All Posts

Category: PgCert: Theories, Policies and Practices

Categories
PgCert: Theories, Policies and Practices

A Journey Through the First PgCert Unit

This first unit of the PgCert has been a fascinating and thought-provoking journey, allowing me to step back and critically engage with my teaching practice in ways I had not previously considered. The process of reading, learning, and engaging in deeper discussions about learning and teaching has made me far more conscious of the theoretical underpinnings that shape higher education pedagogy. One of the most striking realisations has been how, as lecturers, we often apply pedagogical theories instinctively in our teaching, without necessarily recognising them as established frameworks. Instead, we tend to draw from our lived experiences in the classroom and our industry practices, responding to challenges and student needs intuitively. This has reinforced for me the importance of bridging practical experience with theoretical knowledge to enhance both teaching effectiveness and student learning outcomes (Griffiths & Tann, 1992).

A major theme has been the interconnectedness of pedagogical elements. While I initially explored voice and assertiveness in the classroom, my reflections naturally expanded into inclusivity, active learning, and assessment strategies. Peer learning has been a particularly enriching aspect of this unit. Engaging in discussions, sharing experiences, and providing and receiving feedback from colleagues has been invaluable. The microteaching session was a particularly insightful experience—being observed and receiving structured feedback allowed me to see my teaching through the lens of others, highlighting aspects I may have otherwise overlooked. Although my observation task was limited to reviewing a briefing deck rather than observing live teaching, the process of reflecting on teaching materials with a critical eye still provided useful insights. This experience has reinforced the importance of self-awareness and adaptability—being open to critique, refining methods, and continuously evolving in response to feedback (Race, 2001).

Another significant learning point has been around feedback and assessment. Engaging in discussions with peers has sparked new ideas about assessment methods that I am keen to explore in my own teaching. The exploration of formative and summative feedback has prompted me to think more deeply about how assessment can be used not just as a tool for evaluation but as a means to facilitate deeper learning. The idea of assessing the learning process itself has been particularly thought-provoking. Feedback should not be a one-time event but an ongoing dialogue, enabling students to develop their critical thinking and reflective capabilities (Nicol & Macfarlane-Dick, 2006). This aligns with the principles of national professional development frameworks in higher education, which emphasise the role of constructive feedback in fostering student autonomy and engagement.

Inclusivity has also been a key theme throughout this unit. Discussions on how different learners engage with content, the importance of designing assessments that cater to diverse learning styles, and the role of accessibility in fostering an equitable learning environment have all been instrumental in shaping my reflections. These insights have made me more mindful of the small but intentional changes I can make in my own practice to ensure that all students, regardless of their background or learning preferences, feel supported and included in the learning process. Understanding intercultural competence has also played a role in this, particularly in recognising the different ways students engage with learning based on their cultural and educational backgrounds (Deardorff, 2006).

Looking ahead, I am excited to carry these reflections forward into the next phase of my PgCert journey. This first unit has provided a strong foundation, encouraging me to be more intentional about my teaching choices while continuing to experiment with different methods.

The opportunity to conceptualise my practice within the broader landscape of higher education frameworks has been invaluable, and I am keen to build on this learning as I refine my approach further. I am grateful for the rich discussions, the generosity of peers in sharing their experiences, and the thought-provoking insights that have emerged throughout this process. There is still so much to explore, and I look forward to seeing how these reflections will continue to shape my teaching practice in the long term.

References:

Deardorff, D. K. (2006) ‘Identification and assessment of intercultural competence as a student outcome of internationalization’, Journal of Studies in International Education, 10(3), pp. 241-266.

Griffiths, M. and Tann, S. (1992) ‘Reflective practice – linking personal and public theories’, Journal of Education for Teaching, 18(1), pp. 69-84.

Nicol, D. and Macfarlane-Dick, D. (2006) ‘Formative assessment and self-regulated learning: a model and seven principles of good feedback practice’, Studies in Higher Education, 31(2), pp. 199-218.

Race, P. (2001) A Briefing on Self, Peer and Group Assessment. LTSN Generic Centre.

Categories
PgCert: Theories, Policies and Practices

CASE STUDY 3: Implementing a Structured Mid-Unit Checkpoint for Equitable Learning

This case study explores the implementation of a mid-unit checkpoint in Unit 3: Situating Innovation within the MA Innovation Management course at CSM. It examines how structured feedback supports student progress and equitable participation in assessing and giving feedback for learning. Additionally, it aligns with the A3 (assess and give feedback for learning), A5 (enhance practice through professional development), K3 (critical evaluation for effective practice), K5 (quality assurance and enhancement), and V5 (collaborate with others to enhance practice) from the Professional Standards Framework. 

Background

The Situating Innovation unit is an 11-week-long research-based unit where students develop and refine their research proposals. In the past years, despite its duration, there was no structured checkpoint for students to receive interim feedback, apart from voluntary crit sessions organized during class times. While these sessions provided valuable peer interaction, they disproportionately benefited confident students, leaving quieter or less proactive students with limited engagement and feedback opportunities.

