Record of Observation or Review of Teaching Practice
Session/artefact to be observed/reviewed: CCW FAD (Foundation Art and Design) Painting
Size of student group: 2 x 1:1 tutorial
Observer: Amba Sayal-Bennett
Observee: Tommy Ramsay
Part One
What is the context of this session/artefact within the curriculum?
These will be one-to-one tutorial which happens weekly with each student.
How long have you been working with this group and in what capacity?
I have been working with this student from the beginning of part 2, in November.
What are the intended or expected learning outcomes?
The intended outcomes of this tutorial will be to discuss the students’ work, offer further references for them to work with and to respond to any concerns or points of discussion that the student brings up.
What are the anticipated outputs (anything students will make/do)?
It is likely that the student will be given further artists’ or writers to research and due to the time of year, if it comes up, to further discuss and look at their portfolio and applications for BA.
Are there potential difficulties or specific areas of concern?
There are no difficulties anticipated.
How will students be informed of the observation/review?
Students were told of the observation’s verbally last week and over email.
What would you particularly like feedback on?
Any areas of improvement for engaging students.
How will feedback be exchanged?
Verbally and over this form.
Part Two
Observations by Amba
General
Your manner with the students is very engaging. You have a familiar and approachable way of talking, which made the students feel comfortable speaking to you about their work.
Engagement
In both the one-to-one tutorials, the two students were clearly very engaged. You left space for the students to share what they were working on, responding to their studio work in situ to draw out a conversation around their work. I thought you made a good balance in your mode of questioning. In the second tutorial, you refrained from asking direct questions to the student. Instead, you made observations as prompts for the student to elaborate on. This created an openness to the discussion, and left space for the student to direct the conversation in a way that felt more relevant to them. In both tutorials, towards the end of the conversation, you asked if they had any questions, in particular about project deadlines and wider deadlines outside of course, such as portfolio requests and BA interviews.
Teaching and supporting learning
The teaching methods were appropriate to the studio context, and the feedback given was specific to each student. In the discussions, there was a good balance between work done, where to move on from, and suggestions for what needs to be done going forward. You followed up on previous tutorials and referred back to older works to give specific examples. I thought the suggestion to look back at what they had done in Part 2 to mine the history of their practice, to think about the direction the final major project may take, was particularly useful. This gave the students a clear method and direction, whilst maintaining space for independence and heuristic learning.
Asking one of the students to clarify their plans for their work created an opportunity for them to articulate and better understand their interests, mapping and talking through options with support on hand.
You were very encouraging in terms of getting them to think about trying new methods, suggesting they focus on testing and trying things out rather than being preoccupied with the outcome. You were also very encouraging when explaining the usefulness of self-led projects and the paperwork/ organisation around them. You suggested that the paperwork should not be viewed as ‘scary’ but rather a useful tool, like Workflow, which provided another practical method to keep track of ideas and development.
Reminders were given in both tutorials, such as relevant information for upcoming crits, what to do over reading week, and what needed to be handed in after the break. Reiterating deadlines ensures that sure students are aware of when and what they need to submit.
Relevant artist references, as well as current exhibitions, were given to students in both tutorials demonstrating an understanding of the students’ practices. You explained their relevance to the students and described process and methods within their practice, at one point drawing a diagram to demonstrate how the stretcher was made.
The aims were achieved in the teaching activities- offering relevant artist references for them to draw upon, responding to interests and concerns, and discussing their progression plans and BA applications.
Part Three
Observee to reflect on the observer’s comments and describe how they will act on the feedback exchanged:
It was nice to have Amba sit in on the tutorials, and her energy added to the relaxed atmosphere with the students, which I appreciated. I think the students also found it amusing that I am being observed as a student as well, which was fun.
I am really grateful for Amba’s kind and detailed feedback. As a tutor in painting, my days are spent one to one with the students’ giving tutorials and there is not a great deal/any oversight of how this is going. Whilst I do feel comfortable and confident in my ability to perform in this role, it is great to have affirmative feedback.
Receiving the written feedback is useful and the languaging of the feedback also makes me aware of teaching bias – to always push student towards experimentation and trying out new things. This does give me something to reflect on because of course this is not the easiest way to function for students initially, but I do feel in the long run it gives them the best chance of accessing freedom and discovering new ways of thinking and working in their practice.
Whilst Amba was in the muted position of observer I did also think it would be nice from time to time for students to have two tutors to discuss their work to create a more varied and dynamic conversation.