Reading ‘Art-based action research in the development work of arts and art education’
A research method through which participants “tacit knowledge and experiences can be obtained from them…not conveyed through traditional qualitative research methods based on verbal or written language” to produce practical change as well as knowledge (pg. 9). This strategy feels particularly relevant to me as an art educator in a technical role, as well as an industry practitioner.
“Researchers aim to develop operational methods that allow stakeholders and local communities, or the society in general, to become increasingly more sustainable” (pg. 9)
The way in which sustainability, as a wider concept (as oppose to exclusively in relation to the climate) also has relevance to the subjects I am looking to research – sustainable working practices, which result in better mental health (and consequently social justice), and work towards climate justice.
“Artists and art teachers are often multidisciplinary in terms of their identities and roles. Their professional skills often involve an artist’s skills, a teacher’s pedagogic skills, and the skills to develop methods by means of research. They could be described as artist-researchers or artist-researcher-teachers. However, in this article, we refer to them simply as researchers” (pg. 12)
This approach appeals, as it requires the researcher to be an active participant within the community of contributors – part of the reason I am looking into this is because I see my own struggles reflected in the students.
The cyclical nature of action research would allow me to test out different approaches with the students, and develop a design as I go, not only of practical aids to assist them in managing their time and self-regulation, but in ways that this can be communicated to myself, and my colleagues effectively.
The emotions related to time management, sustainability and procrastination- stress, frustration etc, might be more easily communicated via art that words or writing, particularly for a very neurodiverse student population, many of who are communicating with me in an additional language.
“Artistic research, which is practice as research or practice-led research, and action research have many common principles and common factors, such as the aim to change and develop practice”. (pg. 12)
Jokela and Huhmarniemi suggest multiple data collection mediums should be used within art-based research. I would be interested in using some of the following:
Observation diary (notebook with drawings, photos, and and notes)
Physical artwork or sketches produced by participants/collaborators (materials based?)
Interview transcripts
I could utilise the tools I research with my own production of work, and also use myself as a research subject – for an external costume project. However, the additional workload for both myself and the participants would need to be considered in creating a viable and achievable plan within the timeframe I have, and the motivations of participants. This idea works with an assumption that the interventions I design would have the same/a similar impact on a student as myself, which cannot be true. I am an established costume practitioner and educator, who is familiar with and experienced in costume realisation processes, spaces, and timeframes. I am a white, cis-gendered employee of UAL, who grew up in the UK – I do not face the same barriers that student participants might face, which may directly affecting their engagement with costume, and the interventions I design.
I will consider further whether or not to take this forwards, as my ideas for my project develop.
References
Jokela, Timo & Huhmarniemi, Maria. (2019). Art-based action research in the development work of arts and art education.
I am interested in using interviews within my research. Using questions to guide a student through a process is familiar to me, and aligns with my approach as an educator, so I am interested in learning more about interviews as a research method, and how this differs from the form of dialogue that happens within a technical tutorial or studio chat.
Reading ‘Views on Interviews: A Skeptical Review’ – Alvesson, 2011
Alvesson looks at three major positions in relation to interviewing, and mixed positions: neo positivism, romanticism, and localism, and combinations and reinterpretations of these.
Neo-positivism is a clinical, scientific approach in which the interviewer is trying to remove any variables that could influence the outcome. This feels quite scientific to me. Alvesson makes it clear that they think this is quite a reductive way of conducting interviews, which can never truly be standardised or objective or neutral. For me, this does not seem to make sense as an approach, the subjects I am interested in researching being related to personal experience and emotion.
Interactive Rationalism is a reinterpretation of neo- positivism, which “Recognised social complexity and embraces ‘soft’ and ‘flexible’ technical measures in dealing with the problem of how to maximise reliable responses” (pg 5), but like neo-positivism seeks and believes ‘accurate’ conduct and interpretation of an interview as a plausible and ideal.
Romanticism uses rapport, familiarity and trust between interviewer and interviewee to gain authentic expression and “trustworthy talk” (pg5) from the interviewee, which is seen as more valuable and rich. It embraces storytelling, emotion, and empathy. Within this sub-heading, Alvesson also talks about ‘active interviewing’, in which the interviewer aims to construct knowledge collaboratively with the interviewee, also becoming a ‘participant’. Versions of this approach work within ideologies in feminism – “like the minimisation of power differences, empathy, care, sensitivity and other good things” (pg 6), with consent and without invading privacy or crossing boundaries. The concept of an active and flexible interviewer appeals to me. It seems to sit well with wider research concepts I believe lean towards a social justice approach – for example, the use of a positionality statement, and acknowledgement of the complexity of intersectionality. As perviously stated, the emotional, human element of the topics I would like to explore sit well with this approach.