Having successfully implemented and conducted structured checkpoints in other LCF courses, I recognized the benefits of a more inclusive and guided mid-unit feedback session. These checkpoints had proven effective in maintaining student momentum, helping staff identify common struggles, and promoting a deeper engagement with feedback and learning outcomes. Given this experience, I introduced the first-ever structured mid-unit checkpoint for MAIM to ensure all students received formative feedback, gained external perspectives, and refined their research direction before final submission.

Evaluation

The newly introduced checkpoint session was carefully structured to optimize student engagement and feedback quality:

  • Mandatory participation: Unlike voluntary crits, all students were required to present their progress, ensuring broader participation.
  • Cross-supervision feedback: To offer fresh insights, students were not assigned to their own supervisors but instead presented to a different faculty member.
  • Small group structure: Three parallel sessions were conducted with two staff members per room, optimizing discussion time and feedback quality.
  • Accountability and reflection: Each student had 10 minutes to present, which pushed them to organize their research coherently, promoting self-reflection and preparedness.

The response from students was overwhelmingly positive. They particularly appreciated:

  1. Hearing their peers’ progress, which helped them benchmark their own work.
  2. Gaining external faculty perspectives, which provided fresh, unbiased feedback.
  3. Being pushed to structure their work earlier, reducing last-minute stress.

From a theoretical perspective, this aligns with Nicol & Macfarlane-Dick’s (2006) Seven Principles of Good Feedback, particularly in clarifying performance standards, fostering self-reflection, and encouraging sustained engagement. Additionally, Race (2001) highlights the importance of structured self, peer, and group assessment in enhancing learning, reinforcing the value of this checkpoint session. 

A key lesson was that mandatory participation created a more equitable learning experience. In contrast to the previous voluntary crits – where  only confident students engaged – this structured format ensured all students received and acted upon constructive feedback, as emphasized by O’Donovan, Price & Rust (2004) in their work on making assessment criteria explicit and accessible. 

Moving Forward

Reflecting on this intervention and incorporating insights from the PgCert discussions on crits, I identified key enhancements for future sessions:

  • Structuring peer feedback within the checkpoint: While peer crits were previously optional and often dominated by confident students, I plan to formalize a peer feedback component within the checkpoint session. This structured approach will ensure all students actively engage with their peers’ work, promoting deeper critical reflection while still benefiting from staff insights.
  • Optimizing session formats for deeper engagement: Some students expressed a need for more time to discuss their feedback in depth. To address this, I propose conducting the checkpoint in smaller groups over multiple days, resembling a group tutorial format. This would allow for more focused conversations and closer interaction with both peers and staff.
  • Enhancing participation and inclusivity: Combining structured peer crits with faculty feedback will create a more balanced learning experience, ensuring that students who may be less confident in presenting still receive constructive input. A clear framework for guiding peer discussions will also be introduced to help students provide meaningful feedback.
  • Encouraging reflection and application of feedback: Inspired by Russell (2010) on assessment patterns, I propose requiring students to reflect on and integrate checkpoint feedback into their final work. While this is not currently a formal requirement, introducing a reflective journal or structured self-assessment for longer units would help students track their intellectual and methodological development over time.

By implementing these refinements, the checkpoint session will not only provide valuable feedback but also reinforce students’ ability to assess their own work critically, engage more actively with feedback, and integrate it meaningfully into their research process.

References

Brooks, K. (2008) ‘Could do Better?’: students’ critique of written feedback. University of the West of England.

Nicol, D. & Macfarlane-Dick, D. (2006) ‘Formative assessment and self-regulated learning: a model and seven principles of good feedback practice’, Studies in Higher Education, 31(2), pp. 199-218.

O’Donovan, B., Price, M. & Rust, C. (2004) ‘Know what I mean? Enhancing student understanding of assessment standards and criteria’, Teaching in Higher Education, 9(3), pp. 325-335.

Race, P. (2001) A Briefing on Self, Peer and Group Assessment. LTSN Generic Centre.

Russell, M. (2010) Assessment Patterns: A Review of the Possible Consequences. University of Hertfordshire, ESCAPE project.

Categories
PgCert: Theories, Policies and Practices

REFLECTIONS ON BEING OBSERVED BY A PGCERT TUTOR: Innovation, Engagement, and Future-Proofing Pitches

This post reflects on a seminar in which I was observed by a PgCert tutor, focusing on engaging students in collaborative innovation and critical thinking while facilitating rapid idea development and pitching. See the observation notes in this link.

Delivering a seminar for the MBA from LCF around Innovation and Fashion Business Futures was an enriching experience. This was my first engagement with this cohort – I will be supervising two students in their final Consultancy Project. My objective was to create a highly interactive and applied learning session that complemented the recorded lecture I shared a week before and they had previously watched. The seminar explored disruptive technologies and strategic innovation frameworks in fashion, with a particular emphasis on practical application and critical analysis.

Key Reflections on Engagement and Communication

A key priority was to foster student engagement and facilitate meaningful discussions. I sought to create an open and inclusive learning environment, encouraging students to actively participate by acknowledging their contributions and linking their insights to broader seminar themes. However, fostering critical engagement requires more than just participation – it demands the ability to challenge assumptions, question dominant narratives, and synthesise diverse perspectives.

