kellyharrisonpgcert

Date: Thu 27 Feb 2025

Time: 10:00 – 11:00

Location: D110

Observer: Gem Smith

Observee: Kelly Harrison

Session/artefact to be observed/reviewed:

Lesson – Visual Recording in the Built Environment

Size of student group: 40 Y1 students, BA(Hons) Graphic and Media Design, LCC

 Note: This record is solely for exchanging developmental feedback between colleagues. Its reflective aspect informs PgCert and Fellowship assessment, but it is not an official evaluation of teaching and is not intended for other internal or legal applications such as probation or disciplinary action.

Part One
Observee to complete in brief and send to observer prior to the observation or review:

What is the context of this session/artefact within the curriculum?

• A two hour, tutor-led explorative practice/visual research (drawing) workshop as part of the new GMD1 Unit Design Exploration in Context: Reveal design brief as below:

• Reveal. This brief has been written with several interrelated aims; to explore the relationships and potentials of combining analogue and/or digital design processes and methods to produce a less predictable outcome, experimental in form, but wholly communicative in function. The self-determined outcome is to be informed by early research, testing and project development, and agreed at a mid-stage formative confirmation small group tutorial where the media and processes, and communication aim is agreed by your tutors. A secondary aim of this brief is to act as a practical and conceptual journey of discovery into processes and technologies that sit within the broad sphere of contemporary graphic and media design practice.  

How long have you been working with this group and in what capacity?

• I work with the group as studio tutor and as part of the wider GMD1 staff team on rotation throughout 2024/25.

What are the intended or expected learning outcomes?

• Discovery stage, visual exploration of surfaces in the built environment (offsite around LCC)

• Exploratory practice via visual research, combinatory play, mixed media exploration, testing of combined materials and processes, drawing and mark making skills, combined analogue and digital media.

• Physical outcomes to inform and inspire wider contextual exploration and analysis of surfaces e.g. historical, cultural, materials, manufacture, form and function, location, historical and contemporary mapping systems etc.

• The workshop activity contributes to the overall students’ design development and learning journey in response to the design brief and Unit brief, within the framework of the Los and UAL assessment criteria: Enquiry, Knowledge, Process and Realisation.

What are the anticipated outputs (anything students will make/do)?

• Visual research outputs in the form of:
• 1 x A2 folded automatic sketchbook of (8 x A5)  b/w observation drawings mapping surfaces.
• 3 x A3 textural rubbings of found surfaces.  

Are there potential difficulties or specific areas of concern?

• Primarily studio logistics, the students will go offsite to do the visual research activity (outside LCC building) so the the following considerations will be actioned upon:

• Effective management of large group size (40 x students) – explore options to create small sub-groups.

• Ensure students fully understand the activity – digital/presentation slides and physical drawing samples shown in the studio as part of the briefing, include allow time for questions during intro briefing presentation.

• Ensure students are safe while off-site – remind students to stay together, remain aware of busy surroundings – people/cyclists/traffic etc.

• Ensuring students manage their time effectively so the activities are completed within the allocated time – suggest students nominate a time-keeper within their small group.

How will students be informed of the observation/review?

•  NA in this instance as this Observation is online.

•  The session will take place10:00-12:00 on Thu 27 Feb and my PgCert buddy will be observing on that day (between 10:00-11:00.)

• In preparation for the Observation, I have liased with the GMD Year 1 coordinator, and also notified my studio/CTS co-tutor in advance. 

• I will introduce the Observer to the students at the start of the session, and reassure them the observation is of my teaching practice/me and not them. 

What would you particularly like feedback on?

General feedback and/or recommendations in advance of the workshop activity taking place on Thu 27 Feb would be appreciated.

How will feedback be exchanged?

Via the this written form as supplied.

Thank you.

Part Two

Observer to note down observations, suggestions and questions:

The observation took place in D110 at LCC for 30/35 students. Students were attentive, relaxed and cooperative.

The observee informed me that lateness was sometimes a challenge.  There was a Contextual Theoretical Studies (CTS) tutor who was also delivering in the lesson. They were positioned at the entrance to register students without any disruption to the flow of the class activities.  This was a good initiative that I will also take on board.  Some students did arrive late.   How do you manage lateness in your class when you are delivering alone?