However, I think that for me, it will depend on the data I am trying to collect. In any instance, I think balancing some systematic approaches and frameworks is useful, but allowing for flexibility, complexity and difference is valuable too. People are not simple, and neither are our interactions, and it would be arrogant to think that systems and control can ever replace to recognise and consider that to some degree. I should perhaps consider using multiple forms of data collection – both qualitative and qualitative, to compliment one another.
Localism “…emphasises that interview statements must be seen in their local, situation-specific context” (pg. 9). They are social encounters, designed and created to produce “situated…morally adequate accounts” (pg. 9). Alvesson critiques localism as trading “relevance for rigour” (pg. 10). However, again, my research is very specific to the context that I am working in, so I wonder if in this instance, this approach is useful. Interviewing colleagues within my department, who do the job of supporting performance students in costume, and students who I know spend time in costume of have expressed some interest in design would produce richer conversations. However, this may then produce biased results.
Mixed positions are seen as, potentially, a solution to holding combinations of these opposing approaches. The interview results can be seen as “valid knowledge-production” (pg. 11), while also taking into account the wider social context.
However, looking at some examples of situation-specific interviews, Alvesson critiques the use of a less structured, romantic approach, which allows too much room for the interviewer to unknowingly steer the interviewee, and therefore undermine the idea that it the interviewee is creating and defining meaning.
Beyond this, the motives of the interviewee are considered. It is impossible to know whether an interviewee is being open, truthful, and authentic, or if they feel motivated by other factors to perform an idea of what they think they should say, or because there is something they wish to emphasise or speak to, a political motivation. The issue of communication is also considered – the mode of conversation/dialogue/speech is not necessarily the best way for someone to communicate their thoughts, ideas, feelings, or knowledge. Conversely, the opposite may be true.
Class is brought into this, and consequently an area of great personal interest to me in relation to pedagogy. Those who have access to higher education, and are practiced in expressing themselves through words, are going to ‘perform better’ than those whose knowledge is expressed through practice. Interviews, essentially, favour a particular type of person, and in this, traditional forms of interview could be seen as socially unjust, and elitist.
Navigating the complexity of this can be tiring – it is suggested that two researchers interviewing one person (one in dialogue the other a more distanced observer) could be a way of lessening the impact of this. However this imbalance of 2:1 could create additional anxiety for the interviewee. Perhaps instead of interviewing students, I could carry out a focus group, to remove some of the intensity of this. Or, explore the use of non-verbal communication (visual aids/imagery perhaps).
Alvesson concludes by stating their position as one of balance, nuance and moderation, in which “careful interpretation in which ambiguity and the impossibility of finding an ultimate truth or a best interpretation are acknowledged” (pg. 24). Alvesson suggests that “a set of reference points for thinking through the interview situation and its use in interpretation” is needed.
References
Alvesson, M. 2011. Views on Interviews: A Skeptical Review. In: Interpreting Interviews. London: SAGE Publications Ltd. pp. 9-42 Available at: <https://doi.org/10.4135/9781446268353> [Accessed 6 Oct 2024].
Within my role as a specialist costume technician, I encounter the same issue again and again.
Students often leave the realisation of their costumes until the last moment, even if it is a key part of their performance design and outcome, coming to myself and my colleagues in a panic a day or two before a show deadline.
This leads to underdeveloped/unfinished work, distress of the students, the students missing out on practical creative processes in which quality critical thinking could be taking place. This not only compromises the quality of the outcome, but often also leads to the last minute purchase of garments from amazon, or the wasting of materials that are bought in large quantities but not tested ahead of time, and therefore go to waste.
I speculate that that this could stem from a variety of issues, including:
Feeling intimidated by the space, or the staff, an therefore not seeking help until they are desperate for it
Poor time management/perception skills, or a lack of experience in creative realisation processes
High expectations of what can be achieved in a short space of time/ lack of awareness around this
This issue within the learning environment mirrors and feeds into the existing issues within the wider industry of costume, in which hierarchies that do not prioritise costume dictate the last minute changing/purchasing of low- cost fast delivery items and garments. Not only is this a climate justice issue, it is also a feminist issue.
