Inclusive Practices Tasks for Workshop 1
Intersectionality
The Privilege Walk
Dr Maebh Harding
I would be interested to know how this was devised – it feels as though there could be so many questions, and some feel worth larger steps than others – however, I appreciate that this idea is to broadly exposes inequality rather than reflect the true complexity of intersectional discrimination and disadvantage/advantage.
I also think this is interesting in relation to the way in which we expect all students to meet a particular criteria of learning in how they are assessed – this surely is an argument for assessment which is more holistic and encompasses a consideration of the positionality of the individual?
The urgency of intersectionality, Kimberlé Crenshaw, TEDWomen 2016, October 2016, https://www.ted.com/talks/kimberle_crenshaw_the_urgency_of_intersectionality?language=en
Persona Pedagogy
Thomas, C. (2022) Overcoming Identity Threat: Using Persona Pedagogy in Intersectionality and Inclusion Training. Social Sciences 11 (249)
What are the benefits of PP for learning about and developing inclusive practices?
Persona pedagogy allows participants in inclusivity and diversity training to question unconscious bias’s without identity threat, or feeling the need to expose themselves and be put into a vulnerable position. It removes the individual themselves from a process which requires one to empathise with real people.
What are its limitations or downsides?
It is limited in that it can never reflect the true individuality of a real person – particularly in relation to intersectional discrimination, and its real impact on people. It also takes time, and familiarity with the persona’s. I anticipate it could be a little impersonal, in that it removes the ‘realness’ of talking to a person with lived experience.
Other Thoughts
This could be used to teach my students about cultural appropriation in costume and theatre, and possible racist, sexist, xenophobic use of specific garments/fabrics/colours/references within a performance context. It would help them to see their own positionality (and my mine), and critically reflect, and transformatively reflect on the impact of their work in order to create art which is politically engaged and aware.
Positionality
Bayeck, R.Y. (2022) Positionality: The Interplay of Space, Context and Identity. Journal of Qualitative Methods. 21, p.1-9
meganleanne44. (2015) Positionality statements. [Video]. YouTube. November 6. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GpcIVzGYhV
Positionality Statement
As a costume technician teaching CSM performance students how to take a person’s measurements.
My religious and cultural background as a liberal atheist means that I feel comfortable around exposed bodies, discussing anatomy, and being physically touched or touching others.
I am able bodied and neurotypical, which means I find the physical of act of taking measurements relatively easy. I do not have lived experience or understanding from the perspective of a person living with a disability, or a neurodivergence.
I have a degree in Costume for Performance, and 10 years of experience working in London’s costume industry. I am an insider, and have cultural familiarity with the practices of this particular theatre industry. However, I have very little experience or knowledge of theatrical costuming processes in other cultures, and how the process of taking measurements might otherwise be approached.
English is my native language, so I find the terminology used accessible.
In my role as technician, I have authority within the teaching space. The dynamic between myself and students is inherently unbalanced.
Language Centre Training Reflection
Clear and Accessible English (Wednesday 10th April 2024)
I found this very interesting – partly I was surprised at my own ignorance about language structure and grammar. Some very obviously difficult words and phrases I use regularly were flagged.
I will use this advice, and some of the tools suggested, in future – not only in written communication, but in spoken communication with students and staff.
It made me reflect on my own difficulties with academic reading, and the vagueness of the texts – if I struggle, as someone for whom English is the only language I have ever spoken, I cannot imagine how difficult it may be for others, who have learned it as adults.
Pronouncing Names (Friday 12th April 2024)
In such a student facing role, and working with so many students, I was keen to gain some tools to help me remember individual names, particularly those I am less familiar with as a western European person who was educated in the UK, and does not speak any additional languages. It was really interesting to discuss the cultural significance of names – how is East Asian and West African cultures, names often hold a lot more meaning than in western Europe. This amplifies the importance of learning the name of the individual, to whom it is an even more significant part of their identity
I thought that the use of the term ‘English as an Additional Language’ was really interesting, and makes so much sense – the default, unconsidered term being ‘English as a second Lamguage’ which makes so many assumptions, and perpetuates the problematic notion that English is somehow superior to the multitude of languages a student may be able to speak.
Workshop 1 Reflection/Notes – Wednesday 17th April (morning)
The day began with an icebreaker between myself, Tommy, Stephen, and Rob.
We had to discuss the following question:
What is one educational practice you believe perpetuated inequality and why?
We discussed:
- Sign-up culture, drop-in culture (it depends on the confidence of the individual to actively come forwards, for which there are many barriers, which are perpetuated in this)
- Fees, the cost of living in London, cost of materials (stops many people applying in the first place, perpetuating socio-economic divides)
- Admissions processes and ongoing support thereafter (fundamentally flawed in that there is no carry through, so even if students who come up against barriers apply, and attend, the likelihood of them dropping out is high, because of the lack of support once they enter the institution)
- Learning differences and submission criteria (there is still a lack of inclusivity, and rigid criteria which prevent very able and capable students from accessing learning and being awarded).
