and learning. Accessed 15^th May 2025 < https://s3.eu-west-2.amazonaws.com/assets.creode.advancehe-document-manager/documents/ecu/Religion_and_belief-Section_3-Student_inclusion-access_experience_and_learning_1579783006.pdf >

Figure 1. UAL Undergraduate Attainment by Student Profile Categories

Figure 2. UAL Staff Statistics: Sex [binary gender]

UAL (2021/22) Equality, diversity and inclusion: annual report. [Online]. Accessed at: https://www.arts.ac.uk/?a=389423

Figure 3. UAL Undergraduate Profiles 2024/25: Religion

Below, I respond to recurrent themes in the filmed testimony of three people, examining their diverse experiences of disability and intersecting identities. Kimberlé Crenshaw (1990) developed ‘intersectionality’ to explain that occupying multiple marginalised identities compounds oppression. Intersectional praxis in education aims to address disability both in terms of structural barriers and welfare (Sépulchre, 2023).

Film one stresses physical needs and accessibility. It draws a parallel between historic racist segregation and contemporary ‘segregation by design’. This is echoed in film three, while film two highlights educational barriers. These are also foregrounded in research (Lukkien et al. 2024).

I have planned off-site visits to accommodate a student with mobility difficulties, but now consider travel to off-site activities, the organisation of the classroom and the wider opportunities I can make accessible. I will consider how to mitigate student isolation by intervening in group dynamics and will ‘enmesh’ disability across course material (Loutzenheiser and Erevelles, 2019, p. 384), rather than segregating the topic.

Films one and three highlight that inclusivity benefits everyone, hinting at the social construction of disability as problematic (Oliver, 1990). Film three notes the need for planning to accommodate neurodiversity. My lecture content is accessible online before sessions to benefit all students but I newly consider who is able to participate, how far and how this can be extended.

Film two notes the impact of government policies on the participant’s profession and motherhood, but not explicitly her deafness. This highlights that one identity can be viewed as a ‘master status’ (Hughes, 1945; Goffman, 1990 [1963]) but this is context dependent (Bayeck, 2022). This, and reflection on my positionality, prompt me to ‘broaden…[my] understanding of…[student] holistic experiences’, while considering how they view me and the power imbalance in the relationship (Lukkien et al. 2024, p. 715).

Film two highlights the deaf participant’s struggle to communicate, while film three notes difficulty in interpreting communication in relation to recent ‘out’ queer status and neurodivergence. The point of intersection between the duress of queer positioning and neurodiversity, potentially compounds stress, isolation and confusion.

In response, I aim for clear verbal, written and visual communication and to allow space for students to compose their thoughts. I will sensitively monitor student comprehension and encourage participation, divining inadvertent exclusions with fresh awareness of visible and hidden needs.

Film one highlighted the positive impact of Paralympian visibility, although research has problematised this (Goggin, G and Newell, C., 2000). It noted that the intersecting visibility of Black and disabled identities as targets for abuse. This stresses a position that is ‘both physically and culturally marginalized’ (Crenshaw, 1990, p. 1250). In film two, deafness is less visible, while film three’s participant noted he can ‘pass’ as neurotypical and cisgendered. His self-description as ‘probably not neurotypical’, parallels queer status in its medicalisation and expectations that individuals can understand and explain their identity. Film two critiques this inducement to explain, which amounts to an additional labour akin to that expressed by Reni Eddo-Lodge (2017) in relation to race. While gender is accounted for in UAL statistics, the significance of sexuality and heterosexism remains invisible (fig. 1).

I taught a mature student who used a hearing aid and they/them pronouns, but left the MA, ostensibly because of funding. Their disability, age and gender identity did not obviously signal multiplying disadvantage to me, but I am now conscious that such factors could be at play. This is contextualised by research that points to lower degree outcomes and withdrawal associated with disabled students (Shaw, 2024, p. 830), which is born out by UAL retention data (fig. 2). Data fails to acknowledge a gender identity between the binary, which is exclusionary in classification systems that are ‘both material and symbolic’ (Bowker and Star, 1999, p. 286) (fig. 3). Multiple intersecting minority identities can be the ‘location of oppression’ but this is ‘not fully captured by…hegemonic system[s]’ (Hernández-Sacra et al., 2018, p. 287) (figs. 1, 2, 3).