Costume practice is often undervalued, seen as insignificant, and possible to do with little or no skill. Much of this stems from the historical association and undervaluing of the way in which garments are made, and the modern disassociation of this with real peoples time, skills, and hands, and the modern availability of clothing. I buy and wear clothes, so how hard can it be?
As educators, we should be setting the example, and changing the status quo – our students as practitioners of the future.
Possible ways to move towards more sustainable creative costume processes, and higher quality learning experiences:
Showing, sharing examples of, or guiding students through a sustainable project plans, making deadlines clear, and timeline information accessible.
Providing students with lived experiences of creative realisation processes in costume
Improving students confidence in using the costume studio open access space, their confidence to ask questions when they aren’t sure, and confidence in their own ability, confidence in allowing a creative development process to happen (not expecting to know the answer immediately, or without testing ideas etc).
Showing/sharing/giving experiences of tools to help become unstuck.
As both a Specialist Costume Technician, and a Costume Designer and Maker, the studio space is central to my practice (Orr and Shreeve, 2017). The safe management and maintenance of this space is a key part of my role at UAL, including carrying out risk assessments.
Last term, I was discussing a recently finished project with a student, who is black, and neurodiverse. He explained that he finds the studio space too overwhelming to work in, and generally prefers to work from home, despite a keen interest in developing his costume skills. This interaction felt disappointing, in that we (myself, my colleagues and the institution) had presented this individual with barriers that had completely prevented him from accessing the space, equipment, and support. Recognising my positionality as a white, neurotypical woman, I had not previously considered what inhabiting a space like this would feel like for a student with this compounding intersectional identity (Crenshaw,1991), and I wanted to address this through my intervention design.
Through the lens of critical race theory (CRT) and the social model of disability (SMD) I understand that my experience of higher education is and always has been one of access privilege (Garrett, 2024). To discontinue perpetuating intersectional, epistemically unjust, colonial systems which benefit (white, cis-gendered, culturally Christian, able-bodied, neurotypical) people like me at the disadvantage of others, I must actively engage with these theories and enact critical pedagogies (Rekis, 2023).
Intervention Aim
I wanted to re-imagine risk assessment from a social justice perspective (Freire, 1970), designing a tool to aid the identification of intersectional barriers within physical pedagogic spaces (such as our costume studio), and work towards the development of more inclusive learning environments. As the project progressed, informed by feedback, further research, and reflection, this aim shifted towards the development of a critical access approach (Freund, 2001), in designing an Inclusive Assessment Activity for collective critically reflective practice (Thompson and Thompson, 2008).
Key Decisions, Challenges, and Learning
Designing a Visually Accessible, Embodied Process
In discussions with dyslexic colleagues, they expressed finding the written, visually uninspiring, spreadsheet presentation of a risk assessment difficult to use (Appendix A). Considering 40% of the 15.3% staff who have a declared a disability at UAL are neurodiverse (Appendix B, Figure 1), this inaccessible design presents barriers for many of those who work with this type of document. More than this, the static process of filling out a typed form doesn’t reflect the physical reality it relates to. To align more closely with ways of knowing within technical practice (Cleary, 2024), movement and process based creative pedagogies (Barbieri, 2007), and understandings of space through the embodied experience of inhabiting (Rieger, Kessler, and Strickfaden, 2022), I decided to reimagine risk assessment as an activity, to be carried out within the space it relates to.
Figure 1: UAL Equality Diversity and Inclusion (2024) Staff by Type of Disability
I initially designed a simple, step-by-step guide to facilitate this process (Appendix C), inspired by familiar pedagogic tools and colour-based safety systems including traffic lights (Appendix D, Figure 2), UAL’s Safe Systems of Work (Figure 3), and risk assessments themselves (Appendix A). This included walking and talking through a practical process within the space, using post it notes and stickers to note and label any access issues (Figure 2, Figure 4). The accumulation of colours across the post it notes would highlight areas that need attention without being as numerically prescriptive as the original design of a risk assessment (Appendix A).
Figure 2: Image of printed Inclusivity Assessment Traffic Lights, coloured stickers, and post -it notes
Figure 3: Image of UAL Safe Systems of Work signage in the costume studio
Figure 4: Post-it note on drawers in costume studio
In feedback, my colleagues and peers encouraged me to take the experiential element of my initial design further and ask participants to physically make something. This would draw on the strength of the ‘critical thinking disposition’ of technical staff– the critical thinking and embodied knowledge that occurs throughout the sensorial experience of working with physical materials to make something (Cleary, 2024). Going forwards, perhaps this could incorporate (for my specific context) safety pinning the post-it notes to a machine induction sampler (Figure 5).
