The Artefact – Reflective Report

Posted on 31st October 2024 by Tilly De Verteuil

This artefact is an ever-evolving Glossary of terms that begins with the tools used in the Book Arts Workshop and uses an inclusive microteach* to explore the languages and identities in the workshop to facilitate student understanding and empower their own learning as well as foster an environment for collaboration and sharing as creatives and creators with a shared skill or interest.

________

I am a white British woman, working as a technician in a college wide workshop, with a widely international student cohort. I work with students of a multitude of ages, identities and proficiencies in the English Language. As a white person at the University of the Arts London (UAL), I am in the majority of staff members according to the UAL Diversity & Inclusion Report from 2018. Specifically, I work as a full-time technician in the Book Arts Workshop, and I work with one other colleague, who is also a white female European. In relation to my project, I will primarily focus on the interactions between myself and the student cohort. However, it is crucial to recognize that despite being a minority within the classroom, students may unconsciously centre my role due to my belonging to the dominant group within the university (Jang in 2017)

Through my learning during the PgCert, I am aware of the limitations in understanding the experience of a lot of our students in the Book Arts Workshop. During the 5 years I have worked in my position, I have also noticed our limitations in communicating with a variety of students who are new to England, or learning in the English language.

In addition to English as a second language, the work we do in the Book Arts Workshop (BAW) involves a lot of specific and technical terms, and, as a heritage craft, uses a lot of old English words out of place – For example, a “Bone Folder” translated into any other language, could be understood as a tool used to fold bones, but rather it is an item made out of plastic (Bone is a left over term as they used to be made of cow bones) and is used to fold and crease paper.

Describing these tools to groups of 15-20 students at a time means that any misunderstanding is often quietly withheld, and results in a more confusing workshop experience for the student. They spend time working out what the tools name means, or what was said, while the teaching continues without their attention. It made me think about how girls in Southeast Asia, the Middle East, and parts of Africa and South America miss out on school due to menstruation, and how teaching goes on without them as they miss a week of education each month. This loss can build up to 13 weeks of missed school, and can result in significant disruption to their education, and contributes to higher dropout rates among girls (Das 2018)

The other action that can sometimes occur when this confusion arrives, is that the students quietly discuss it with their peers to work it out. This disrupts their peers, and can sometimes mean that my colleague and I, unaware of what they are discussing, assume they are not interested in the workshop. We then have two options, to ask them to pay attention, (in front of the other students this feel like an aggressive act) or to allow them to chat and continue for the sake of the other students in the room.

Both of these outcomes mean that as the teacher, you have no awareness if anyone is stuck, before moving on with the instructions.

______________

My initial plan for the artefact was simply a published glossary book, available in the workshop for students to read in their own time. The Glossary would include translations of every tool used in BAW in every major language, as well as translation and descriptions of more complex terms used. For example, Bone Folder would be described as a tool made of a hard material, used to fold and crease paper. This description would be in each language, with photos of the tool at use in the workshop.

I thought more about this object in the workshop, and the reality of where this publication might sit. It did not feel very accessible. If there was just one book, and many students at the same time, they would have to come in outside of teaching hours to read through the book, or they would read through the book during teaching, which is more disruptive to the demonstrations and everyone else’s learning as well as their own.

Perhaps I thought, it can be an online resource, on Moodle. How would it be used? Students would have to retain all the information either in advance of a workshop or look it up and understand after a workshop.

To read in advance, the likelihood that all the information would be remembered is slim, and to read after the workshop, does not have any impact on the initial confusion during the workshop teaching.

A poster in the workshop? This would need to be HUGE in order to fit all the information, or it would need to be very small typeface. It is also then, only available in the workshop, and has the same limitations as the published book.

Both physical forms also don’t allow for changes or additions as the Glossary grows, new languages come to the space, or terms are updated.

We foster a very friendly environment in the workshop, and a lot of students stay in touch after they graduate, so I discussed this with a few of our regular students and Alumni, with English as a second language, and two of whom self-described as beginning their degree with a low competency of English.

I asked them 3 key questions.

Where in the workshop teaching did you find yourself getting lost? Was it in the language used, the speed, or the description of the tools?
What could we as teachers do to help if you were confused in a demonstration? Calling it out in front of peers feels too aggressive, but leaving you to your confusion also isn’t fair.
Do you discuss your confusion with your peer groups in your native language? Is this because you are embarrassed or because you don’t have the language to explain?

I made some excellent discoveries.

Firstly, almost all of the participants agreed that the confusion arose from tools and terms.

“They were described with a title, and then used.”

“you don’t really need to know the title, unless you need to ask about it, but if you don’t understand what they said, then you can’t ask about it anyway”

“yeah, sometimes it’s just like a quick thought, like ‘what’s that called again?’ but it feels like it would be too hard to explain what you are asking about”

Secondly, upon discussing how we could help in confusion, it seemed to stem mostly from embarrassment, on insecurity about language capabilities.

“I didn’t every want to slow the class down by asking a question everyone else seems to understand”

“or if it’s not an important thing, like what a tool is called, you can just ask the person next to you if they got it”

“sometimes it is just gossip with your friend, like ‘oh man, is it really bone?’ or nice colour paper, or something like that”

I mentioned that I can notice if someone is confused, or talking with a peer, and that asking them what they are talking about, even by just saying “all okay?” or “you guys okay?” can be received as aggressive and feels like hostile traditional Teacher>student relationship dynamic. The participants agreed that is uncomfortable in any situation. I wondered if maybe there is a way of opening it up to the entire class as a conversation, so that nobody would feel pointed out.