In introducing themselves, Miriam and Amberlee cited bel hooks (1994, p21). Sharing your identity as an individual and an educator allows the power dynamic to be redressed. I thought this might be something to bring into my own workshop delivery, and wondered what this should include.
We discussed critical pedagogy, and the way in which it recognises the humanity of the learner in its consideration and awareness of wider contexts, and how they affect/effect learning. We talked about the way sin which this can affect the sense of self of the individual profoundly, and their self-esteem.
Frier (1970) was cited and discussed. These concepts rang very true to me, in that they address the underlying issues I am troubled by as an educator. The idea of active participation through critical pedagogy enabling the effecting change is exciting, compared to the discomfort I feel thinking about the ‘banking’ like status quo of traditional education.
We discussed the student as a consumer,and how this created friction in relation to Frier’s ideas. We also discussed the ways in which the cultural capital of marginalised groups is de-valued in education, and the invisible rules around what is acceptable or unacceptable to reference. Kathryn Mekindiele (?) was mentioned in relation to research around citational justice.
We discussed the myth of meritocracy, and its intersectional layers.
We briefly discussed the ways in which the brining in of different acts has effected higher education (equality act, race relations, etc…) and how these have sought to ‘eliminate discrimination’, or ‘advance equality of opportunity’, or ‘disrupt inequality’. We talked about the ways in which this is phrased is important, and frames the action – who is doing or not doing what is important.
n.b. Kimberlee Crenshaw has a podcast!
We then discussed our thought on the high impact Privilege Walk (1988), and the ways in which is a very blunt tool, which is deeply inappropriate for a classroom environment. Someone even pointed out that the instructions themselves ask participants who are not able bodied to read out the questions, rather than participate themselves, which is incredible othering and exclusionary in itself. Beyond this, it lack nuance, exposed vulnerability, incited guilt, and could trigger trauma. However, we agreed that when read as a solo activity it can be useful in highlighting some very basic privileges to those who hold them.
We discussed positionality, empathy, and sympathy. A piece of writing on the different between empathy and sympathy by Brene Brown was cited at this point, which I would like to look up, alongside bel hooks’ writing about pedagogy. Audrey Lorde was cited in brilliant quote about action “guilt is not what is required, action is what is required”.
In relation to the task of deciding what should have happened instead of the account we were given:
- We discussed the students charter, which I have not read, and apparently is long and boring. I thought this was very interesting, as surely such an important agreement should be accessible and simple to understand?
- We discussed timeframes, and how important immediate interventions on the ground are, and doing what you are able to.
- Paul Rossy was mentioned as a useful reference
- A parallel between police reporting and UAL incident reporting was made – the bureaucracy of it, the ‘officialness’ of it, the lack of emotional, pastoral care built into processes.
- We discussed boundaries in care, and how boundaries are care.
- We discussed the need for direct contact with appropriately trained individuals – rather than this referring upwards.
- We discussed the importance of communication and confidence in this.
- We discussed the importance of recognising and validating the disclosure of something to you, even if you are not the appropriate person to tell.
Workshop 2 Reflection/Notes – Wednesday 17th April (afternoon)
‘Awarding gaps’ as oppose to ‘attainment gaps’ – the importance of language and the way in which it implies who is or isn’t doing what. In ‘attainment gaps’ the implication is that the responsibility lies with the student, whereas the use of ‘awarding gaps’ recognises that the university’s action/inaction is the subject that needs to be critiqued. By avoiding deficit thinking, we also change language from things like ‘outreach’ to ‘learning and participation’.
We looked at a video interview with Ade Adepitan about the intersectionality of disabled and black identity. Ade highlights the way in which physical abilities are celebrated in the Paralympics, and the power of this removal of barriers.
We looked at the concept of discrimination by design, and the ways in which society is built with inherent barriers for specific groups of people, which means we cannot all participate equally, which means we all lose.
We discussed visibility and invisibility, and the privilege in autonomy to choose. The idea of hyper-visibility, and the ways in which inclusive practices can help to avoid systematic discrimination and implicit bias’, and consequently avoid the burden falling on the individual.
We discussed the value of having lived experience in the room when designing and decision making.
‘Room of Silence’ was cited as a useful reference, as well as bel hook’s writing about inclusivity.
Psychological safety was discussed at length, and how it’s lack of economic motivation in education (and policing) makes it less of a priority than in, for example, aviation, where hierarchies are broken down in order to allow any concerns or issues to be raised by anyone, despite position. The high stakes require phycological safety, and this is built into the culture and processes.