Figure 5: Costume machine induction sampler with post-it notes safety pinned to it
Expanding the Meaning of ‘Hazard’ and ‘Risk’
To understand what ‘risk’ and ‘hazard’ means within the institution, I looked at UAL’s Safety, Health and Wellbeing Policy, which includes promoting a culture that is “kind, compassionate and inclusive” (UAL Health and Safety, 2023). However, of the key risks listed the only category explicitly relating to wellbeing, is stress. In taking a human-centred approach towards a “critically reflective reinterpretation of risk” (Morely et al., 2001). I wanted to encompass an evaluation of access to space, equipment, information and support, as well as opportunities for voice, autonomy, psychological safety, and representation.
In recognising that this deviates from the familiar elements of risk assessment, I wrote an accompanying sheet of prompts (Appendix E). I also re-named the process to better reflect its aims of inclusivity, action, and social justice. In doing these things, the focus was flipped from highlighting barriers (and thus problematising those who are discriminated against) to improving access (and thus questioning the actions of those with power), aligning more closely with the philosophies of SMD and CRT.
Initially, I thought of this reimagining as a separate tool, to be used in addition to the original risk assessment model. However, in the feedback process, Michael suggested that this embodied method could be used to address all forms of risk and hazard. This expanded, conceptualisation speaks to the ideas within holistic interpretations of safety (Morely et al., 2001), which better align with critical pedagogy (Freire, 1970).
I found it almost impossible to boil this down to a prompt sheet, let alone one which is accessible and user friendly, the possible intersectional impacts on individuals being so complex and varied (Crenshaw, 1991). Going forwards, I would like to spend more time considering how this might best manifested.
Towards Critically Reflective Communities of Practice
I initially designed a tool to be used by a small group, rather than one singular person (questionably defined as ‘competent’ by the Health and Safety Executive). As this would not provide much capacity for a broad range of personal experiences to be fed into the process, and poses the potential for identity threat (Thomas, 2022), I discussed utilising additional tools, such as persona pedagogy (Thomas, 2022), or an identity rubix cube (Figure 6, Figure 7) with my colleagues and peers during feedback. We debated the ethics of presuming to ‘competently’ understand the lived experiences of another person, who’s intersectional identity is unique to them, and the risk of one’s own biases perpetuating existing structures (Garret, 2024).
Figure 6: Image of empty, open ‘Identity Rubix’ designed by Michael Ste-Croix, Technical Manager: Performance Programmes. Rubix is filled will facets of identity, and manipulated to explore different intersectional identities.
Figure 7: Image of empty, closed ‘Identity Rubix’ designed by Michael Ste-Croix, Technical Manager: Performance Programmes.
They suggested expanding the design to become a much larger participation activity, possibly involving the students themselves, and therefore empowering their voices (Morely et al., 2001). Although expanding the design to become a larger type of participation activity initially seemed like a natural and exciting development, this suggestion raised further questions around emotional labour, psychological safety, the need to forefront otherwise marginalised experiences, and the physical practicalities of this intervention. Going forwards, this could be balanced by limiting participation to staff who have put themselves forwards as willing, but expanding it to become a cross departmental activity, therefore still benefiting from the accumulation of a broader diversity of lived experiences.
Alternatively, as Rieger, Kessler, and Strickfaden (2022) describe, access consultants could be employed by the institution. Although this could be very effective in safely fore fronting the experiences of those who are usually deprioritised, these consultants would not have the same embodied knowledge of the activities and processes within the space as technical staff (Cleary, 2024). Furthermore, this would require investment from the institution. As I am not a budget holder, this may not be possible to achieve.
The tension between the value of lived experience and the vulnerability of identity threat emerged as a key challenge in the design of this process. The perspectives of UAL health and safety staff in relation to this would have been insightful, but unfortunately those I reached out to were not forthcoming. This perhaps speaks to the culture and values of such a large institution in its prioritisation of financial efficiency and data (Curry, 2017).