It was good practice to see the observee working collaboratively with a CTS staff member. Students were able to view how the two areas of theory and practice align

A paper register was used. A suggestion for a digital version or a QR code may be used for easy access and that may be more secure, particularly for a large cohort.

The observee spoke with a clear, calm and audible voice highlighting the task at hand. The observee informed the students that I was present in the room to view their teaching practice only.

The aims for the lesson were delivered clearly and a PowerPoint was used to harness this information. I asked a question about the PowerPoint if students had access to this before the lesson to support neurodivergent students or where English is not their first language? The observee highlighted that the presentation is available on Moodle after the session and not before, this encourages attendance. What provisions are given for these students who may find absorbing the information shared a challenge at this fast pace? The observee did ask students repeatedly if they had any questions and this was useful.  They constantly checked in with the students throughout the task, they were always attentive.

Some of the terms used such as cross hatching was mentioned, the students were asked to define this.  This was a good way of assessing prior knowledge. The observee went on to verbally explain the meaning of each method for clarity. A demonstration of each method in the presentation would have been useful, however they later performed a live demonstration before students completed the task.

There was a good connection made throughout of the student’s previous work to create a bridge of knowledge; this illustrated good practice.

The planned activity required students to leave campus, to explore and create mark making using a range of resources and methods.  Incorporated into this task students were responsible for the time allocated. This was a good way of embedding time management.  I will also ensure to embed this in my teaching. This exercise also included collaborative working with their peers, highlighting transferable skills for their practice.

Students were engaging and would later return and reflect on their work, creating a pop-up exhibition and to share their ideas. The observee highlighted the importance of public speaking and to show empathy to others who are not as vocal encouraging working together as a community.  This was a very good, engaging and explorative lesson.

Part Three

Observee to reflect on the observer’s comments and describe how they will act on the feedback exchanged:

Thank you Gem, for attending and observing the session in a calm, professional, friendly and supportive manner.

The feedback received is most helpful, my thoughts, comments and proposed actions as below:

In terms of strategies for managing student lateness and registration: because of the large GMD class sizes, we always have 2 x co-tutors delivering in each session. This way we can manage lateness/registration between us and as seen in the observation, which usually works well. If, on the rare occasion, I am delivering alone e.g. due to co-tutor absence or lateness, I take the register at the start of the session, then again at the session mid-point/before students leave the studio for the comfort break.

I welcome the helpful suggestions about paper/digital registration, which I’ll share with our Y1 Co-ordinator. To confirm, students tap in on entering the studio, sign the paper register, then studio tutors upload to a digital register after the session end.   

Thank you for the positive comments about co-teaching between GMD studio staff and CTS staff. As mentioned, this is a new initiative having been only implemented this current year 2024/25. Personally speaking I feel positive and genuinely excited about the closer alignment between theory and practice in the studio sessions. I (and CTS co-tutor) are actively seeking to raise student participation via the studio set-up; to create a supported ‘safe space’ where students feel comfortable to share thoughts, ideas and questions, in particular less confident or EFL students.

In terms of the slide presentation, I welcome the question: ‘What provisions are given for these students who may find absorbing the information shared a challenge at this fast pace?’, as mentioned the slides are made available on Moodle after the session, but this is an interesting and important point raised and so I will share this with the GMD staff team to seek recommendations and actions going forwards.

I will continue to think and act upon the positive and valuable observations, suggestions and questions as outlined above, within my teaching practice going forwards.

Thank you for your generous comments, they are very much appreciated.

Date: Tue 25 Feb 2025

Time: 16:00-16:30

Location: Online/Teams

Observer: Linda Aloysius

Observee: Kelly Harrison

Session/artefact to be observed/reviewed:

Lesson plan/slides/project brief – in prepartion for studio workshop Mapping Surfaces in the Built Environment, taking place from 10:00-12:00 on Thu 27 Feb (to be observed by PgCert peer between 10:00-11:00).

Size of student group: 40 x year 1 students, BA(Hons) Graphic and Media Design, LCC.

 Note: This record is solely for exchanging developmental feedback between colleagues. Its reflective aspect informs PgCert and Fellowship assessment, but it is not an official evaluation of teaching and is not intended for other internal or legal applications such as probation or disciplinary action.

Part One
Observee to complete in brief and send to observer prior to the observation or review:

What is the context of this session/artefact within the curriculum?

