My observation of Giulia:
Record of Observation or Review of Teaching Practice
Session/artefact to be observed/reviewed: Monday January 29th 2.pm DCP Foundation group, Briefing students on a project
CCWSize of student group: 18
Observer: Beatrice Vorster
Observee: Giulia Ricci
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?
End of part 2 of the course, students are working on a brief (Art &) over which they have more ownership and independence; this is the final part of the project, which leads to displaying the work in a show, it is their first more serious opportunity to think about their work in a space, within a group situation, in relation to an environment
How long have you been working with this group and in what capacity?
Since start of part 2, Nov 2023, as AL one day a week and then from January 2024 as interim option leader cover, also one day a week
What are the intended or expected learning outcomes?
Students will have reflected on their work and their possibilities in terms of being adapted, changed or developed for an exhibition context, in relation to a physical space for it to be displayed, and for that choice of space to be meaningful and enhancing the work itself. Making informed decisions, students will have been shown examples of works installed in different ways and what that does to the work
What are the anticipated outputs (anything students will make/do)?
Critical discussion, sharing/thinking about strategies to achieve the outcomes, brainstorming, possible (desirable but might not suit the context) some testing on site and/or sketching, annotations and reflections for workflow
Are there potential difficulties or specific areas of concern?
Students’ progress of individual work might not yet be developed enough to start engaging with the requirements of the briefing. So I need to be mindful of this and remind students of the time scale of the project and support individually in a way that is diversified
How will students be informed of the observation/review?
Students will have ben informed in the morning and then again at register time, observer will be introduced.
What would you particularly like feedback on?
On my areas of weakness:
• Engaging students in instructions is a challenge I face, I have to push myself and I am not always sure if I am doing it in the correct pitch. I think is partly to do with having dyspraxia, therefore I get anxious about delivering instructions on a sequence of actions.
• Also, equally challenging, shifting from talking to group to individual and back again in a way that’s appropriate in a group situation
How will feedback be exchanged?
Whichever way Beatrice prefers. Happy to do verbally and I can take notes.
Part Two
Observer to note down observations, suggestions and questions:
Introduction friendly and clear, students seem at ease. Students addressed by name and largely on time. A summary followed by more in-depth which is useful, relating back to previous project.
Sense of humour!
Encouraging students to think about sustainability, expense, and how to expand their work to challenge themselves. Encouraged to help each other
GOOD: relating back to things which are familiar while developing/encouraging them to let go and try something new. You make clear your expectations of them. Tasks briefed are practical and connected to the project. Different levels of tasks are suggested but all students treated like professionals.
Students do volunteer to take up challenges. Some more engaged than others but this is normal. Students could be encouraged to take notes.
Interesting range of artists which relate in various ways to the brief. Could be interesting to weave these into the brief to keep engagement.
Part Three
Observee to reflect on the observer’s comments and describe how they will act on the feedback exchanged:
As I told Beatrice during our oral post-observation debriefing, the fact that we are a small group in DCP is certainly connected to the nice atmosphere we have been able to establish in the classroom, in terms of engagement, attention levels and mutual respect, since we are able to give dedicated attention to everyone. From experience, when I am faced with a much larger group (35-40) I find addressing each individual student by name more challenging, and as a consequence I fear that my effectiveness in delivering the teaching decreases. This is to do with the stress of making mistakes in naming people and with the effort of working/concentrating with background disruptions, such as people arriving late/mid briefing, students on the phone, having to interrupt and repeat something if I fear someone isn’t following.
Very good point about the taking of notes being encouraged by the tutor; I am so used to consider the students’ needs in terms of diversifying how they can access the course briefs and information, that I take it for granted they should take notes if they are able to. Will give this more consideration from now onwards.
Could be interesting to weave these into the brief to keep engagement.
This is such a good suggestion. Although the brief was clear, I would have maximised the use of examples/references had I woven these into the delivery of the brief rather than
treating it as a second part of the presentation. I will definitely keep this in mind for future reference. In fact, Beatrice pointed out that I could have been more effective if I had spent more time on each artist/example and shown fewer. I totally agree. Unlike the brief’s powerpoint, which I created from a written brief that’s already part of the course, I used a previously created set of images as examples. Next time I will be more critical about using this material, which I had delivered last year in a slightly different context, and adapt it more appropriately.
Thank you, Beatrice, I found our observation experience very helpful.
Giulia’s observation of me:
Record of Observation or Review of Teaching Practice
Session/artefact to be observed/reviewed: Practice Workshop
Size of student group: TBC
Observer: Giulia Ricci
Observee: Beatrice Vorster
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?
– The session is built on my micro-teaching activity. It is an optional practice workshop for students who are interested in working with found images and archival practices for the Final Major Project.
How long have you been working with this group and in what capacity?
– These students are in Foundation, specializing in Fine Art: Photography and Time-Based Media. I have worked with them since September 2023 and more closely since they have specialized in November of that year. I am working with the same group on a weekly basis and am some of their personal tutor.
What are the intended or expected learning outcomes?
– I hope that through discussing the practice of working with found images, students will spend more time with a single image and start to consider it’s status as an artefact of our time.
– Practically, I hope they will all have a better understanding of ways in which they can incorporate this into their own work however, I hope also to introduce ideas of media literacy.
What are the anticipated outputs (anything students will make/do)?