In moving away from the technical-rational approach of the numerical risk assessment matrix (Appendix A), towards an open ended, discursive process which allows for nuances and critical reflection (Rieger, Kessler, and Strickfaden, 2022), perhaps the same approach can be applied to participation. As previously addresses, expansive, holistic perceptions of safety are too vast and complex to define within the confines of a categorised system. It is impossible to completely ‘solve’ the accessibility of spaces within the constraints of time, budget, and institutional practice. Instead, developing regular opportunities for meaningful, collective, critical reflective practice to occur would be a more productive and realistic aim in developing more inclusive spaces (Rieger, Kessler, and Strickfaden, 2022).
Next Steps
Before the new academic year begins, I will carry out an inclusive assessment activity in the studio space with my departmental colleagues. This will not only enable us to critically reflect and enact immediate changes ahead of the arrival of our students, but will provide me with experience to draw on in the further development of this tool.
Within the next unit, I would like to carry out further research into the meaning of wellbeing and safety within the institution, and approaches to collective critical reflexive practice. I would like to continue to focus on technical staff and the physical spaces they are responsible for, as a means of working towards the development more inclusive environments, and communities of practice among technicians. I would like to do this through qualitative data collection, interviews and discussions, and experimentation of processes with willing participants.
My interest in developing communities of practice among technicians stems from my experience during this unit, and the pg cert as a whole. Having time and space to share, observe, and discuss challenges, similarities and differences of positionality and pedagogic practice have given me a much broader perspective on my values and identity as an educator, and ways this might develop in the future.
(w/c 1645)
References
Barbieri, D. (2007) ‘Proposing an Interdisciplinary, Movement Based Approach to Teaching and Learning as Applied to Design for Performance related Areas’, Working Paper. Prague Quadrennial 2007, London.
Cleary, V. (2024) ‘Thinking through making: What kinds of learning take place when HE students engage with creative arts technicians?’, Art Design & Communication in Higher Education. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1386/adch_00087_1 (Accessed: 5 July 2024)
Crenshaw, K. (1991) ‘Mapping the Margins: Intersectionality, Identity Politics, and Violence against Women of Color’, Stanford Law Review, 43(6), pp. 1241-1299
Freire, P. (1970) Pedagogy of the Oppressed. New York: Bloomsbury Academic
Freund, P. (2001) ‘Bodies, Disability and Spaces: The social model and disabling spatial organisations’, Disability & Society, 16(5), pp.689-706. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1080/09687590120070079 (Accessed: 2 July 2024)
Garrett, R. (2024) ‘Racism shapes careers: career trajectories and imagined futures of racialised minority PhDs in UK higher education’, Globalisation, Societies and Education, Available at: https://doi.org/10.1080/14767724.2024.2307886 (Accessed: 5 July 2024)
Morley, C., Clarke, J., Leggatt-Cook, C. and Shkalla, D. (2022) ‘Can a Paradigm Shift from Risk Management to Critical Reflection Improve Child-Inclusive Practice?’, Societies, 12(1). Available at: https://doi.org/10.3390/soc12010001 (Accessed: 5 July 2024)
Orr, S. and Shreeve, A. (2017) Art and Design Pedagogy in Higher Education: Knowledge, Values and Ambiguity in the Creative Curriculum. London: Routledge
Rieger, J., Kessler, C. and Strickfaden, M. (2022) ‘Doing Dis/ordered Mappings: Shapes of Inclusive Spaces in Museums’, Space and Culture, 25(1), pp. 4-19. Available at: https://doi-org.arts.idm.oclc.org/10.1177/1206331219850442 (Accessed: 5 July 2024)
Thomas, C. (2022) ‘Overcoming Identity Threat: Using Persona Pedagogy in Intersectionality and Inclusion Training’, Social Sciences, 11(6), pp. 249. Available at: https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci11060249 (Accessed: 5 July 2024)
Thompson, N. and Thompson, S. (2008) The Critically Reflective Practitioner. Great Britain: Bloomsbury
Feedback and Comments from Navinbhai Patel: Specialist Technician, Garment Technology
(Notes taken from an audio recording of an in-person meeting at LCF on 27/06/2024, at approx. 4.00pm)
Navin agreed that the current model of risk assessment is strange in that it doesn’t have subheadings to guide the user.
Navin suggested peer-to-peer spatial risk assessment would work well for those with similar disciplines, where other staff members could leave notes of feedback around the room.
Power struggle and claiming of space is a problem in Navin’s space too. Could this address this too? Could it be part of the prompts? Navin does put some systems in place, such as labelled cupboards (Figure 1).