Fig. 1. UAL Student Data Profiles

Fig. 2. UAL Disability Retention

Fig. 3 UAL Gender Retention

References

Film 1 Ade Adepitan interviewed by Nick Webborn

https://youtu.be/KAsxndpgagU?si=9AN4JdzPDdTNsNwS

Film 2 Christine Sun Kim: “Friends and Strangers”

Film 3 Chay Brown, Co-Founder, Director of Operations and Director for Healthcare at Transactual

Bayeck, R. Y. (2022) Positionality: the interplay of space, context and identity, Journal of Qualitative Methods, 21 pp.1-9

Bowker, G. C. and Star, S. L. (1999) Sorting things out: classification and its consequences. Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press

Crenshaw, K. (1991) Mapping the margins: intersectionality, identity politics, and violence against women of color, Stanford Law Review, 43(6) pp. 1241-1299

Eddo-Lodge, R. (2017) Why I’m no longer talking to white people about race. London: Bloomsbury

Goffman, E. (1990 [1963]) Stigma: notes on the management of spoiled identity. London: Penguin

Goggin, G. and Newell, C. (2000) Crippling Paralympics? Media, disability and olympism, Media International Australia, 97(1) pp. 71-83

Hernández-Saca, D. I., Gutmann Kahn, L. and Cannon, M. A. (2018) Intersectionality dis/ability research: how dis/ability research in education engages intersectionality to uncover the multidimentional construction of dis/abled experiences. Review of Research in Education. 42(March) pp. 286-311

Hughes, E.C. (1945) Dilemmas and contradictions of status. American Journal of Sociology, 50 pp. 353–359

Loutzebnheiser, L. W. and Erevelles, N. (2019) “What’s disability got to do with it?”: Crippin’ Educational Studies at the intersections, Educational Studies: A Journal of the American Educational Studies Association, 55(4) pp. 375-386.

Lukkien, T., Chauhan, T. and Otaye-Ebede, L. (2024) Addressing the diversity principle – practice gap in Western higher education institutions: a systematic review on intersectionality, British Educational Research Journal, 51(2) pp. 705-736

Oliver, M. (1990) The social construction of the disability problem. In, The Politics of Disablement: Critical Texts in Social Work and the Welfare State. London: Palgrave. pp 78-94

Sépulchre, M. (2023) Intersectional praxis and disability in Higher Education, Social Inclusion, 11(4) pp. 362-372

Shaw, A. (2024) Inclusion of disabled Higher Education students: why are we not there yet?, International Journal of Inclusive Education, 28(6) pp. 820-838

I am unit leader for Fashion Histories on MA Fashion Cultures and Histories, with some agency to modify briefs and Learning Outcomes. The unit has two assessed submissions: a review (Element 1) and an essay (Element 2). It begins an implicit journey towards dissertation and beyond, as well as establishing wider expectations for cohorts with diverse prior education and education gaps.

Students struggle to meet the LO for Enquiry (fig. 1), which was inherited from a previous course iteration. Some also struggle to grasp the specificity of choosing a single primary source to analyse and need support with academic referencing.

Realising uneven student familiarity with academic research across the cohort, I introduce google scholar early, signpost the library induction and citethemrightonline, while pointing to the collateral benefit of learning referencing conventions by attending to set readings (Dewey 1997 [1938]). I address the difference between primary and secondary sources, which some find difficult to grasp. At another university, I have done activities on this topic within the library and intend to explore this possibility at UAL.

I reiterate and elaborate on LOs in briefings, verbally offering examples to students unused to shaping their own arguments and research. Following John Biggs’ (2007) research on ‘constructive alignment’, avenues appropriate for the Enquiry criterion are covered in week one and I remind students at interim seminars. I aim to modify LOs in line with guidance (UAL a and b), but currently, to avoid making them too prescriptive (Addison, 2014; Biggs, 2012), I rather offer detail and examples in a seminar and make slides available. Students also grade an exemplar assignment and participate in a peer review exercise. This has worked well in helping them understand the process and alignment.

