Session/artefact to be observed/reviewed: Group crit session for outcomes of the two week project Rise of the Machines
Friday 2nd February 3pm : G8, G9, G10 Wilson Road
Size of student group: 25
Observer: Rebecca Harper
Observee: Anna Reading
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?
This group crit session acts as a form of peer feedback for student outcomes at the end of a compulsory project called Rise of the Machines. This is the final set project the students will undertake before their Part 2 assessments the following week and is a chance for peer led evaluation and reflection.
How long have you been working with this group and in what capacity?
I have been working with this group since they specialized in November 2023 (2 months). I am a specialist subject tutor for Sculpture which is the pathway the students have chosen. Some of the students will be members of my tutor group.
What are the intended or expected learning outcomes?
On successful completion of this unit the student will be able to:
Learning outcome 1 • Apply, integrate and contextualise research methods and activities within a creative practice.
Learning outcome 2 • Identify, select and safely use appropriate materials, methods, media, tools and technologies in relation to a variety of creative practices.
Learning outcome 3 • Develop ideas, solve problems and apply learning strategies within the context of a range of diverse creative practices.
Learning outcome 4 • Understand the conventions and application of critical evaluation and reflection for a range of audiences and purposes.
What are the anticipated outputs (anything students will make/do)?
The students will present an individual response to the brief Rise of the Machines which asks students to consider the role of technology in relation to their work. The outcome will depend on their experimentation with materials and methods and will take the form of object or installation.
The wider group will be asked to provide feedback via written notes and verbally.
Are there potential difficulties or specific areas of concern?
Students will work in smaller groups of 4 – 5 to provide feedback on one another’s work as the wider group is too large within the time scale. This can create space for generative dialogue between students but can also leave groups unsupported for periods of time, as I move between groups. The students are mostly used to this technique by now. Some students find it harder to participate in group discussion and so the session begins with written notes.
How will students be informed of the observation/review?
Before the crit begins I will gather the students into a room and announce that we are being joined by an observer for the session. I will introduce Rebecca and explain that she is not there to make judgements on them, rather to provide me with feedback on my own teaching.
What would you particularly like feedback on?
What I did well, and what methods worked
How engaging I am when speaking to the wider group?
Whether my instructions were clear and how they were received. Did the students understand the task.
How was my own feedback received by the smaller groups of students?
How were the unattended groups engaging in the activity?
Any suggestions for how I might help students feel like they know what to do differently next time
How will feedback be exchanged?
Email within two weeks and an in-person conversation
Part Two
Observer to note down observations, suggestions and questions:
In observing Annas teaching session, several key insights emerged, both relatable and providing valuable reflections.
Anna’s approach was characterised by a relaxed yet engaging demeanour, effectively establishing rapport and motivation by acknowledging student achievements and growth fostering a celebratory atmosphere. Congratulating students on the achievement of their show, established a sense of recognition and validation for their progress and efforts, reflecting on their journey and “how much their confidence had grown”. Her clear and concise briefing linked session objectives to the brief, creating an atmosphere conducive to informal, reflective critical discussion. Explaining “the crit is a chance to explain your thinking to one another”. Encouraging student preparation by tasking them with setting up the exhibition space, could have been further enhanced by incorporating activities such as note-taking or reflective written exercises to deepen engagement prior to the session for students who struggle verbally.
Partial self-selection in the group learning space was interesting offering dynamic participation. Checking “Have you got a group Jim”? was inclusive, though I noted the potential for students to feel left out if they were last, suggesting a need for inclusivity considerations.
The five discussions referring to one work were engaging, and dynamic. Asking Group-1 “Can I ask someone else in the group to sum up where you got to in the work”, making sure that students were listening. Annas adeptly facilitated discussions (a free thinking, helicopter overview), encouraging diverse perspectives and critical thinking through avoiding yes/no responses and prompted personalized responses, contributing to a rich dialogue. Asking the group as a whole to respond and to develop an opinion, invited distinct and valuable contributions. However I noted that less verbalization and direction of the conversation, could allow more space and opportunity to reflect independently or formulate solutions. As opportunities for further research could be considered. Despite this, the discussions centred around shared goals, encouraged reflecting on students own work and peers, thinking forward to progression; with Anna fostering a collaborative and supportive atmosphere.
I relate to challenges arising around participation during group discourse, particularly for international students with language barriers. You proactively provided language support, asking for clarification, which was commendable. Faced with a situation where students attempted to leave, your decision to encourage them to stay fostered further engagement among the remaining participants. This highlighted the importance of equipping students with effective communication and decision-making skills, as well as ensuring fair participation opportunities. The resulting ‘dyadic reflective practice’ suggested potential strategies such as; offering more time to those who need it, written components for participation to ensure all students have a chance to speak. Additionally, efforts to prevent group divisions based on existing friendships can promote inclusivity and cultural understanding, enhancing the overall learning experience for all students.
Anna’s sculpture background brought an enquiring attitude to the session, evident in her use of questioning. The strength in her linguistic inquiry, communicating simply yet critically, was particularly beneficial to support student learning. Her session offered so much about effective facilitation of group discussions and student engagement. I was inspired observing your session and took away valuable lessons.
Part Three
Observee to reflect on the observer’s comments and describe how they will act on the feedback exchanged:
Thank you, Becki, for this rich and thoughtful feedback.
I am glad that a sense of celebration of student achievement came across in the introduction to the Crit. I was genuinely impressed by the work produced by the group and wanted that to encourage them to have a positive experience of the crit.
I agree that written element could have contributed to the session, especially to promote responses from wider variety of students. Up to this point, many of the recent crits had been heavily focused on written feedback using post it notes, so I was keen to get the students talking more. However, a reflective/evaluative written task would have been a great way to incorporate this element and I will aim to create a worksheet for students to fill in about their own work and the other work they saw, after the crit has happened, which will also provide a way to end the session rather than tailing off early.
It is great to hear your thoughts on my engagement with the smaller crit groups and I like the description of a free-thinking helicopter overview. I will continue to provoke discussion by pushing students to clarify their answers further and help them articulate what they really mean. I also agree, my excitement for the work produced definitely made me talk a bit more than I should, and it would be good to try leaving more gaps in conversation for students to fill. This will help with student inclusion, as well as trying to split up the groups into diverse backgrounds and social groups. This is something I had tried to do when setting up groups, but somehow the system broke down slightly, and some groups did end up gravitating to each other. This is something I will be aware of in the next session, perhaps using a written list to designate students to groups, allowing me to keep track of who is working with who.
Many thanks,
Anna