Navin thought this would be a really interesting activity to carry out in the new LCF building – particularly the ‘heart spaces’ (Figure 2) which are supposed to encourage a fluid way of working, but actually result in a noisy, overcrowded workshop environment as they have no sound separation from the other floors in the center of the building. We discussed the oversight in asking for technicians input in the design of the building’s interior.
Figure 1: Labelled cupboard spaces at LCF
Figure 2: One of the ‘heart space’ teaching studios at LCF
Feedback and Comments fromJames Hopkins: Specialist Technician T&L Foundation, 3D Digital
(Notes taken from an audio recording of an in-person meeting at LCF on 27/06/2024, at approx. 4.00pm)
James agreed that this activity would require the perspectives of other technicians, ideally from other buildings or departments.
James suggested that a natural footpath use test might enlighten further understanding of spaces, or recording use in some way – and that maybe this could be incorporated into the design of the tool too.
James thought that this would be a good thing to do every year, similar to a risk assessment.
The same physical space issue happens in James’ environment too – the confident students, usually home students, take up the most of space. We discussed at length how difficult it is to know if students are being prevented from using the space because of barriers, or if this sometimes comes from a position of wanting to work from home, and how to disentangle these two possibilities.
Reflections and moving forwards
Anonymous Feedback
Navin’s feedback reminded me of a technique that Tommy Ramsay, a fellow pg cert student, uses with foundation students, where they leave anonymous feedback for one another, in the space on post-it notes. This would potentially reduce the risk of identity threat, and the need to expose one’s identity in the process of the assessment.
Collaborationand Community
Reflecting on our discussion, and the one I had with Verity and Michael earlier that day, I wonder if this could become some kind of interdepartmental/cross college activity? An all day knowledge exchange of practice, where we show each other our spaces, do making activities as embodied risk assessment, then feedback to one another with intersectional inclusion in mind? This may be practically difficult to arrange, but then again could slot into the technical conference well.
Time
Within the timeframe of this project, I will not be able to test all of the developed ideas I have taken from this feedback before the submission deadline, which perhaps reflects some of the issues we face within educational institutions – our limited resources, time, and budgets meaning we are reactionary rather than preemptive.
I could however, develop this further through the action research project, and test my designs out with willing colleagues and peers, like Navin and James, in looking towards a design which is easily transferrable to other departments.
Comments and Feedback from Verity Cleary: Specialist Costume Technician, Performance Programme
(Notes taken during an in- person meeting at CSM on 27/06/2024 at approx. 12.00pm)
Verity commended the visual and interactive elements of the process
She noted the way in which this would encourage critical reflection
Verity pointed out that the traffic light system would not be suitable for colour-blind students!
The potential for individual identity and the voice of the technical staff to be heard within this process was of interest, and she wondered if the student voice could be brought in too.
Suggested that this could also be used in relation to very specific curricular projects, as a reflective tool
Verity suggested pushing the embodied process further, and making it a tactile process.
Verity wondered how the will the modifications and changes be actioned more specifically.
In noting that this process is about changing the aims of a risk assessment, she commented that it is a ‘re-definition of the tool’.
Comments and Feedback from Michael Ste-Croix: Technical Manager, Performance Programmes
(Notes taken during an in- person meeting at CSM on 27/06/2024 at approx. 12.00pm)
Michael immediately looked to the transferability of the idea, and the ways it could be used for events and performances as well as for spaces.
Michael initially understood the idea as a broadening of the idea of risk that includes physical hazards, as well as issues of access. I found this interesting in that I have previously thought of it as a separate process, in addition to risk assessment.
Michael wondered if, in relation to his earlier comment, it could be used by the students themselves, as part of their process.
Michael suggested that the process would benefit from being even simpler, and transferable, to make it easier to understand, and useful to more people.
He suggested that his own intervention design could be used in conjunction with mine.
Reflections and Moving Forwards
Critical Pedagogy
This intervention should be as Verity says, a ‘redefining of the tool’. Currently, risk assessments are for the institution, in order to lawfully protect it from accusation, and abide by its duty of care. What if a risk assessment was for the student, and for social justice? This approach is, as Miriam suggested, very much one of critical pedagogic practice (Friere, 1970), and I am interested to see how this re-framing will affect the design and process.
Design
Verity immediately pointed out, in relation to the inclusivity of the design, that some students are colour blind. So, even though both risk assessments, and the traffic light system we use across the college in our workshops for machine safety use this system, it is inadequate. Verity raised this, because she has had experiences in the workshop and studio environment with students who are colour-blind. This is one example of how the experiences of technical staff, and wide communities of pedagogic practice are invaluable in the process of designing tools for the development and improvement of learning spaces. I will also reconsider the design of the process of assessing – could it be more tactile, as verity suggests, and could it be simplified, as Michael suggests.
