Tag: Reflections

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.

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.

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.

As I started thinking about my upcoming Microteaching session, I kept circling back to one question: How much do we actually consider the way we use our voice?

Voice is something so natural, so automatic, that we often take it for granted—until, of course, we find ourselves struggling to be heard, misunderstood, or simply ignored. Whether in everyday life, at work, or in the classroom, the way we use our voice can shape interactions, influence perceptions, and determine outcomes. Yet, so often, we misuse it, or worse, fail to use it effectively at all.

Take the classic example of team projects. How often do we see one proactive student taking on most of the work while others coast along? Frustration builds, tensions rise, and yet, many students struggle to voice their concerns in a way that is constructive and effective. The ability to set boundaries, to express frustrations without alienating others, and to assert oneself with confidence is a skill that should be actively encouraged—not just in students but in all of us.

This got me thinking about assertive communication and how it plays a crucial role in teaching. It’s not just about speaking up—it’s about using our voice intentionally to set the tone, to guide discussions, to encourage participation, and to establish authority without resorting to dominance.

Scott (yes, let’s bring in some academic backing!) suggests that assertive communication helps navigate difficult conversations, reduces stress, and prevents resentment from creeping into interactions. We’ve all had those moments where we hold back what we really want to say, only to overthink it later. But what if we had a simple, structured way to handle these situations in real time?

That’s where I came across the DESC method, a powerful yet straightforward tool for assertive communication:

D – Describe the situation clearly and objectively—stick to the facts.

E – Express how you feel using “I” statements to avoid sounding accusatory.

S – Specify what you would like to happen instead—be direct and clear.

C – Consequences—outline both positive and negative outcomes if things do or don’t change.

I’ve been observing this pattern for a long time—students often struggle with group work, regardless of the course or context. However, the Collaborative Unit at MA Innovation Management (CSM) has been a particularly interesting setting to analyze these dynamics more closely. Bringing together students from two different courses to work in teams highlights the same recurring challenge I’ve seen time and time again: some students naturally step into leadership roles, while others remain passive, waiting to be directed. But what if we equipped them with the skills to navigate these group tensions with assertive, confident communication?

This brings me back to my Microteaching session. The more I reflect on this, the more I realize how fundamental voice is in the teaching context—not just what we say, but how we say it.

How do we use our voice to command attention without intimidating?
How do we encourage discussion without losing authority?
How do we shift between assertiveness and warmth to create an engaging learning environment?

I’m beginning to see voice not just as a tool, but as a powerful instrument—one that can influence everything from student participation to classroom energy. And if voice is this powerful for us as educators, can you imagine the impact it could have if students mastered it too?

So, my Microteaching session will focus on using and mastering voice as a powerful tool in teaching. I want to explore how educators can refine their voice for clarity, impact, and engagement—whether it’s in delivering a lecture, moderating discussions, or guiding students through their own learning journeys.

Excited to dive into this! More reflections coming soon… 

References

Scott, S.A. (1983) Assertiveness: How to stand up for yourself and still win the respect of others. California: Impact Publishers.

This is Elisenda, and I’m excited to kick off both my PgCert journey and this blog! My teaching spans across CSM and LCF—at CSM, I’m involved in the MA Innovation Management, while at LCF, I contribute to the BA Buying & Merchandising, MA Fashion Design Management, and the Fashion MBA. Alongside teaching, I’m currently in my third year of a PhD at LCF and FBS.

Lately, I’ve been thinking a lot about something that shapes our experiences every day but often goes unnoticed—our own fabulous voices!

Whether in teaching, research, or daily interactions, the way we use our voice has a huge impact. So, as I embark on this PgCert journey, I’m looking forward to exploring this more—how we communicate, connect, and create meaningful learning experiences. Let’s dive in!