• A two hour, tutor-led explorative practice/visual research (drawing) workshop as part of the new GMD1 Unit Design Exploration in Context: Reveal design brief as below:

• Reveal. ‘This brief has been written with several interrelated aims; to explore the relationships and potentials of combining analogue and/or digital design processes and methods to produce a less predictable outcome, experimental in form, but wholly communicative in function. The self-determined outcome is to be informed by early research, testing and project development, and agreed at a mid-stage formative confirmation small group tutorial where the media and processes, and communication aim is agreed by your tutors. A secondary aim of this brief is to act as a practical and conceptual journey of discovery into processes and technologies that sit within the broad sphere of contemporary graphic and media design practice.’  

How long have you been working with this group and in what capacity?

• I work with the group as studio tutor and as part of the wider GMD1 staff team on rotation throughout 2024/25.

What are the intended or expected learning outcomes?

• Discovery stage, visual exploration of surfaces in the built environment (offsite around LCC).

• Exploratory practice via visual research, combinatory play, mixed media exploration, testing of combined materials and processes, drawing and mark making skills, combined analogue and digital media.

• Physical outcomes to inform and inspire wider contextual exploration and analysis of surfaces e.g. historical, cultural, materials, manufacture, form and function, location, historical and contemporary mapping systems etc.

• The workshop activity contributes to the overall students’ design development and learning journey in response to the design brief and Unit brief, within the framework of the Los and UAL assessment criteria: Enquiry, Knowledge, Process and Realisation.

What are the anticipated outputs (anything students will make/do)?

• Visual research outputs in the form of:
• 1 x A2 folded automatic sketchbook of (8 x A5)  b/w observation drawings mapping surfaces.
• 3 x A3 textural rubbings of found surfaces.  

Are there potential difficulties or specific areas of concern?

• Primarily studio logistics, the students will go offsite to do the visual research activity (outside LCC building) so the the following considerations will be actioned upon:

• Effective management of large group size (40 x students) – explore options to create small sub-groups.

• Ensure students fully understand the activity – digital/presentation slides and physical drawing samples shown in the studio as part of the briefing, include allow time for questions during intro briefing presentation.

• Ensure students are safe while off-site – remind students to stay together, remain aware of busy surroundings e.g. people/cyclists/traffic etc.

• Ensuring students manage their time effectively so the activities are completed within the allocated time – suggest they nominate a time-keeper within their small group.

How will students be informed of the observation/review?

•  NA in this instance as this Observation is online.

•  The session will take place10:00-12:00 on Thu 27 Feb and my PgCert peer will be observing on that day (between 10:00-11:00).

• In advance of the Observation, I have liased with the GMD Year 1 coordinator and also notified my studio/CTS co-tutor.  

• I will introduce the Observer to the students at the start of the session, and reassure them the observation is of teaching practice/me and not them. 

What would you particularly like feedback on?

General feedback and/or recommendations in advance of the workshop activity taking place on Thu 27 Feb would be appreciated.

How will feedback be exchanged?

Via this written form as supplied.

Thank you.

Part Two

Observer to note down observations, suggestions and questions:

Thank you, Kelly, for sharing your teaching materials, lesson plan and for our discussion about your teaching.

In our recorded meeting, in consultation with you, I suggested the following:

1. Verbally re-frame the session from the outset to place emphasis on team work, making clear to the students that working together and supporting one another is an integral part of the lesson. In other words, the lesson is not only technical but involves an element of collaborative practice which will be useful for them in industry in future. Make clear to the students what you mean by ‘team work’ – give specific examples of behaviours and approaches that you as tutor(s) will be observing.

2. Take a transparent approach as tutor: verbally relate to students that you are aware that any of them gravitate towards their ‘comfort’ groups and that they can work in these groups for the practical task outside of the classroom, but will be re-grouped on their return to the classroom so that they come out of their ‘comfort zone’ and learn to work in diverse groups, as they will most likely have to in industry settings.

3. In relation to the above and other aspects of the session, encourage students to co-teach with you; more outspoken students can be encouraged to help quieter students to articulate and communicate their ideas. Alongside this – as discussed – maintain high levels of ‘verbal rewards’, particularly for quieter students.