On other courses, my assessment is subject to scrutiny by unit leaders and moderators, contributing to a culture of surveillance (Addison, 2014, p. 317 drawing on Ball and Olmedo, 2013). With this MA, as Unit Leader with a closer relationship to the cohort, tensions around assessment centre rather on the students. Their essays overwhelmingly fit within a B- to A- span. This makes it hard to gauge a spectrum of ability. I am also more exposed to their response to assessment and these students are often ambitious and easily disappointed.

Marked improvements in some students’ research and communications skills, from Element 1 to Element 2, demonstrate the efficacy of careful assessment feedback at early stages. While feedback was praised in course committee meetings, some students wanted further debriefing. This isn’t possible in timetabling but might be addressed in group seminar or informal opportunities, going forward.

Academic research and writing can map well onto LOs well because both are text based. Further, this MA differs to arts courses that stress the importance of ‘not knowing’ (Addison, 2014, p. 322). Writing and its teaching, as related to ‘rhetoric’, are cultural and ideological, arising ‘out of a time and place, a peculiar social context’ (Berlin, 1984, p. 1). They are influenced by culturally instituted language patterns and education (Hande Uysal, 2008). My teaching maintains a particular logic to the expectations of an essay, its contents and organisation, which I am aware by observation, coheres with colleagues and is often shaped by western traditions. We account for creativity and guard against biases, but the essay is more clearly defined than an arts outcome.

Bibliography

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

Ball, S. J. and Olmedo, a. (2013) ‘Carre of the self, resistance and subjectivity under neoliberal governmentalities, in Critical studies in Education, 54(1) pp. 85-96.

Berlin, J. (1984) Writing instruction in nineteenth-century American colleges. Illinois: South Illinois University Press.

Biggs, J. (2007) ‘Using constructive alignment in outcomes-based teaching and learning’, in Biggs, J. B. and Tang, C. S-k (eds.) Teaching for quality learning at university. Maidenhead: Open University Press. pp. 50-63.

Biggs, J. (2012) ‘What the student does: teaching for enhanced learning’, in Higher Education, Research & Development. 31(1) pp. 39-55.

Dewey, J. (1997 [1938]) Experience and education. New York: Touchstone.

Hande Uysal, H. (2008) ‘Tracing the culture behind writing: rhetorical patterns and bidirectional transfer in L1 and L2 essays of Turkish writers in relation to educational context’, in Journal of Second Language Writing, 17(3) pp. 183-207.

UAL (a) Course Designer: Crafting Learning Outcomes. Accessed 10^th March 2025 <https://www.arts.ac.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0027/190395/Course-Designer-4-Crafting-Learning-Outcomes-PDF-255KB.pdf>

UAL (b) Inclusive Marking of Written Work Guidelines for Staff. Accessed 10^th March 2025 <https://assessmentfeedback.arts.ac.uk/inclusive.php#:~:text=Inclusivity%20is%20a%20core%20value,noting%20the%20highlighted%20points%20especially>

This reflection addresses the influence of Michel Foucault’s theories on education. Mark Barrow (2006) deploys Foucault’s technologies of the self to argue that education contributes to self-construction and that this is especially prominent in creative degrees, proposing that ‘design assessment is an individualising technology’ (2006, p. 367). This differs from models of knowledge transmission and reiteration in examinations, because creative degrees promote learning through iteration and reflection, documented in a ‘learning journal’ (Barrow, 2006, p. 364). Further, there is ‘an overt expectation that…the design student would display a personal connection with the work’ (Barrow, 2006, p. 363), while assessment is ‘a confessional tool’ that incites ‘students to disclose themselves to their lecturer’ (ibid., p. 364).

My teaching is neither exclusively iterative nor transmissive. It is creative and developmental, but not in the same ways as design/art. My students rarely directly centre themselves in their work, but free topic choice and discussion of positionality, invites them to reflect on their subjectivity and its relationship to their research.

I am resistant to confession because of its association with social control, which is not addressed by Barrow (2006). In my work, I have moderated a dissertation about anorexia and been tasked with asking students to share a moment when they have felt uncomfortable because of their appearance. I am dubious about the appropriateness and ethics of such cases and given opportunities, would re-direct topics.