Transferability of the Template
As Michael suggests, this could be a transferrable template, used in more than just spaces. Like the model of risk assessment is used as it stands, it could be used a bit like an ethics form – a parallel Miriam also drew. This relates to an intervention another technical colleague is deigning (Faust Penyra) relating to his initial meetings with students about the staging of their work. In this instance, Faust, as technical manager, may request that they complete a risk assessment. However, if a risk assessment which was more expansive were to be used I this scenario, it would allow the ethics and possible damage caused by performing something which is, for example, racist or discriminatory, to be looked at, considered, and reduced or managed in some way. It would create space and time for those conversations, and provide a framework for them. This may well be something that already exists in the sphere of the academic, and in conversations between academic staff and students.
Diverse Identities and Identity Threat
Verity was very interested the power of bringing in individual identity, and the ways in which this would provide space for voices to be heard. We discussed at length, that it might be most useful as a cumulative process, and ideally it would platform the technical voice, and/or the student voice. We then discussed the conundrum of wanting the space to be ready for students before they enter it, and how it can be vulnerable, and a barrier to have to reveal your identity, and ask for help (Thomas, 2022). This is a dichotomy which continues to emerge.
Additional Tools
Michaels rubix cube (Figure 1) is of interest in that it could be used in order to generate imagined identities, in a very similar capacity to the first part of Thomas’ persona pedagogy process/activity (2022), alongside my risk assessment, which is essential a scenario based activity. However, it may end up being too simple, and also still has the same potential to perpetuate unhelpful stereotypes, due to the biases of the person embodying the persona, which is not theirs, and not real (Thomas, 2022). However, though it is useful to think critically about the possible barriers a space might present for others, this should not replace the involvement of real, lived experiences being represented.
Figure 1
Action
I also took away from this conversation, a need to focus on the outcomes and actions. How will they be recorded, kept, and presented? How will change be affected? I will also reconsider the design of the process- could it be more tactile, as verity suggests, and could it be simplified, as Michael suggests?
References
Freire, P. (1970) Pedagogy of the Oppressed. New York: Bloomsbury Academic
Thomas, C. (2022) ‘Overcoming Identity Threat: Using Persona Pedagogy in Intersectionality and Inclusion Training’, Social Sciences, 11(6), pp. 249. Available at: https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci11060249 (Accessed: 5 July 2024)
My initial design is an ‘Inclusivity Assessment Activity’, which can be carried out my technical staff within any department at UAL. The activity should be carried out collaboratively, within the physical space it refers to.
The resources I have produced to guide staff through this process include a simple step-by-step guide (Figure 1), a traffic light graphic (Figure 2), and a sheet of supplementary prompts (Figure 3). Some post-it notes, coloured stickers, and pens are also needed in order to complete this activity.
(Notes generated to help me discuss my intervention design with my peers and colleagues)
Idea
To design an accessible tool for technicians to use, to help the unpack the inclusivity/barriers within a physical workshop or studio space, to work towards a more inclusive physical, spatial, sensorial learning environment, and social justice.
The tool should be used to make time and space to collectively critically reflect on potential and existing barriers, and ways of improving accessibility, rather than as a way to ‘solve issues’. It is impossible to measure or create an entirely inclusive physical space.
Context
I have always worked in studios and workshops, and am familiar with the requirement for health and safety risk assessment, which takes place annually and each time the space changes. With the concepts of ‘risk’ and ‘safety’ in mind, I think it would be useful to also be required to regularly assess of the inclusivity of a space.
There are many barriers within the studio space, that have become clear through student feedback, and reading and source analysis within the pg cert. There is currently no space or time created for those who manage the space, and can consequently remove some barriers or create a more inclusive environment, to do this critical thinking. Taking time and space to do this regularly could have a huge impact on student engagement with the space.
Positionality
White
Cis female
Gender conforming presentation
Middle class
Atheist
British
Lived in the UK my whole life, no additional languages
Christian primary and secondary education
University educated
Able-bodied
Neurotypical
Technician for 1.5 years at UAL, at TL for 3 years prior
Costume practitioner
Risk Management
Risk management and assessments exist to legally protect the institution and its employees. Risk assessment is a blunt, unspecific tool that is seen as systematic and as achieving ‘safety’. It applies exclusively to physical (and mental) wellbeing and safety.