4. Ask students to either take turns in timing parts of the session where timing is required or – really this is your suggestion based on our discussion: ask all of the students to all time one another to create a ‘chorus’ of different timers; this emphasises the team element of the task and should also provide moments of fun and momentum.

5. Ensure that you – and any co-tutor – are vigilant about observing where students are working co-operatively together, in diverse groups or pairings. Verbal rewards can be given to the group / pair as and when appropriate. Also, if possible given potential noise levels, the whole group can be alerted to the fact that a smaller group / pair are working extremely well together. In other words, when students are working well, draw attention to this and use this a an example for other students to draw from.

Part Three

Observee to reflect on the observer’s comments and describe how they will act on the feedback exchanged:

Thank you, Linda for the opportunity to share my lesson plan, teaching materials and  for our constructive discussion about my teaching. Your helpful feedback and practical suggestions were very much appreciated.

I place high value on the useful and practical application of my PgCert learning/s into my teaching practice, and I acted promptly and pro-actively on your feedback as follows:

My PgCert peer observed me teaching this session between 10am-12pm on Thu 27 Feb. In advance of the session, I revised my lesson plan (by adding in your feedback) and implemented the recommendations into my teaching practice immediately as below:

• I verbally re-framed the session to place emphasis on team work, I made it clear to the students what I meant by ‘team work’ and gave specific examples of positive behaviours and approaches. I noted students responded positively and were seen working well together: helping each other choose materials, sharing and trying new mark-making methods, and supporting each other to install the pop-up exhibition. 

• I took a ‘transparent approach as tutor and verbally encouraged the students to come out of their ‘comfort zone’ and learn to work in diverse groups, as they will most likely have to in industry settings. Students responded positively, and willingly worked in diverse groups during the off-site drawing activity. I noted that they quickly reverted back to their familiar ‘comfort zones’ back in the studio, but I will continue to encourage this way of working going forwards.

• I encouraged students to co-teach with me, suggesting more outspoken students help quieter students to articulate and communicate their ideas, and engage actively in the workshop activities. I maintained high levels of ‘verbal rewards’ during all stages of the workshop; during the slide presentation, off-site drawing activity and pop-up exhibition and tutor peer feedback session back in the studio. This worked particularly well during the tutor peer feedback session/crit. I encouraged the students to support each other while they undertook the ‘chain reaction’ crit method; I invited the students to take control of the crit e.g. a student starts by choosing a favourite drawing, explaining/discussing their choice to/with the group, then inviting the student who had created the drawing to take their turn to choose a favourite drawing to explain/discuss with the group – and so on. This worked well, the studio atmosphere was calm and focussed. Because the ‘chain reaction’ crit creates a random student selection process, this improved inclusivity; a broader range of students participated (spoke) including quieter students, within the supported ‘safe space’.

• I asked students to take it in turns timing during the offsite drawing activity. They responded positively; they all returned back to the studio on time with the drawing tasks completed. Only one student was late back, but this was because they had chosen to work slightly away from their group, had become so immersed in the drawing activity that they had lost track of time, they apologised on their return – having created some very good work.

• I ensured that I (and my co-tutor) were vigilant about observing where students were working co-operatively together, in diverse groupings and pairings. We gave regular verbal rewards when students were working well together during the studio sessions, we also accompanied them offsite for the drawing activity circulating between the groups as they worked, to give verbal rewards. This was successful, there was a happy, busy, convivial atmosphere during the session and the students remained active and engaged.

Overall, I was very pleased with the positive impact of the feedback on my teaching. I explained (prior to the start of the session) to my PgCert peer observer that I had implemented your feedback into the lesson plan, and I appreciated their positive formal feedback to the actions and interventions as part of the observation, and also the generous additional comment as below:  

‘The whole session was so good it was hard to find any areas to refine.’ 

I look forward to continuing to embed and develop these pedagogic methods and approaches into my ongoing practice.

Thank you again.

Community Kitchen

Introduction

In addition to my teaching role at UAL I accrued 10 years experience as educator at the Design Museum, London; devising and delivering innovative teaching and learning activities and programmes for diverse audiences. The museum product handling collections and exhibition programmes provided a wealth of content which informed my pedagogic practice and inspired my passion for Object-Based Learning and I drew on this knowledge and experience when planning this session. I welcome the opportunity to explore connections and reflect on past, present and future teaching experience at UAL and beyond, as part of my PgCert learning journey.   