My tutor’s observations highlighted that my communication style was effective in engaging students. By employing active listening techniques – such as non-verbal cues, backchanneling, and reinforcement through follow-up questions – I was able to establish rapport and maintain an interactive dialogue. A particular strength noted was my ability to bridge theoretical models, with real-world industry applications, ensuring that students understood both the conceptual framework and its limitations in practice.

One constructive piece of feedback was the need to manage participation dynamics, particularly in instances where a single student dominated the conversation. Ensuring equitable participation is essential, and I will adopt strategies such as redirecting questions to the group (e.g., “That’s a great question-what do others think?”) and setting clear expectations for time allocation during discussions. This also raises a broader pedagogical question: how can educators cultivate an environment where quieter voices feel empowered to contribute without the discussion being overly structured or constrained?

Refining Group Activities and Task Management

The seminar was structured around a group-based task in which students developed and pitched a future-proofing strategy for Nike. To set up the activity, I used a combination of slides and verbal explanations, incorporating structured prompts and brand imagery to provide context. While my tutor found the slides visually engaging, they also noted that certain aspects -such as font readability and colour contrast- could be improved for accessibility. 

This is an important consideration, and I will be more mindful of inclusive design principles in future materials. This feedback also prompted me to reflect on whether my reliance on visual stimuli was inadvertently privileging certain learning styles over others. Would a greater integration of alternative instructional strategies, such as concept mapping or case-based debate, provide a richer learning experience?

Additionally, verbal check-ins were an effective method for gauging student understanding of the task. However, my tutor suggested incorporating a quick recap from each group to ensure clarity before students embarked on the exercise. I find this a very useful recommendation, as it provides an additional layer of confirmation and allows for the early identification of any misunderstandings. It also raises a fundamental consideration about scaffolding independent learning -how much structure should be provided to ensure comprehension while allowing space for students to take ownership of their interpretations?

Supporting Student Collaboration and Critical Thinking

Throughout the session, I actively monitored student discussions, offering guidance and prompting critical thinking through targeted questions. My tutor noted that my approach – encouraging brainstorming, suggesting mapping exercises, and ensuring time management – helped keep students focused and productive.

One key takeaway for me is the need for adaptability in managing time during interactive sessions. I made real-time adjustments, such as encouraging concise, structured pitches, to align with the time constraints. This flexibility proved effective, but it also highlighted a potential tension: in prioritising efficiency, do we risk sacrificing deeper inquiry? Encouraging students to think critically about emerging technologies requires both structure and open-ended exploration – striking this balance remains a continual challenge in my teaching practice.

Key Takeaways and Future Improvements

This seminar provided a valuable opportunity to refine my teaching practice, and I greatly appreciate my tutor’s insightful observations. Moving forward, I aim to

  • Implement strategies to ensure balanced participation, such as actively inviting diverse voices into discussions while encouraging self-regulation among more vocal students.
  • Enhance accessibility in my slide design by improving colour contrast and readability, while also diversifying instructional materials to cater to different learning styles.
  • Introduce structured group check-ins, where students recap instructions to confirm understanding before starting their tasks, ensuring a balance between guided support and independent exploration.
  • Continue to integrate industry insights with theoretical frameworks, while challenging students to critically evaluate dominant industry discourses rather than accepting them at face value.

Overall, I am pleased with how students engaged in critically assessing innovation strategies in fashion. Their discussions demonstrated a strong grasp of key concepts while highlighting the need for continuous refinement in pedagogical approaches. Additionally, this session prompted reflection on my voice – not only in terms of student participation but also as a tool to stimulate creativity and critical thinking. The way I use my voice to assert ideas, pose thought-provoking questions, and challenge students to think beyond conventional solutions is instrumental in shaping the seminar dynamic. Given the task of developing and pitching an innovative tech concept within an hour, my voice played a crucial role in guiding students through uncertainty, encouraging them to embrace rapid ideation, and instilling confidence in their creative instincts. Striking the right balance between assertiveness and encouragement ensures that students feel both challenged and supported, enabling them to articulate and refine their ideas more effectively.

I look forward to further developing my vocal delivery as a means of fostering deeper engagement and innovation in future seminars.

Categories
PgCert: Theories, Policies and Practices

REFLECTIONS ON OBSERVING A PEER: Review of a Briefing Deck

This post is based on an observation of a session deck rather than a face-to-face session. As such, the level of detail and insight into actual delivery, student engagement, and facilitation techniques is not present. Additionally, as I am not familiar with the broader context of this course, my ability to fully grasp the depth of this brief deck is very restricted. Therefore, the following notes focuses primarily on the clarity, structure, and alignment of the provided content with the intended learning outcomes outlined in the same deck, rather than commenting its effectiveness in real-time. See the observation notes in this link.

The Responsible Design Unit Launch session deck appears to provide a well-structured introduction to ethical, inclusive, and sustainable design principles within the BA Graphic Media Design curriculum. It seems designed to foster critical engagement, creativity, and collaboration, while introducing students to key themes such as Equity, Futures, Ethos, and Systems. The combination of interactive activities, discussions, and reflection-based tasks supports different learning styles and encourages students to critically engage with their own design practice.