The last point excited me, as these ‘gossip’ questions are all useful. In Book Arts we are keen for everyone to understand every part of every process as it helps you to make a decision in your work, and place the materials and methods used in context.

I decided then to change my artefact into mini microteaches during workshop sessions, where, as each tool is used and described, I ask participants of the workshop if they have seen it before, and what they would call it.

I discussed this with peers and colleagues and Shura, my tutor in the unit. Shura expressed a lean toward asking openly for contributions on this is preferable, rather than explicitly asking each person to engage one-by-one, as this could have some feeling of “performing a cultural thing” attached to it, that can make people uncomfortable which is totally the opposite of what I intend to achieve with this.

Instead, I will ask the group if anyone has seen this tool before. The I will describe it, what it is made from and what it is used for.

There is then a time period where it could be comfortable for some to contribute what they would call that tool, or if they have seen it in a different context, what they would use it for.
This informalises the contribution. I can also level the field by beginning with a difference my colleague and I have. These differences can sometimes be cute or funny, and Shura mentioned it is still worth cataloguing these, to have as a glossary that students could engage with after the workshops, if they found this part of the discussion interesting, but weren’t confident to contribute in the session.

My intention was to break down the hierarchical barrier between myself and the students and to de-emphasize the dominance of the English language. However, the experience has been even more transformative than I anticipated. With the guidance and input from students, colleagues, and the PgCert team, I have been filled with enthusiasm and inspiration to explore language in a more creative manner. I now view it as a playful tool to shift focus from Eurocentricity and embrace diverse language, and in this sense, it becomes a symbol for a wide array of new creative possibilities and stimulating discussions for staff and students alike.

________________________

-Das et al. (2018) “Menstrual hygiene management among schoolgirls in South Asia: a systematic review and meta-analysis”
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26936906/

-Jang, B (2017) “Am I a Qualified Literacy Researcher and Educator? A Counter-Story of a Professional Journey of One Asian Male Literacy Scholar in the United States.”

Journal of Literacy Research 2017, Vol. 49. pp. [Online]Available at: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/1086296X17733491 [Accessed on: 10/07/21]

Microteach Write up

Posted on 31st October 2024 by Tilly De Verteuil

My object-based microteaching exercise is suitable for all students across the college, and is designed as the introduction to all inductions in our workshop space. The goal is to equip students with the ability to analyse paper or book objects and recognize the grain direction, along with understanding the significance and the context of why the choice of grain direction may have been chosen.

First, a brief verbal explanation on paper making and the concept of ‘grain’. Then, students will participate in a physical demonstration where they are given two pages from the same magazine. One page is torn vertically “across the grain,” resulting in an uneven tear that often results in tearing off a corner, with fibres “poking out” of the edge of the tear.
The second page is torn horizontally “with the grain,” resulting in an easy, clean and straight tear across the sheet.
This hands-on activity effectively highlights the nature of paper fibre’s and how they can affect the final publication, while also presenting a clear visual representation of paper grain.

After acknowledging the wastefulness of tearing paper to determine grain direction, we introduce an alternative method. Each student is given a fresh sheet of plain white paper and instructed to softly bend it in half vertically, feeling the paper’s resistance under their hand. Next, they repeat the process horizontally and note the difference in resistance.

The concept of grain direction in paper is further elaborated upon. I explain that the direction of weaker resistance experienced during the paper bending activity is parallel to the grain direction. We then discuss the terminology associated with grain direction, such as “long grain” and “short grain,” and their implications for publishing. It is emphasized that proper grain direction is essential for optimal printing and binding results, especially for high-quality publications such as books and magazines. The restrictions and recommendations for grain direction in publishing are also explored in-depth, including the optimal weight for different types of paper, the importance of aligning the grain direction of all paper components in a publication, and the potential consequences of disregarding grain direction guidelines.

My experience running this microteaching exercise was quite different from what I had expected. I thought it resembled more of a one-dimensional demonstration rather than the interactive activity and experience that I am used to.

Feedback from participants indicated that they could also imagine the difference between the two teaching environments, and that the atmosphere of the teaching space played a significant role in their willingness to engage and understand the concept.

I also think that I may have rushed through the delivery of the content, as I was subtly aware that the audience would not need the immediate relevance of the information. In a workshop setting with my students, I know they will use the knowledge of grain direction right away in a subsequent task, as well as in their future projects, given they all signed up for the course. As Csikszentmihalyi and Hermanson (1999) observe “after the individual’s curiosity is aroused, the exhibit must engage sustained interest in order for learning to take place” (p. 73) However, while teaching in the Micro-teach setting, I knew the participants wouldn’t utilize this knowledge beyond the session.

Consequently, I feel I failed to elaborate on certain aspects of the lesson, as I usually do when I sense any uncertainty, which is essential for a group of students who are unsure of the subject matter. The information instead seemed like a dismembered slice of information presented in an office room, without the context for its wider application and significance to skills usually acquired later in a lesson.

The current format of the exercise involves a single large group, which can sometimes lead to a herd mentality where participants simply agree with each other. However, based on the feedback I received, I could consider experimenting with different techniques for facilitating the activity. As Bonwell (1991) identifies “active learning involves students in doing things and thinking about the things they are doing” (p. 68). One possibility could be to split the group into smaller sub-groups and have them test the grain direction of paper independently before sharing their findings and insights with the rest of the group. Another approach is to incorporate questions throughout the demonstration to encourage critical thinking and active participation. For example, I could ask the group to speculate on the reasons behind certain publishing guidelines related to paper grain direction, before presenting them with the information. These alternative techniques may help to foster a more engaging and interactive learning experience for the participants, and provide a more well-rounded understanding of the topic.