Intervention Outline
Planning session with CTS tutors– 10 December 2024
Focus: reflect on teaching this term so far and plan for next term/next year.
The meeting was held during the last week of term, which was shaped by overall exhaustion (it is a long term!) as well as a rush to complete all the planning for Block 2 before taking time off. The planning for the new re-validated, embedded delivery of CTS units is not going particularly smoothly and the meeting was very much clouded by a lot of anxiety about this. Indeed, most of the 3hr meeting was devoted to resolving some of these more urgent issues.
Nevertheless, we had some space to start thinking about how we might want to deliver the second year, Design Cultures unit. This is the only remaining cross-school unit in the new model (in the ‘old’ model, CTS units are delivered entirely across school – there’s a lot to say about this but it’s outside the scope of this project).
There are two key things to say about the unit in the context of this project:
- Students are able to choose their thematic curriculum as part of this unit, led by their personal or disciplinary interests
- Student work is assessed through writing – both a finished piece of writing (2000-word submission) as well as through a documentation of their research/process (what form this is to take is open to discussion)
My intervention was aimed at shaping some of that discussion and questioning how the unit might be delivered and how it might be assessed. I created a Padlet (to use the session and continue the discussion after the meeting) and presented a series of questions that were informed by my primary research (see slides).
My aim was to move away from a delivery format that sees a ‘single authoritative figure’ shape and deliver a syllabus. I wanted to encourage a more flexible, open, student-led delivery: a kind of ‘festival of ideas’ where students can map their own journey through lectures, workshops, ‘design sprints’ or other kinds of interactive sessions. It would almost be like a ‘conference’ that runs over the course of 4-5 weeks were students get to choose what ‘panels’ to join and then need to make sense of the things they found out about during these sessions. This would ensure that students are able to be exposed to a variety of voices/perspectives but also tailor their journey to their needs/interests/curiosities. For me this would be a kind of emancipatory, inclusive, plural curriculum delivery model.
In the second half, students could settle into small groups with a tutor and ‘work through’ some of the ideas/concepts they learned and work on independent enquiry within that landscape to prepare for their final submission.
Primary research:
This approach was informed by my interviews with UAL graduates. For example, a few respondents said they valued the variety of themes and ideas that students were exposed to through CTS units. They valued the way CTS sessions nurtured their curiosity and gave them scope for independent enquiry in relation to their own interests. They also recognised the emphasis on decolonisation and how important that was, especially considering UAL’s diverse student body. Finally, they emphasised valued the well-rounded understanding of wider art and design history that CTS gave them and thought this was central in being able to participate in the studio culture where they worked or have informed conversations with their clients. This varied cultural knowledge, therefore, was not marginal but central (if less tangible than other design skills) in their everyday working life.
Tutor comments:
During the meeting, I did not record the session, but took notes both during and after the meeting. The discussion with CTS tutors centred on two aspects: firstly reflecting on and emphasising the value that CTS brings to course delivery/student’s experience; secondly, the logistical challenges in terms of delivering a more flexible, independent, student-centred delivery of the Design Cultures unit when working with large cohorts (500 students). Tutors showed some resistance to this model both as it seemed to be too complicated to manage and they feared chaos in delivery and unsustainable workloads. They also worried about the tension between students having to first navigate some independent selection of sessions to attend, and then how they were going to be supported in preparation for the final submission. Some questions were also raised around the agency of tutors to ‘shape’ the curriculum and deliver sessions on topics that draw from their own research expertise.
While the session provided a useful starting point to nudge tutors to consider different modes of delivery and outcomes, it did not provide a conclusive ‘answer’ or ‘solution’ to the Design Cultures delivery. However, the Padlet created for the session will be used to continue discussing/planning the unit as it will only be delivered in Block 2 of 2025/2026 unit.
Brief slides from the session can be found here:
Evaluation, Reflection and Next Steps
My main reflection is that I wish I had done this project before we had embarked on the reapproval of all UG courses in the Design School in 2023/2024. Some of the work on the student perception of CTS was never done on a consistent cross-school level, and it feels like a lot of the radical changes we made were not rooted in empirical research but in various anecdotal perceptions of the role of CTS in design education. Some of the findings from both my secondary and primary research would have been really useful to frame some of the debates we were having at the time.
My second reflection is that I should have done additional primary research with CTS tutors before jumping into this intervention. I think this actually should be done as the key next step. The question I need to get to the bottom of is, why do tutors see writing (and essay writing in particular) as the key format through which CTS knowledge can be communicated. What kind of ideas/attitudes/criticality is writing bringing and how does that relate to issues such as awarding gaps, inclusive teaching, etc.? If I could do that research before coming to any conclusions or carrying out an intervention this would be my ideal approach.
Next steps:
I might, therefore, run some individual or group interviews to explore the way both CTS and potentially studio tutors see the role of writing. I think this would be good to carry out in the next year or so – maybe after we run the first iteration of Design Cultures – as it could then lead to potential minor modifications to the unit and changes to assessment outputs.
Planning/Reflection Padlet
Below is the screenshot of the questions/prompts that were designed to shape the discussion of the Design Cultures delivery that was informed by findings from my primary research.
Design Cultures unit outline
There are a couple of reflections to be made about this unit. It was written in Autumn 2023 and I based on my learning throughout the PgCert and this unit in particular, there are a couple of things I would already change.
Firstly, I would rename the unit to be called ‘Decolonising Design Cultures’. While both students and our external examiners have recognised that CTS tutors already do a lot of ‘decolonising’ work in the curriculum, foregrounding this approach in the unit title seems important to expressing that commitment further.
Secondly, I would rethink the essay format for the final submission. Here is what the Assessment Description is at the moment: “A portfolio of written assessment submissions, including an essay of 2000-words, a research journey document and an annotated bibliography of 800 words”. I would take out the word essay and reframe it as a 2000-word written submission: this could then open up the submission to different forms of writing – fragments of writing; reviews; reflections; criticisms; etc.