However, given that this is a briefing session rather than a content-based instructional resource, this review is necessarily structural, focusing on the clarity and formatting of the slides. Without insight into how discussions unfold, how students engage, or how facilitation supports learning, the observations remain focused on the design of the deck rather than its real-time impact.

Strengths noted:

Strong alignment with learning outcomes

  • The session seems to effectively transmit and include all three intended learning outcomes (Enquiry, Communication, and Process) through hands-on activities and discussions.
  • The “Becoming Material” and “Collective Library” activities particularly stand out in supporting exploration, articulation of values, and iterative development, which align well with the unit’s objectives.

Engaging and interactive activities

  • The “Becoming Material” activity seems to be a unique and immersive way to introduce students to materiality, prompting them to think critically about its history, usage, and implications. The role-playing aspect (first-person narrative) adds a performative and reflective layer to learning.
  • The “Collective Library” activity encourages independent research and knowledge-sharing, reinforcing students’ ability to contextualize responsible design beyond their immediate experience.

Clear structure and flow

  • The session appears to follow a logical progression, beginning with introductory activities (settling in and welcoming), followed by active engagement (hands-on activities, research, and mind-mapping), then unpacking the unit brief in more detail, and finally concluding with reflective learning and extended discussion.
  • Time allocations appear well-considered, ensuring that activities have a clear beginning, middle, and end without feeling rushed.

Encouragement of inclusivity and open dialogue

  • The Session Etiquette slide at the beginning appears to set clear expectations around active listening, supportive responding, and inclusivity, which is particularly important given the potentially sensitive topics addressed in responsible design.
  • The open-ended and exploratory nature of the activities ensures that students with diverse perspectives can contribute meaningfully.

Engaging slide design

  • The slides are well-structured, visually clear, and engaging, making the key information accessible and easy to follow.
  • The use of visuals, concise text, and a logical sequence helps maintain clarity while reinforcing the session’s main themes.

This session appears to be well-designed with a thoughtful balance of engagement, discussion, and active learning, making responsible design accessible and stimulating for students as a briefing session.

That said, my observations remain limited due to the nature of the deck provided, which serves as a briefing session rather than a content-based lecture. A more in-depth review would require observation of the live session, student interactions, and facilitation dynamics to fully evaluate its effectiveness.

Categories
PgCert: Theories, Policies and Practices

CASE STUDY 2: Navigating Cultural and Educational Diversity in Collaborative Learning

This case study addresses the importance of adapting teaching strategies to accommodate students’ diverse academic experiences, ensuring an equitable learning environment. It aligns with the Professional Standards Framework, specifically addressing A2: teaching and supporting learning through appropriate approaches and environments and V1: respecting individual learners and diverse groups of learners, while also incorporating elements of K2: approaches to teaching and supporting learning appropriate for subject and level of study. 

The study is based on the Collaborative Unit run by MAIM and MAAI at CSM, and it explores how different student experiences influence teamwork and knowledge-sharing and how the application of cultural and educational theories can support more effective collaboration. Given that many UAL programmes incorporate collaborative units, discussions with colleagues across various courses and faculties confirm that these challenges are widely shared. You can check here another post related to the Collaborative Unit (Reflections on being observed by a peer: Facilitating Team Collaboration and Conflict Resolution).

Background

In today’s globalised higher education landscape, classrooms are increasingly diverse, with students bringing varied cultural and educational backgrounds that shape their approaches to learning and collaboration (Deardorff, 2006). While this diversity enhances the learning experience by introducing multiple perspectives, it also presents challenges, particularly in group work, where different understandings of collaboration, leadership, and communication can lead to misunderstandings and conflict (Meyer, 2014).

The Collaborative Unit has run for 6 weeks and one key challenge identified at the very beginning of the project was that students experienced frustration and difficulty progressing with their teamwork due to misaligned expectations and differing approaches to academic work. Many struggled to understand how their peers structured tasks, made decisions, and engaged in collaborative problem-solving, leading to inefficiencies and tensions within the group. This aligns with findings from Hofstede (2001), who emphasised that educational expectations vary significantly across cultures due to differing levels of power distance, individualism, and uncertainty avoidance. In our observed case, some students were highly familiar with independent research and self-directed learning, while others were engaging with structured academic inquiry in a group setting for the first time.

Evaluation

To address these challenges and foster a more inclusive learning environment, we introduced Erin Meyer’s Cultural Map framework, a widely recognised model that highlights how cultures differ across dimensions such as communication style, decision-making, and attitudes towards confrontation (Meyer, 2014). By mapping themselves and their peers within this framework, students gained deeper insights into their own collaborative styles and recognised that tensions often stemmed from cultural predispositions rather than personal shortcomings.

In parallel, Geert Hofstede’s cultural dimensions theory was introduced to provide further context on how different cultures approach learning and collaboration. For example, students from collectivist cultures, where group harmony is prioritised, initially hesitated to assert their perspectives, whereas students from more individualist cultures were accustomed to voicing their opinions assertively (Hofstede, 2001). This discrepancy created initial communication barriers, reinforcing the importance of explicitly addressing these dynamics in an academic setting.