Unlike Barrow (2006), Stephen Ball (2013) outlines Foucault’s interest in the way education has constructed and maintained social divisions, in what Ian Leask describes as ‘the grim truth of the education process’ (2011, p. 59). In later research however, Ball elaborates that ‘Foucault does not intend that his analyses produce a horizon of absolute subjection and domination, but rather…a horizon of freedom’ (2019, p. 133). This horizon may consist of unending development and potential rebellion, or ‘oppositional micro-politics’ (Leask, 2011, p. 57). My aims are not revolutionary, but this reinvigorates my encouragement of student critical thinking and the destabilising of purported truths.

Reviewing Ball (2013), Richard Niesche notes that the ‘ethical formation of the subject, truth-telling and subjectivity emphasise the productive side of power’ (2016, p. 114). This refers to Foucauldian concepts summarised by Paul Rabinow (1997), which Barrow (2006) uses to conceptualise a process by which the design student is reflexive in self-critique. Here, telos is defined as ‘the act of disassembling the self’ so that the student can finally ‘err from the norm in a deliberate and considered way’ (Barrow, 2006, p. 367). Ball (2019) suggests ways in which this Foucauldian ethical self can be constructed by fostering an environment conducive to experimentation, student self-awareness of context, and critique. He notes that ‘[t]he “classroom” is reconceived as a space of freedom, the “curriculum” as curiosity, and “pedagogy” as a parrhesiatic [bold, free speech] encounter’ (Ball, 2019, p. 137).

This reminds me of the importance of establishing a supportive teaching environment and offering opportunities for students to voice thoughts and debate topics, while empathetically negotiating aspects of the personal. As an HPL in a neoliberal system, pedagogic boldness remains within boundaries. However, I am newly aware of my role in guiding student-subject critical awareness, experimentation and development, which is important for their work, as well as their understanding of themselves as a social subject with agency.

Bibliography

Ball, S. (2013) Foucault, power, and education. London: Routledge.

Ball, S. (2019) ‘A horizon of freedom: using Foucault to think differently about education and learning’, Power and Education, 11(2) pp. 132-144.

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

Leask, I. (2011) ‘Beyond subjection: Notes on the later Foucault and education’, Educational Philosophy and Theory, 44(1) pp. 57–73.

Niesche, R. (2016) ‘What use is Foucault in education today?’, Journal of Educational Administration and History, 48(1) pp. 113-118

Rabinow, P. (1997) ‘Introduction’, in, P. Rabinow (ed.) Michel Foucault ethics: subjectivity and truth: the essential works of Foucault 1954–1984, Volume one. Harmondsworth: Penguin. pp. xi–xlii.

This reflection addresses Learning Outcomes, their emergence and relationship to a neoliberal, market orientated agenda and the tensions in implementing the ‘technocratic ideology of learning and assessment’ in art and design courses (Davies, 2012, p. 4).

Nicholas Addison (2014) highlights the intention of LOs to centre student learning and inclusivity but criticises their limited ability to develop creative responses. He highlights the alternative model of cultural, historical, activity theory (CHAT), rooted in Lev Vygotsky’s (1978) theories, which stress student development as continuous becoming and the tutor as a more knowledgeable guide in a process of learning through proximity, interactions and internalisation. The model applies to studio-based arts education and addresses concerns that LOs fail to respect HE staff integrity. The description resonates with that of group and informal mentoring (Lunsford et al., 2017).

Allan Davies (2012) focuses on similar shortcomings of LOs, also highlighting Bloom’s (1956) taxonomy, which shaped the generic and universal qualities of LOs. Davies notes that ‘[i}n the search for accuracy and “clarity”…paradoxically, the more the landscape becomes ambiguous’ (2012, p. 6). He highlights other ways students understand requirements and stresses the need for a clear relationship between expectations placed on students, course content, delivery, and assessment. John Biggs (2007) discusses this as constructive alignment. Drawing of Biggs (2003 [1992]), Davies (2012) advocates a nested hierarchy model for assessment criteria, in which each grade builds on the previous one, indicated by overlapping terminology.