– Students will participate in an activity which asks them to describe images. I will then introduce a conversation around image texture and different artists who work in a similar way.
– Students will be able to make high quality scans of their desired image and play with distorting images..
Are there potential difficulties or specific areas of concern?
– Students may be less engaged with a workshop as they are eager to develop their own project.
– Different technical understanding of qualities of digital or analog images.
How will students be informed of the observation/review?
– Students have been informed via email in advance and will be reminded on the day during morning registration.
What would you particularly like feedback on?
– My clarity of communication and ability to maintain engagement. How to discuss a topic such as media literacy in a non-didactic way.
How will feedback be exchanged?
– Preferably in writing or in-person conversation, whichever is suitable to observer.
Part Two
Observer to note down observations, suggestions and questions:
Settling in and introduction were excellent: students were told to prepare pen and paper to take notes, tables and equipment were set up efficiently. Introduction was very clear and comprehensive, so students had an overview of the workshop and its learning goals, and expectations were established clearly. Late students were seamlessly brought up to speed without disrupting the flow.
Communication was excellent at all stages:
• Beatrice explained was to do in a clear manner
• Activities were times appropriately
• Students were prompt with clear instructions
• Activities were explained step-by-step
Resources were well organised and set up effectively. Sharing her own archive of images was really generous and the broad range of analogue and digital resources certainly kept the engagement levels up throughout the session. Students were taking notes throughout the lesson and following instructions, showing engagement in many ways:
• By choosing images
• Making annotations
• Paying attention at the projected images
• Responding to questions
Media literacy: Beatrice gave an excellent technical and contextual background to the whole activity, tailoring it to different levels of interest and expertise. In particular, digital and analogue images were clearly contextualised with the use of a broad range of materials:
• Magazine cutouts
• Vintage images
• Antique prints
• Projected images
• Zoomed in details with projector
• Google search of artworks and resources to enrich the context/references
• Actual books to browse
• Digitising equipment for the creation of resources to be used by the students for their own artworks
Perhaps the activity might have had scope for more group conversation in the process of looking at the images together? It was thoroughly enjoyable nonetheless and the students engagement didn’t seem to be affected.
Part Three
Observee to reflect on the observer’s comments and describe how they will act on the feedback exchanged:
This was a really useful exercise that bought the speculative workshop developed for my micro-teaching and put it into action. One of the main feedback comments from the session with my colleagues was that it would be useful to offer different levels of technical language when looking at these images. I therefore made sure that as I was offering prompts, I gave a variety of keywords ranging from the descriptive to the more complex terminology I felt this was appropriate as the students who attended were in the photography specialism and therefore some of them were comfortable with either learning new terms or were already familiar.
Giulia’s comments were really helpful – to see both what I did do but not realise and also ways in which I could develop this workshop.
For example, I had not considered the wide range of media types that I was bringing in – from books, to pages from magazines, to use of projector etc – and this seemed, as Giulia observed, a good way to keep things moving and widen the scope of looking practices.
I agree that it would be productive to work in a way where students are encouraged to discuss things with each other, perhaps in pairs. Although there was some casual conversation, it could have been structured into the workshop.
This slideshow was used to add context to our conversation on thinking about images as objects – either in their physicality, or ways in which artists use texture in the way that they work with images.
Post observation comments following a conversation with Lindsay in Montanna’s absence:
Observer to note down observations, suggestions and questions:
I would have loved to observe this session live; it sounds like such an enriching experience for the students.
When we reviewed the session together you told me that fifteen students signed up, and another two dropped in unannounced. That’s great — it’s usually the other way around with optional workshops, i.e. you get fewer than you were expecting. Did the extra two join because they saw what was going on and thought it looked interesting?
Isn’t it intriguing how the attention is held differently by images on screen and on hard copy? It would be far too simplistic to claim that screens are addictive and hard images are simply ‘absorbing’. There is also a romanticism to the ‘found image’ in the sense that it is a dead end; it prompts questions that are unanswerable, at least until one puts it through a reverse google image search (is that part of the workshop?!).
The sustained attention to an image supports the development of observational skills and contemplative practice. Your workshop content includes a blend of activities with some didactic teaching (on images as objects), and this seems to have worked well.
You observed that your students struggle to work with new people and tend to stick in their cliques. We talked about ways to orchestrate their networking. Game-style activities work brilliantly for this; even something really simple like picking numbers or colours out of a ‘hat’ and finding their new pair/group. Getting them to work together on something in (lighthearted) competition with other pairs/groups can really help with bonding (like getting paired with a sibling’s new partner in a family game or Articulate or Pictionary).
I’d love to know your thoughts about orchestrating the students into different pairings and how their projects were influenced by this workshop on photographs as found objects.
Part Three
Observee to reflect on the observer’s comments and describe how they will act on the feedback exchanged:
Discussing this with Lindsay and reading her comments has prompted me to think about ways that this session can similarly facilitate togetherness and conversation between students who do not usually interact with each other.
Within the timeframe of this workshop, students could be encouraged to describe the image to each other or explain why they like it. I could also ask students to find someone else in the workshop whose image is most similar to theirs and then discuss this.
In a longer session – pairing off and using the images together could be developed into a narrative exercise, inviting them to consider how placing their two images side by side ‘unlocks’ them or proposes a narrative. In that way, there would be an additional learning opportunity to think about the way in which photographers often exhibit in series.