Through these frameworks, students were able to identify the root causes of their frustrations, acknowledge the influence of cultural differences, and develop strategies for effective collaboration. Moreover, by discussing conflict moderation techniques such as assertive communication, students gained the confidence to express their perspectives in a constructive manner, eliminating any unspoken tensions or “elephants in the room” (Deardorff, 2009). 

The integration of cultural mapping tools significantly enhanced students’ ability to collaborate effectively. In their final presentations, students demonstrated a remarkable level of self-awareness by mapping each group member’s position within the Cultural Map framework, illustrating how their diverse backgrounds contributed to the group’s collective learning process, and how the differences enhanced the final submission. This exercise not only improved teamwork dynamics but also fostered a sense of inclusivity, empowering students to articulate their ideas assertively and respectfully (Deardorff, 2009).

Moving forward

To foster more effective collaboration in diverse learning environments, I aim to embed cultural competence awareness into the curriculum, by including some of the following: 

  • Workshops on intercultural communication, providing students with practical tools to navigate diverse teams effectively (Spencer-Oatey & Franklin, 2009).
  • Reflective exercises on personal biases and cultural expectations in learning environments (Gudykunst, 2004).
  • Ongoing use of cultural frameworks such as Meyer’s Cultural Map and Hofstede’s dimensions to ensure that students develop the skills necessary for global collaboration.

These strategies equip students with the awareness and adaptability needed to engage effectively in diverse professional and academic environments, preparing them for the complexities of an interconnected world (Holliday, Hyde, & Kullman, 2010).

References

Deardorff, D. K. (2006). Identification and assessment of intercultural competence as a student outcome of internationalization. Journal of Studies in International Education, 10(3), 241-266.

Deardorff, D. K. (2009). The SAGE Handbook of Intercultural Competence. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.

Gudykunst, W. B. (2004). Bridging Differences: Effective Intergroup Communication. 4th ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.

Hofstede, G. (2001). Culture’s Consequences: Comparing Values, Behaviors, Institutions, and Organizations Across Nations. 2nd ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.

Holliday, A., Hyde, M., & Kullman, J. (2010). Intercultural Communication: An Advanced Resource Book for Students. London: Routledge.

Meyer, E. (2014). The Culture Map: Breaking Through the Invisible Boundaries of Global Business. New York: PublicAffairs.

Spencer-Oatey, H., & Franklin, P. (2009). Intercultural Interaction: A Multidisciplinary Approach to Intercultural Communication. London: Palgrave Macmillan.

Categories
PgCert: Theories, Policies and Practices

The Art of Mediation: How Voice, Objects, and Art Shape Engagement – Insights from the Workshop Readings

For the last few posts here, I’ve been thinking about how voice—so central to my exploration of communication—operates not just as a tool for presence but also as a means of moderation and balance in dialogue. In conflict resolution, voice is more than volume or authority; it is about ensuring that expression does not become a tool for dominance, where raising one’s voice becomes a way to claim power over others rather than fostering mutual understanding. Assertiveness should not be mistaken for loudness, and presence is not about overpowering but about engaging effectively.

With this in mind, I have also been exploring how voice might find new dimensions beyond speech. If fostering brave, intentional communication is about empowering presence, then how does this extend to art and objects? This ties back to the microteaching exercise, where objects were at the core, both in the session and in the brief. Can objects, too, serve as communicators, provocateurs, or even as mediators themselves? You can read more about my microteaching session reflections in this link. 

In my previous reflections, I explored how vocal tone, authority, and embodied communication shape brave spaces. But through our recent readings, particularly Becker (2019), Hooks (1995), and Ahmed (2019), I see a compelling parallel between voice, artistic presence, and conflict mediation.

Art is not just seen—it is experienced. It infiltrates spaces, takes up room, and demands engagement in ways that speech alone sometimes cannot. This connects to the idea of mediation: art as an object that does not simply reflect reality, but actively shapes how we engage with it.

This was evident in my microteaching session, where objects—like the imaginary ball in the vocal exercise or the peeler in the storytelling activity—served as mediators of meaning. These objects did more than illustrate ideas; they shaped the way participants communicated, prompting embodied responses, shifting perspectives, and even modulating authority. Just as tone and volume influence how a voice is received in a debate or disagreement, the presence of an object can anchor conversations, distribute power, and reframe interactions, making space for multiple voices rather than one dominant one.

The same applies to art in broader contexts. Art doesn’t just reflect reality; it mediates it, much like a voice can. It can make power visible (or invisible), include or exclude, and redefine participation through immersion. Ahmed’s (2019) work on use resonates deeply here—just as a voice becomes meaningful through its application, so too does art. The artistic interventions at Davos, for example, were initially peripheral but became powerful precisely because they were used—not as decoration but as essential discourse.

To truly embed art at the core of societal transformation, it must not wait for an invitation. It must assert itself—immersing audiences, provoking dialogue, and facilitating engagement. The same is true in the context of conflict resolution: mediation is not about neutrality but about active participation in creating balance. From Davos to our own classrooms, the challenge is not just to include art, but to use it as a tool for radical change.

This shift reminds me that the presence of art, like the presence of a strong voice, is not something that should wait for permission. It needs to assert itself, to reshape interactions, challenge hierarchies, and make meaning through action.