Planning

For the Microteach session I selected a mix of international food packaging examples (Fig.1) which were representative of a range of graphic design styles and genres in acknowledgement, and by way of relating to the diverse student group; with the aim of raising levels of inclusivity and participation.

The desired learning outcomes were:

• Observation drawing – looking to learn and visualising findings
• Drawing from memory – visualising mental images
• Design awareness – analysis of key graphic design concepts
• Visual literacy – ‘reading’ objects to find meaning
• Exploration of wider concepts – culture, context and ethics
• Self-reflection and evaluation – what, why and how
• Communication and discussion – shared group feedback

The session included 3 tasks: observation drawing, memory drawing and written reflection and evaluation, with planned timings as below:

• Welcome and introduction – 3 mins
• Task 1 Observation drawing – 3 mins
• Task 2 Memory drawing – 3 mins
• Task 3 Reflection and evaluation – 5 mins

The materials used in the session were: food packaging examples, blank A6 white postcards, colour pencils and black fine liner pens.

Activity

To start the session, I welcomed the participants and introduced the collection of food packaging and the observation and memory drawing activity. I adopted empathetic teaching methods to create a positive and inclusive learning environment; aware that not all people are confident at drawing I reassured the group that we would use the process of drawing as a means of gathering and recording visual data, rather than a meritocratic exercise in demonstrating drawing skills.

Participants were invited to choose a piece of packaging which they were attracted to, and to create an observation drawing detailing; shape, form, colour and graphic detailing (Fig.2).

When the allocated drawing time slot had ended (3 mins), I removed the packaging samples from the table and putting them out of sight, then participants created a second memory drawing of the packaging on the reverse of the postcard – this time using visual recall, instead of observation methods (Fig.3).

While participants were completing the memory drawings, I talked through suggested key points for their consideration as part of the reflection and evaluation task, including:

• What did you do?
• Why did you do it?
• How did you do it?
• Explain your choice of packaging – food contents, style, design?
• Describe design detailing – typography, images, colour, materials, form?
• Wider contextual considerations – culture, heritage, values, associations, nostalgia, memories and feelings?

When the allocated drawing time slot had ended (3 mins), participants then annotated their memory drawings in response to the prompts ready for group feedback and in conclusion of the session.    

Feedback

Overall, I was very pleased with the levels of participation, outcomes and positive feedback received from the group.

Participants described the objects as ‘engaging, relatable, appealing, accessible, and interesting’ and raised the points that ‘drawing can instil nervousness and fear because not everyone is good at it’, and that the choice of small drawing format (A6 postcard) was ‘less intimidating as opposed to a huge blank white sheet of paper.’ I include this feedback as evidence of inclusive and empathetic pedagogic practice in the session.  

Participants commented that Task 3 (reflection and evaluation) ‘Worked really well at this point, it really hit home and helped focus the group and understand why we’re doing this and what we’re learning’. This highlighted and evidenced the importance of reflective learning, and I will make a point to build this into my practice going forwards.

Participants highlighted the positive experience of using drawing as an opportunity to explore connections between ‘graphic design principles and branding identity vs. culture, community and shared storytelling’.  

Quotes included

‘Made me consider the way packaging and graphic design is part of our collective meme.’

‘I paid attention to the shapes and colours and this made me think about what makes the branding recognisable.’

‘Comfort, curing hangovers in my 20s with friends, great leveller food (Heinz Baked Beans).’

‘I am Polish and drank this milk ay my grandmother’s house. I can’t remember if red is whole or half fat. I was interested in the letter outline; neither a shadow or a full outline, so it was hard to draw.’

In light of the above, I welcomed tutor feedback as they raised the point that (with OBL) when asking about participants feelings and emotions, these could be positive or negative and that some objects could be triggering. I made a note to embed an awareness of this into my future practice.

Conclusion

Taking part in the Microteach group sessions was an immensely enjoyable and invaluable experience. It created a rich opportunity to engage in and flex the student/teacher dialogue, to learn from each other, try out new skills and approaches and explore the wider meaning of best teaching and learning practice – in a highly creative and supportive environment.  

Reference

Hardie, K. (2015) Engaging the senses: object-based learning in higher education