Format
Risk assessments are long, boring, inaccessible, and hard to use and understand. Usually, one person does a risk assessment on their own, and takes responsibility.
‘Competent Person’
Risk assessment requires a ‘competent person’ to carry them out. It is not clear what this actually means, but there are uncomfortable implicit implications.
Use of a Matrix
The matrix design used to carry out a risk assessment supposes that the risk of a hazard causing a person harm can be estimated and measured numerically. In the case of social, epistemic and psychological harm in a pedagogic environment, it is impossible to suppose and define what might be likely to cause harm, given the complexity of individual identities and experiences involved. Therefore, I have chosen to move away from the matrix, and use a simpler, similar traffic light system.
Furthermore, the matrix design is itself not very easy to use, or accessible for those with learning differences. I would like my assessment to shift the focus away from paperwork, and focus on collaborative action, movement, and critical discussion.
What could Risk Management Be?
Considerate of the individual, intersectional human experience within space, and how this affects embodied experiences.
Acknowledge the complexity of individual identities (‘who is at risk of harm’).
Be a communal, accessible, discursive, practical, embodied process.
Allow for critical reflection and discussion.
Recognize its own bluntness and inadequacy, and understand that it is impossible to imagine all the intersectional ways a space could present barriers for an individual.
Miriam Elgon: Personal Tutor, Course Leader in MA Academic Practice
(Formative, written feedback given in response to intervention design outline on 24/06/2024, after a personal tutorial on 19/06/2024)
This is an interesting proposition because:
Your inclusive risk assessment idea brings together discourses around inclusive spaces created by learning design and inclusive spaces created by architectural design in a really rich way. The combined consideration of physical and mental aspects will make for an incredibly effective tool.
Your thorough approach to analysing different understanding and uses of risk assessment has raised important observations already, for example, the use of the phrase ‘competent persons’. Asking who a risk assessment is for, implicitly or explicitly, is very aligned with the values of critical pedagogy, which seek to illuminate who is benefiting and who is being oppressed by habitual and default systems.
Consider:
The design of the risk assessment – And the way that this word might mean something different to you as a creative practitioner than it might mean to others in other fields. Though at the core of much risk assessment activity is a form, could and should it be verbal, visual, tactile? Should it be a one-off or a sequence of activity over time serving different purposes? You can think about content and form as playfully as you would in realisation of any project.
The nature of risk assessment – what it is and should be, in the same way as other subjects like ethics. Is it a form, an approach, an attitude, a practice? etc
Speaking to UAL Health and Safety staff within the university – How do, see and think about all these areas? Ensure you document these conversations and fold them into your development and reflection.
Resources and Questions
Morley, Christine, Joanne Clarke, Chez Leggatt-Cook, and Donna Shkalla. 2022. “Can a Paradigm Shift from Risk Management to Critical Reflection Improve Child-Inclusive Practice?” Societies 12, no. 1: 1. https://doi.org/10.3390/soc12010001
Are their ideas or perspectives from risk management in other areas that could enrich your thinking? For example, the role of voice, empowerment and reflection in risk management and childcare?
Hemingway, J., & Armstrong, F. (2012). Space, place and inclusive learning. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 16(5–6), 479–483. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603116.2012.655502
Are there ideas or perspectives from inclusive space design that could support, disrupt or enhance what you’ve been thinking?
Might there be other ways of creatively and inclusively assessing space?
Reflections and Moving Forwards
Design
In response to Miriam’s querying of the design, I would like to consider ways it could move away from the original structure of a risk assessment, which includes filling a long, inaccessible excel form, independently and statically. I would like to move it towards something which reflects my own creative pedagogic practice, which encompasses teaching and learning through doing, movement, tactility, and process (Barbieri, 2007) but also incorporates critical reflection and an understanding of space through the embodied experience of inhabiting (Rieger, Kessler and Strickfaden, 2022).
Nature
I would also like to design this tool with my colleagues, and other technical staff in mind. Several technicians I work closely with are dyslexic, for example, and struggle with long forms like risk assessments. As tool which all of us are expected to utilise as part of our day to day activities, it should be made more accessible – as should all tools, as the social model of disability exemplifies. Looking at UAL staff data, which I requested from the EDI department, 40% of the 15.3% of staff who have a declared a disability are neurodiverse.
Other Perspectives
TBC – I have contacted H&S staff at ual but have not heard back.