References:

Ahmed, S. (2019) What’s the Use? On the Uses of Use. Durham: Duke University Press.

Becker, C. (2019) How Art Became a Force at Davos. World Economic Forum. Available at: https://caroldbecker.com/how-art-became-a-force-at-davos-1 (Accessed: [20/02/2025]).

Hooks, B. (1995) Talking Art as the Spirit Moves Us. In: Art on My Mind: Visual Politics. New York: The New Press.

Categories
PgCert: Theories, Policies and Practices

REFLECTIONS ON BEING OBSERVED BY A PEER: Facilitating Team Collaboration and Conflict Resolution

This post is a reflection on a one-hour tutorial in which I was observed by a peer as part of my ongoing PgCert journey, focusing on facilitating team collaboration and conflict resolution. See the observation notes in this link.

Facilitating collaboration is never straightforward—especially when working with diverse teams where expectations, communication styles, and cultural understandings of teamwork can vary significantly. My most recent tutorial was a perfect example of this complexity, offering an opportunity to observe, reflect, and refine approaches to fostering effective teamwork.

This session formed part of a six-week collaborative unit where students from MA Innovation Management and MA Applied Imagination work in cross-disciplinary teams to identify an opportunity for collaboration with an institution from the Knowledge Quarter. The end goal is to present a future-proof idea or proposal, integrating research, strategy, and creative thinking.

Importantly, the observed session covered only one hour of a three-hour tutorial, and this tutorial itself was just one of many across the six-week unit. The broader learning journey includes multiple touchpoints, including structured team-building activities, reflective exercises, and conflict-resolution strategies.

Cross-Group Sharing: Creating Space for Reflection

We started the tutorial with a cross-group sharing exercise, designed to give students the chance to step outside their immediate teams and engage in an informal yet insightful exchange with another group. The activity took place outdoors, with snacks on hand to create a relaxed environment—small but intentional choices aimed at encouraging openness and reducing pressure.

Students were asked to reflect on their team’s collaboration dynamics and share insights with a peer from another team. They approached this exercise in different ways—some focused on solutions and workflow adjustments, while others expressed frustration over unresolved tensions. The challenge, of course, is to bridge these perspectives, ensuring discussions move beyond venting and towards constructive action.

One notable observation was that the presence of an external observer created some initial hesitation among students. I had deliberately not introduced the observer formally during this short activity (10min), as I wanted to maintain the authenticity of the discussion. While this decision led to some momentary confusion, it also allowed students to engage more naturally. In future, I will assess on a case-by-case basis whether a formal introduction is beneficial—or if a low-key approach helps students express themselves more freely.

DESC: A Framework for Addressing Tensions

As part of the preparation for this session, students were introduced to the DESC framework from Scott (Describe, Express, Specify, Consequences)—a communication model designed to structure feedback and resolve tensions in a constructive manner. While the observer noted that the group discussions could have benefited from additional reflective tools such as a SWOT analysis, I realised that I had not explicitly shared the DESC framework with the observer beforehand. As a result, the underlying structure of the student reflections may not have been immediately clear. 

This highlighted a valuable learning point for me as a facilitator: when inviting an external observer into a session, ensuring they have full context on the methodologies being used can provide greater clarity in their feedback and interpretation of student interactions.

Navigating Conflict: Strength-Based Approaches

Another recurring theme in the tutorial was conflict within teams—a natural, if often uncomfortable, aspect of group work. Issues ranged from differences in work ethic and commitment levels to interpersonal tensions and frustration over perceived imbalances.

Rather than focusing solely on problem-solving, I encouraged students to take a strength-based approach—recognising what was working well within their teams and using that as a foundation for addressing challenges constructively. One particularly effective tool for this was revisiting their original team charter. By reconnecting with their initial values and agreements, students were able to identify areas where they had drifted and make conscious decisions about what to adjust moving forward.

Beyond the immediate challenges of the unit, I emphasised that these moments of tension, negotiation, and recalibration were not just about completing an assignment but about developing critical life skills. The ability to navigate team dynamics, manage disagreements, and foster productive collaboration will be essential in their future careers—whether as leaders, innovators, or change-makers. I encouraged them to see team collaboration as a leadership skill in itself—one that, when mastered, will strengthen their ability to work across disciplines, influence others, and drive meaningful impact in professional environments.

Final Reflections and Moving Forward

This session reaffirmed the importance of structured reflection, open dialogue, and adaptability in collaboration. Encouraging students to articulate challenges, revisit their commitments, and actively engage in conflict resolutionnot only enhances their project outcomes but also equips them with lifelong skills for professional teamwork.

One area I want to further explore in future sessions is the power of voice in communication—how students use their tone, volume, and presence to assert themselves within a team. Effective collaboration isn’t just about what is said, but how it is conveyed, and I see great potential in integrating voice-awareness exercises into future tutorials. This connects with my previous reflections on the importance of using one’s voice wisely, not just as a tool for expression, but as a strategic instrument for influence, leadership, and fostering a productive team environment.

Facilitating teamwork is rarely linear, and there’s no single formula for success. However, by continually refining our approaches—both as tutors and students—we can create more resilient, adaptable, and engaged teams who are prepared not just for academic collaboration, but for the professional challenges ahead.