My teaching is within design institutions, sometimes with practice based students, where practice can mean anything from bespoke tailoring to journalism, and sometimes for students enrolled on an academic MA course. The type of sustained relationship Addison (2014) and Davies (2012) discuss, isn’t possible in my department. Cultural and Historical Studies is separated, outside a ‘school’ within UAL. This is reflected in the high level of HPL and part-time staffing, which is rarely understood by students and may contribute to a sense of discontinuity.

As a framework for parity (Addison, 2014), LOs enabled me to assess work without prior knowledge of course or students. Following the above, I understand LOs as a mechanism of the neoliberal model from which I currently benefit, but which sustains the precarity of my employment. I see LOs as a symptom and target of critique, but it is rather the employment structures that shape student and staff experience.

LOs remain dependent on their author (Addison, 2014). Some are clearer and more balanced than others. I find simpler LOs matched to only one grade criteria, the most effective. This shapes my limited opportunities to write them. LOs usually come with briefs, which may be instructive or inspirational and assessment is moderated, points missed in the articles above. Holistically, there is space for staff and student creative interpretation, destabilising claims that LOs are universalising. This is also stressed by Biggs’ (2007) emphasis on the verbs of LOs, which promote active student engagement, rather than a concretised intended outcome. Understanding the construction of LOs and explicit discussion of ambiguities, alignment and criteria, directs my future approach to discussing them with students, prompting me to offer examples of my interpretation when I am the principal assessor and have opportunities to do so.

Bibliography

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

Biggs, J. B. (2003 [1992]) Teaching for quality learning at University. Society for Research in HE and Open University Press.

Biggs, J. (2007) ‘Using constructive alignment in outcomes-based teaching and learning’, in Biggs, J. B. and Tang, C. S-k (eds.) Teaching for quality learning at university. Maidenhead: Open University Press. pp. 50-63.

Bloom, B. (1956) A taxonomy of cognitive objectives. New York: McKay.

Davies, A. (2012) ‘Learning outcomes and assessment criteria in art and design. What’s the recurring problem?’, in Networks, 18, July, University of Brighton, Faculty of Arts, online. Accessed 25^th February 2025 <http://arts.brighton.ac.uk/projects/networks/issue-18-july-2012/learning-outcomes-and-assessment-criteria-in-art-and-design.-whats-the-recurring-problem>

Lundford, L. G., Crisp, G., Dolan, E. L. and Wuetherick, B. (2017) ‘Mentoring in higher education’, in Clutterbuck, D. A. and Kochan, F. K. (eds.) The SAGE Handbook of Mentoring. London: Sage.

Vygotsky, L. S. (1978) Mind in society: the development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Record of Observation or Review of Teaching Practice        

 

Session/artefact to be observed/reviewed: 2 hours Seminar for BA Fashion Marketing Year 1

Size of student group: Around 20 students

Observer: Paul Bench

Observee: Misha Xu

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?

• Understanding and discussions on how to structure the summative assessment which is an individual report
• Discuss and make all marketing decisions in the simulation game including Q3,Q4.

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

• Since they joined LCF in Sep 2024, I have been doing lectures (cross 3 courses), seminars, and tutorials

What are the intended or expected learning outcomes?

• Understanding the Principles of Fashion Marketing, and reflecting their understanding in the Simulation Game.

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

• A marketing report 1500 words
• Students are required to produce a marketing report for a fashion company/brand/retailer/designer of their choice. The report outlines a marketing plan to meet the requirements of an identified target market within a local or global context. The marketing plan should outline clear aims and objectives, implementation activities and KPIs to measure performance and progress towards the achievement of the marketing plan outcomes.

Are there potential difficulties or specific areas of concern?

• No

How will students be informed of the observation/review?

• I will introduce it to students before the seminar starts

What would you particularly like feedback on?

• Student engagement and group participants

How will feedback be exchanged?

• This record form, and email communications

Part Two

Observer to note down observations, suggestions and questions:

The observed session was towards the end of a unit. Through this unit, students engaged in an online team game in which students apply theory in active decision making framed as a competition. This was explained to me ahead of time. The session also served to recap on briefing notes before a summative report submission.

