Session/artefact to be observed/reviewed: Group tutorials
Size of student group: around 30 students
Observer: Corey Ford
Observee: Mikolai Berg
Part One
What is the context of this session/artefact within the curriculum?
This is a class for Year 2 Fashion Photography students, and they are in the 4th week of a 40-credit unit (9 weeks), in which they are introduced to 3D image making and provided insight into emerging technologies in fashion imaging.
The submission requirements are; a 30 sec MOV file produced in a 3D software (usually Blender) (moving image submission), accompanied by a re-branding exercise of an pre-existing brand’s updated identity in the New Media landscape (research journal submission).
The focus of this session are group tutorials in which the students are asked to introduce their initial WIP, chosen brand, branding strategies, concept and up to date outcome in Blender. This is followed by feedback by the teaching team and their peers.
How long have you been working with this group and in what capacity?
I’m the Year 2 lead and have been with this cohort since the beginning of this academic year. This is the 2nd 40 credit unit that I am delivering for them.
What are the intended or expected learning outcomes?
Overall, in order for the students to contextualise their image making practices in emerging technologies and the ability to conceptualise a creative pitch in consideration of existing brand heritage.
This session, in particular, provides an opportunity to share their WIP, witnessing their peers’, and be given a space to feedback. The objective is that such sessions are inspiring and pave way for further exchanges, inside or outside the classroom. These tutorials are to be informal and an opportunity for them vocalise their processes, a key element in creative conception.
What are the anticipated outputs (anything students will make/do)?
Either in one circle or divided in two, the students are asked to present their WIP in 3 minutes. They have a choice to do so vocally, or accompanied by PDF, presented on their laptops or on the classroom monitor. After each presentation, they can feedback on the progress of their peers.
Are there potential difficulties or specific areas of concern?
Depending on the number of late comers, the decision on dividing the group in one or two can cause issues related to session timeframe (one group – too time consuming, two possibly too short)
How will students be informed of the observation/review?
In the beginning of the class.
What would you particularly like feedback on?
Everything, time allowing.
How will feedback be exchanged?
Via email.
Part Two
Hi Mikolai,
I enjoyed coming to observe the students in the Fashion school. You set the tone as friendly and relaxed, e.g., chatting with students about train delays, and playing music from their own playlist. The structure was: i) introduction presentation, then ii) design crits. I organise my reflections using these as headings below.
::INTRO PRESENTATION:::
You made several efforts to put students at ease, e.g., emphasising the informality of the upcoming presentations. You also asked students about challenging elements of the course e.g. “How are you finding Blender?” – reassuring students it will take time to master. You also gave frequent reminders that information is on Moodle, helping students with information overload. Alongside, you delivered the lecture from a stool, which made your power status closer the students.
There was divided attention amongst students e.g. some looking at their laptops and less listening to the presentation. They likely already knew the material, and, from their screens, many were looking at notes for their crit – perhaps, nervous or just preparing. I don’t feel this distracted from their understanding of the content per se, but more so indicates their motivation to impress. It might be worth (re)-grabbing their attention somehow if delivering a crucial point.
:::DESIGN CRITS:::
Circle Layout: Students were positioned in a circle, and you moved around its centre. A challenge with the circle is that it is hard to read students’ faces to judge if they want to comment, with your back facing them. Students behind you also lost attention e.g looking at their computers/phones. This was truer for later crits where students presented from their seats; it was difficult for students at the back to see the presentations. Perhaps, having students put their materials on an interactive whiteboard like Miro and presenting this at the front could create a focal point for discussion?
Timing: Students were given three minutes for updates. Time was needed for tech setup. Your expert feedback could also be timed as, from my own experience of doing crits, I find it is easy to get carried away with giving lots of feedback – especially when excited about a student’s idea. Aware of the time, you asked the students if they wanted to split into two groups. Students seemed happy to continue as one, and as you commented “It is nice for everyone to see everyone’s work”. It was great to get the students involvement in this decision making. There’s an opportunity to group students with similar projects e.g. the grouping Oakley and grouping Victoria Secret. This could help them to differentiate their projects and think divergently from one another also.
Feedback: When giving feedback, you did a great job of reassuringly nodding along. In my crits, I’ve kept a blank face to create the illusion of objectivity (I wonder your thoughts on this). Your comments fabulously connected to student’s personal identity as designers. I didn’t see many students writing down feedback. During their presentations you could write notes to give back after, so they don’t forget?
Order: The first presenting student was keen and prepared. I wondered if students later would feel less prepared and anxious in comparison. Some students indicated this: one said “I think don’t think it was very well prepared” and another in setting up said “I don’t have like much”. Could a more random ordering of presentations help?
Quiet Students: One student didn’t want to partake. It was good not to pressure them into doing this, being sensitive to their own anxieties and learning style differences. I wondered whether you checked up on them afterwards to make sure they get the same opportunity of feedback.
Overall, I enjoyed the experience and look forward to potential future collaboration.
Part Three
Thank you for this insightful feedback Corey. There are many structural elements that I have not thought about, so I really appreciate this.
The especially useful points in your feedback are regarding tone/communication and students’ attention. I think that I have to change my informal approach and apply more distance between myself and the students, I have been aware of this for a while. I find this difficult as it feels like roleplay but do realise that in effective teaching, these roles are important. If I would apply a more disciplined and firmer approach in terms of communication I may be surprised at the improvements in their course of learning and general attention – hopefully then reflected in their submissions.
Here’s a more structured feedback reflection:
Group crits layout improvements: The spatial design and making sure that all students are focused on the presentations, presentation/feedback timings, implementing grouping per brand.
Elements of feedback: Making sure that students write notes, or having the teaching team writing them and providing those to students.
Timing: As previously with these activities I should have split the group in two, as the late arriving students were accommodated but did prolong the pre-viewed time for the tutorials which affected attention span.
Order: Presentations in random order to alleviate group pressure, are all points which can enhance such sessions I totally agree.
Quiet students: Following up with these is a crucial task, which I aim to materialise.
In all, thank you for this detailed feedback. Your objective perspective has really made me consider what can be improved. I wish I could have you in on more than this one occasion!