Categories
PgCert: Theories, Policies and Practices

From Safe Spaces to Brave Voices

Reflecting on my Microteaching session, I see a strong parallel between the ideas explored in Arao & Clemens’ (2021) “From Safe Spaces to Brave Spaces” and the way we use voice in teaching. Their argument—that learning environments should not only be safe but also brave—resonates deeply with my exploration of voice, communication, and assertiveness.

In both my microteaching session and the case study I wrote, participants—educator peers and students alike—experimented with how vocal tone carries authority and intent (The Imaginary Ball Game) and how storytelling shifts when we change perspective (The Peeler Activity). These exercises moved them beyond passive speech into intentional, embodied communication, much like Brave Spaces push educators beyond neutral facilitation into active, engaged presence. Fostering voice awareness is essential for building “brave” communication—speech, presentations, and lectures that are not just present but truly heard, not just delivered but deeply engaging.

Brave communicators do more than just find their own voice—they empower others to find theirs. Assertiveness in communication isn’t about being the loudest in the room; it’s about speaking with confidence, clarity, and purpose. In the classroom, a teacher’s voice sets the tone for participation, dialogue, and inclusivity. When we model assertive, intentional speaking, we encourage students to do the same—to express themselves openly, challenge ideas, and engage critically without fear.

Moving forward, I want to deepen my exploration of how voice can transform the learning space. How can we train ourselves to harness vocal presence in a way that fosters engagement and trust? How do we help students build their own assertive voices? These questions guide my next steps – because if we want to create brave spaces, we need to start with brave voices.

References

Arao, B. & Clemens, K. (2021). From safe spaces to brave spaces: A new way to frame dialogue around diversity and social justice. In: L.A. Landreman (ed.) The Art of Effective Facilitation: Reflections from Social Justice Educators. 2nd edn. Sterling, VA: Stylus Publishing, pp. 135–150.

Categories
PgCert: Theories, Policies and Practices

CASE STUDY 1: Enhancing Collaboration through Assertive Communication

This case study explores how I used evidence-informed approaches to know and respond to my students’ diverse needs – addressing V1 (respect for diverse learners), V2 (promoting participation and equality), and V3 (evidence-informed practice) – in a collaborative setting where uneven participation and communication barriers impacted group dynamics. To address this, I implemented a structured intervention to enhance assertive communication, foster inclusion, and promote equitable teamwork, aligning with A2 (supporting learning), K3 (how students learn collaboratively), and K4 (the use of effective learning environments and approaches) to create a more inclusive and participatory learning experience.

Background

As part of the MA Innovation Management programme, I tutor students in Unit 2: Collaborative Practices, which fosters interdisciplinary collaboration between MA Innovation Management and MA Applied Imagination students at CSM. This unit is structured around small-group tutorials, collective lectures, guest speaker sessions, and guided readings. Each group is assigned a dedicated tutor for three-hour weekly sessions, providing close guidance and an opportunity for deep engagement.

My assigned group (The Dream Team), an imbalance in participation emerged early on, with two students taking on the bulk of the work while others remained passive. This created frustration, disengagement, and potential conflict, making it difficult for the group to function effectively. Communication and confidence appeared to be the root causes, as the quieter members hesitated to assert themselves, while the more active students became increasingly frustrated. Recognising that effective communication is key to equitable collaboration, I sought to implement a structured intervention to encourage assertive participation.

Evaluation

Having recently conducted the microteaching exercise (the Friday before), I adapted an activity from that session to address communication barriers within the group. The “Invisible Ball” exercise – initially designed to help participants discover their assertive voice – was repurposed to demonstrate how clear objectives improve communication. The activity required students to verbalise their intention as they “passed” an imaginary ball, ensuring the recipient was aware and prepared.

Though seemingly lighthearted, the exercise underscored key principles of workplace communication:

  1. Clear articulation of intent – The ball could only be successfully “passed” with explicit verbalisation, mirroring how tasks in teamwork require clarity and direct communication (Bamber & Jones, 2015).
  2. Confidence in delivery – Initially, some students hesitated, but they quickly realised that assertive speech—not dominance—ensured the message was received (Griffiths & Tann, 1992).
  3. Balanced participation – The exercise naturally equalised engagement, allowing quieter students to find their voice in a low-risk environment (Arao & Clemens, 2021).

Following the activity, I guided a reflection on how clear, direct communication is essential in professional environments, particularly when navigating group work challenges. Students recognised how unclear expectations had contributed to uneven workloads and identified strategies to rebalance their collaboration.

To reinforce this learning, I introduced two additional strategies:

  • Structured Check-Ins: Weekly tutorials began and ended with brief reflections on each member’s contributions, ensuring that accountability was embedded into the process.
  • Peer-Led Problem-Solving: Instead of defaulting to my intervention, I encouraged students to discuss workload imbalances collaboratively, strengthening self-regulation and collective responsibility (Gibbs, 2015).

These adjustments significantly improved participation and engagement, fostering greater trust, confidence, and commitment within the group.