Students were congratulated at the start of the session for attendance across the unit. Encouraging students to log on to the relevant game/application and get into their groups, took some time. While students did this and latecomers continued to arrive, key aspects of the session and imminent deadline were repeated, while students were encouraged to excel in the remaining time.

Unless students had been forewarned of the observer presence, it would have been good to alert them to the observation. Organising late students and group working on laptops, while summarising submission requirements was potentially challenging to manage, but done with ease. The break seemed to come a little early, but this may relate to the flow of the session, the impending game deadline and established protocols.

The session was orderly, with distinct shifts from the login and stress on the game, to more formal submission slides. A combination of clear information about deadlines and what to submit with good explanations about how to format the report and why, was supplemented with more active use of the shared screen. This sharing briefly included the outlook app, but ensuring this is closed ahead of sharing to class might be good in future. Sharing citethemright and Academic Support booking areas on screen might have been good, but this had likely been covered previously.

The presentation of information was thorough and enthusiastic, allowing space for questions. Formal elements at the beginning and in the summative briefing were presented at the lectern and at appropriate volume for the class, while individuals and groups were attended to in a modified tone. The pace of some information delivery could be slowed down. However, by this stage students are presumably well versed on the expectations.

There were a number of behavioural/individual student challenges. This contributed to a challenging situation in which some students had to be introduced to the task while the majority focused on summative activities. Misha demonstrated extremely high levels of patience and empathy, sought the assistance of technical staff and managed everything with ease and an even tone.

Some groups/students were more engaged in the task than others. This is inherent in all group work. Perhaps some attention could be paid to each group more systematically. However, I was only able to observe the first part of an extended session, so all students likely received attention across the span of the full session.

Overall, the session was handled with skill, confidence, technical ability and excellent attention to diverse student needs.

Record of Observation or Review of Teaching Practice        

 

Session/artefact to be observed/reviewed: 2 x online tutorials of 30mins each

Size of student group: students meet one-to-one with tutor

Observer: Misha Xu

Observee: Paul Bench

 

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?

These are the final tutorials before student submission of their final year extended essay for Contextualising Your Practice. Grades count towards final degree grade.

Students receive 3 tutorials, which are supplemented with group seminars at points during the unit and drop-in sessions before submission. They should have begun planning their projects before the summer. Not all attend tutorials. A tutorial record sheet is produced during the tutorial and emailed later to the student by the tutor.

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

Since early Oct 2024 as an associate lecturer taking seminars and tutorials.

What are the intended or expected learning outcomes?

LO 1 Demonstrate a critical awareness of a range of theories and knowledges relevant to your chosen topic (Knowledge)

LO 2 Critically analyse diverse concepts and ideas (Enquiry)

LO 3 Evaluate and apply appropriate methods related to your research questions (Process)

LO 4 Clearly articulate your research and ideas through an extended essay (Communication)

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

An extended essay (4,500 words) presented in academic format, including bibliography and references.

Are there potential difficulties or specific areas of concern?

It can be hard to fit everything into the session and offer a good balance, especially at this final opportunity and if students have either not done much work or want me to read a finished essay. It can also be hard to balance useful discussion about their topic with making sure they have relevant notes on their record sheet to refer to afterwards, as well as making them aware of the resources available and answering questions, while sticking to time.

How will students be informed of the observation/review?

Students recorded have consented on e-mail in advance.

What would you particularly like feedback on?

Any tips for how I could improve the delivery of everything that needs to be covered and anything specific relating to the type of student that I could improve on.

How will feedback be exchanged?

Use of this form. Further notes or online meeting if necessary.

Part Two

Observer to note down observations, suggestions and questions:

Paul briefed me in advance that the observed sessions are 2 individual final tutorials before students submit their final-year extended essay for the unit of Contextualising Your Practice.

At the beginning of the tutorials, Paul thanked students for giving consent to record the meeting for observation purposes; warmly welcomed students; and checked their progress during the winter break. Students have been offered several opportunities to ask questions before moving on. The submission deadline has been highlighted, Paul also kindly suggested the students submit a bit earlier by considering the potential risk, i.e., technical issues.

