Record of Observation or Review of Teaching Practice
Session/artefact to be observed/reviewed: Final Major Project seminar groups Drawing and Conceptual Practice FAD (Foundation Art and Design) CCW
Size of student group: Total group size = 18 students, each seminar group= 6 students
Observer: Tommy Ramsay
Observee: Amba Sayal-Bennett
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?
The seminar groups are scheduled in Part 3 so that students can meet each week to share their progress and help support each other through the FMP. I will lead the first seminar group, and then these will continue weekly self-managed by the students. The seminars are informal and supportive sessions which will last for an 1hour. In this first session, students will be sharing their ideas and plans. We will discuss each student’s project for 10 minutes. This will give students the chance to hear about each other’s work, give peer to peer feedback and make suggestions.
How long have you been working with this group and in what capacity?
I have been working with this group since the beginning of Part 2, in mid-November, as the Interim Specialist Option Leader, delivering workshops, seminars, tutorials and carrying out assessments to support students with their studio practice.
What are the intended or expected learning outcomes?
Through the seminar discussion, students will communicate ideas informing their work, contextualize their interests, and receive relevant references and suggestions for how to develop their projects.
What are the anticipated outputs (anything students will make/do)?
Students will give and receive feedback on their plans for the Final Major Project- this could be in the form of artist and text references, materials, and processes to use.
Are there potential difficulties or specific areas of concern?
Student participation and encouraging the students to give feedback on each other’s work so that it is not predominantly me talking.
How will students be informed of the observation/review?
Students will be notified in the morning about the observation.
What would you particularly like feedback on?
Student engagement and ways to encourage participation.
How will feedback be exchanged?
Verbally and through the ROT form.
Part Two
Observations of Amba’s teaching from me
General
You have a relaxed confidence to your teaching and a gentleness with how you hold space for students. Students seemed comfortable and engaged when discussing their work with you.
Engagement
In the five-person group tutorials, four students would listen, whilst one student discussed their ideas with you. I thought this set up worked really well and students were engaged, both when listening and when presenting their work. I thought the that the atmosphere around the table was one of quiet listening and engagement.
You asked excellent questions that helped students to push the discussion around their ideas further and it was clear that you have tracked the progress of your students and that you are engaged with their making and their ideas. This allowed discussion to flow easily and for students to feel comfortable and open when discussing their ideas. There was a good balance between asking questions about the ideas in the work and in the making of the work as well referencing previous work from each student.
I though the reference points that you offered up for each student where absolutely on point and covered contemporary artists’ as well as writers and “thinkers.” I found myself really hoping that the students would go away and research your offerings!
Teaching and supporting learning
The teaching methods implemented were appropriate to the group tutorials context. Feedback offered to each student was relevant and will engage students further with their own making.
Questioning the medium of the work of one of the students and whether they were going to make his own VR space allowed them to engage further with their own plans and to think through their ideas with the group.
There was a good balance of discussion about previous work as well as where and how to take the FMP work forward.
Reminders of deadlines given to students made sure that students were aware of when and what they need to submit for the FMP.
Highly relevant artist references were offered to students in all tutorials which really showed your comprehension of each student’s individual thinking and making. Students felt comfortable and confident discussing their ideas with you.
Part Three
Observee to reflect on the observer’s comments and describe how they will act on the feedback exchanged:
Thank you for all the feedback and comments Tommy, they have been very useful and generative. The observations were an interesting and enjoyable experience, and great for the students to see us as learners. Reflecting on both our ROT forms, I did wonder if it was harder to be critical, as the context and style of our studio teaching is so similar? I definitely felt that this familiarity created a blind spot for me in terms of offering suggestions and questions. In regards to how I will act on the feedback exchanged:
General
Small group size: It is really encouraging to hear that you thought that the students were comfortable and engaged. Reflecting on other instances where students have discussed their work with their peers, I wonder if the reduced size of the group was something that made students feel more relaxed? The small table discussion gave them an opportunity to share work in progress without having to address the whole group, which may have been more intimidating. Students were perhaps also less likely to tire from listening, which can happen when moving from student to student in larger group sizes. In this format, attention is more concentrated in the shorter session and more evenly distributed, unlike longer sessions where group fatigue can set in before the last person presents. Working with smaller groups is something that I will continue to do and test out in other settings such as crits.
Engagement
The session that you observed was the first of the group seminars. This was to be moderated by a tutor before the group would self-organize, meeting independently each week and running the seminars themselves. The aim was to generate a sense of responsibility and ownership over their learning through sharing experiences and constructive advice (Brooks, 2008). I have reflected on your comment that there was clear engagement in the session. However, since then, they have been reluctant to organize the seminars unless prompted by a tutor. I wonder if this indicates the need for more support in the independent seminars, possibly through suggested scheduling and worksheets with prompt questions. The following methods are ways to support independent organization following the first seminar, and hopefully to generate confidence and engagement at this transitional stage between a-level and degree (Ballinger, 2002).
Written questions: You mentioned that that the atmosphere around the table was one of quiet listening and engagement. To increase feedback from students so that they are less reliant on tutors’ comments, posit-notes could be used to share questions and suggestions. This worked successfully in a crit setting, increasing equal participation by anonymising questions, and also functioning as a way to record feedback for the presenting student to take away and reflect on.
Worksheet with prompt questions: You commented that I was able to ask questions that helped students push the discussion around their ideas further. It would be good to find ways to enable students to ask more relevant questions to each other. I could develop a worksheet for the seminar with a simplified grading-grid and corresponding prompt questions to ensure constructive alignment. This could be used or developed by students across the remaining student-run seminars.
Pre-seminar task: You mentioned the benefits in the feedback resulting from my prior engagement with students work. A pre-seminar task could be incorporated to give the other students the same opportunity to familiarise themselves with their peers work before the session. This would provide context to the ideas discussed and enable them to come prepared with useful questions and comments.
Scribe: It is really nice to hear that you thought the references where relevant and wide ranging. Your comment that you found yourself hoping that the students would go away and research them made me think of ways that could support this process. Writing down references, or having a student write down notes from the discussion, provides a list or resource for them to refer back to after the seminar.
Teaching and supporting learning
Encouraging reflection: You mentioned that there was a good balance of discussion about previous work as well as how to move their FMP forward. This made me reflect on something I thought that was very successful in your teaching session that I observed. You encouraged a student to establish links between previous works in order to surface or identify emerging themes and interests. I thought that this prompt to reflect on their practice and methods gave the student a clear task, whilst allowing them space to reflect on their practice to consider how to develop their current work.
References
Ballinger, G. J. (2002) ‘Bridging the gap between A Level and degree: some observations on managing the transitional stage in the study of English Literature.’ Arts and Humanities in Higher Education, 2(1), pp. 99-109.
Brooks, K. (2008) ‘Could do better? Students’ Critique of Written Feedback’, Networks, 5, pp. 1-5.