Moving forward

This experience reinforced the importance of active facilitation in student-led learning. Moving forward, I aim to:

  • Introduce communication-focused exercises earlier in the unit to pre-empt collaboration challenges.
  • Develop structured peer-feedback mechanisms, allowing students to reflect on their group roles and adjust dynamics proactively.
  • Continue embedding reflective practice, encouraging students to critically assess their own contributions and communication strategies (Wilson, 2021).

By embedding these principles into my teaching practice, I aim to further support students in developing clear communication skills, fostering equitable participation, and building confidence in collaborative settings.

References

Arao, B., & Clemens, K. (2021). From Safe Spaces to Brave Spaces.

Bamber, V., & Jones, N. (2015). Enabling Inclusive Learning (Ch.11).

Gibbs, G. (2015). Maximising Student Learning Gain (Ch.14).

Griffiths, M., & Tann, S. (1992). Reflective Practice – Linking Personal and Public Theories.

Wilson, M. (2021). A Contemplative Pedagogy.

Categories
PgCert: Theories, Policies and Practices

MICROTEACHING REFLECTION: The Power of Voice and Presence in the Classroom

Stepping into my Microteaching session, I wanted to explore how voice shapes communication—not just through words, but through tone, posture, and movement. Voice and body are deeply connected; tension can weaken delivery, while openness enhances clarity and confidence. In teaching, this interplay sets the classroom’s energy and engagement. This session was a chance to experiment with harnessing it more effectively.

I designed two activities that aimed to bring this awareness to life:

  1. Vocal Tone & Intent in Classroom Scenarios (a.k.a. The Imaginary Ball Game)
  2. Exploring Narrative & Voice Through Storytelling (a.k.a. Describing a Peeler)

Activity 1: Vocal Tone & Intent in Classroom Scenario

I introduced the first activity without revealing much about what was coming next. Participants were asked to pass an imaginary ball around while calling out each other’s names. But there was a twist—each time the ball was passed, they had to embody a different intention or emotion:

  • Throw it as if you’re angry
  • Throw it as if you’re surprised to see someone after a long time
  • Throw it as if the ball is very heavy

It was simple, playful, and immediately created a flat-shared experience. Everyone was in the same boat of uncertainty—no one knew exactly what was coming next. This, in itself, was a valuable lesson: when students feel equally unprepared, they tend to loosen up and engage more openly.

This type of warm-up, though seemingly small, serves multiple purposes:

✔️ Building group connection – A great icebreaker at the start of a course or unit.
✔️ Reducing performance anxiety – Since everyone is navigating the unknown together.
✔️ Enhancing voice awareness – As participants become more intentional with their tone and delivery.

Looking back, I realized this activity could have been expanded further. With more time, I would have introduced elements of body awareness, encouraging participants to notice how movement and posture shift when speaking with different intentions. We spend so much time seated at our laptops—why not bring in more physicality, allowing students to feel more comfortable in their bodies while speaking?

Activity 2: Exploring Narrative & Voice Through Storytelling

For the second activity, I shifted the focus to objects—specifically, peelers. (Yes, peelers. Stay with me here.)

I had kept them hidden in my bag all afternoon, so when I finally placed them on the table, there was a moment of surprise. After working with dice, a dramatic box, and artist boxes from the Netherlands, no one expected that their last task of the afternoon would involve… a peeler.

The task was simple: describe the peeler in three different ways to a peer with only one minute. However, I didn’t introduce all three prompts at once—I revealed them one by one, allowing participants to notice how their perception and expression evolved with each stage:

  1. First minute – Pure Description: Objectively describe the peeler (no personal input).
  2. Second minute – Personal Commentary: Describe it with subjective thoughts and opinions.
  3. Third minute – Storytelling & Context: Place the peeler within a bigger narrative.

And then… the interesting part began…

At first, most people kept their eyes fixed on the peeler, even though we all know what a peeler looks like. Holding it in their hands seemed to anchor them—just like how having a script or notes can make us feel more secure in a presentation.

One participant noticed something about the peeler they had never paid attention to before: its waxed skin. A tiny detail that had always been there but had never been consciously observed.

Despite me clearly stating that the peeler now belonged to them, no one peeled or tasted the fruit. Why? This made me wonder—was it politeness? Hesitation? Or simply the ingrained habit of sticking to only what was explicitly asked?

Reflecting on this, I started making a parallel between holding onto objects and holding onto scripts in presentations. When we grip onto something—whether it’s notes, a remote control, or even a podium—how does it affect our body language, movement, and confidence? Would letting go allow us to engage more freely with our audience? Although we didn’t discuss this in the session, it left me with food for thought on how much physical presence impacts vocal delivery.

Final thoughts…

This session reminded me how much we unconsciously rely on certain habits—whether it’s fixating on an object when speaking, sticking to a script for security, or hesitating to push beyond what is explicitly asked. It also reinforced how voice isn’t just about words; it’s about how our body supports them.

I left the session with even more curiosity about the intersection of voice, movement, and presence in teaching. How can we help students (and ourselves) become more aware of how we use our voices—not just in words, but in energy and physicality? And more importantly, how can we create spaces where communication feels natural, confident, and fully engaged?

There’s so much more to explore—so stay tuned for the next step in this journey!