The 1^st student managed her own time very well, and made good progress; then Paul kindly checked her drafts and pointed out a few potential areas where she could further improve before submission. The tutorial record form has been completed in the last 5 mins, students left the tutorial confidently with a clear understanding of improvements.

The 2^nd student was a bit behind the progress as he got new ideas during the break and was still in the planning stage for the whole essay. Seems like the student was not sure about the methodology yet, Paul shared the screen and went through the Learning Outcomes in the unit’s Moodle page with the student together. The record form has been completed in detail for the student. Paul goes through and highlights information with the student professionally even some surprises happened to the student’s progress. I am just wondering how the student should submit his Ethical Form for approval, as this is the last tutorial?

The 2 observed tutorials have been managed well in both structure and time with a well-balanced speaking speed. Considering it’s the final tutorial before submission, Paul shared the relevant screens and reminded students of the key date, format requirements, and who can be contacted for further information during the tutorials.

Overall, the online tutorials are very changeling because of the “online” nature, especially for the last tutorial, but Paul managed both tutorials well with a high standard of professional knowledge. In the future, maybe the tutor can request students to update their progress before the tutorials by email at some certain point, especially for tutorials with big breaks in the middle, to avoid “supervised” big changes.

Part Three

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

Much of my work is one-to-one online tutorial, which is widely seen as the most effective but hard to implement/costly form of learning (Bloom, 1984; Wiliam, 2011). To write my feedback for Misha, I drew on Jeffrey Fletcher’s notes on the ‘collaborative model’ of peer review (2018, p. 52). This also highlighted that colleagues can be reticent to offer criticism of each other (Fletcher, 2018; Cosh, 1998). I found this to be the case in my observations and interpret this in Misha’s feedback on me. It is also difficult to ascertain how the discrete session responds to the wider curriculum and previous related sessions, which is reflected in the feedback, which necessarily preferences observable behaviours and protocol in the moment.

I appreciate Misha’s note on the introductory elements of the tutorials. These can sometimes be missed in what can be a stressful line up of student tutorials online. It reiterates for me, the importance of maintaining clarity in the purpose of the session as well as the warm welcome, space for questions and administrative aspects, such as deadlines.

Misha noted my attention to student work and the record sheet. It can be difficult close to submission, with students wanting feedback within a brief online meeting, while it remains important to uncover major gaps. It is also always challenging to produce a meaningful record sheet for students to refer back to while reading and talking. I’m pleased that Misha saw what I was aiming to achieve and judged it successful from the perspective of the student.

Misha noted some challenges with the second student, who had good attendance but had surprisingly limited progress. She flagged an ethics form. This is rather a participant consent form, which students are instructed to their tutor. They are reminded of how to submit consent forms in e-mail updates from the unit leader. However, this reminds me of the need to verbally continue to reiterate administrative factors.

Misha highlighted the difficulties of the online tutorial and it reassures me that she found my approach of professional standard. Her point that an update would be helpful is pertinent. However, it is policy that the tutorial remains the space for interaction and feedback. This stresses the significance of timetabled teaching as well as the need for student parity. However, I do sometimes ask students to email work shortly in advance of the session if they want me to look as a specific part of their writing, to avoid time wasting technical difficulties.

Misha interpreted the student’s difficult as a switch in topic, but from my knowledge of his topic across multiple tutorials, it was rather that he hadn’t done much work, including reading. In this case it is frustrating, so I prioritise directing the student as to some fundamentals they need to include to meet learning outcomes and link these to available resources that can support them after the tutorial. This sometimes includes drop-in and Academic Support tutorials, as well as Moodle Toolkits and briefs.

Bibliography

Bloom, B. (1984) ‘The 2 stigma problem: the search for methods of group instruction as effective as one-to-one tutoring’, Educational Researcher, 13(6) pp. 4-16.

Cosh, J. (1998) ‘Peer observation in higher education – a reflective approach’,

Innovations in Education & Training International, 35(2) pp. 171-176.

Fletcher, J. A. (2018) Peer observation of teaching: a practical tool in Higher Education, in The Journal of Faculty Development, 32(1) pp. 51-64.

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