OpportunitiesChallengesStrategies

ReferencesFor one-to-one, small group, large group teaching,

and the open exchange of feedback (crits).

Cohort A:One-to-one teaching

Cohort B:One-to-one teaching

Cohort C:One-to-one teaching

One-to-One: Opportunities● Personalised, inclusive - can meet diverse needs● Private/confidential● Can be straight with individuals who need a push● Build relationship & trust● Look at personal development and progress

One-to-One: Challenges● Parity of student experience● Repetition of effort● Have to be on one another’s wavelength● Feedback limited by teacher’s experience● Puts onus on tutor● Can turn into pastoral care● Can create dependency● Easy to go off topic● Time management

One-to-One: Strategies & references● Refer to course tutorial policy● Use tutorial form to set agenda - send in advance● Set clear outcomes & tasks to complete before the next time● Vary who sets agenda - Tutor? Student? Peer?● Set boundaries and/or expectations● Make it mandatory● Talk to colleagues● Use peer observations

UAL has a Tutorial Policy, although it’s maybe not the most inspiring of reads. (http://www.arts.ac.uk/media/arts/study-at-ual/academic-regulations/documents/Tutorial-Policy.pdf).

There is an interesting 2011 paper from City University that draws on both Laycock’s (2009) and Thomas & Hixenbaugh’s (2006) work on personal tutoring and has the bonus of being freely available online. The Shreeve & Batchelor (2012) article in Networks reports on a research study into positive tutoring relationships in art and design, and has some good references that you might be interested in checking out.

One-to-One: Strategies & referencesLaycock, M. 2009. Personal tutoring in higher education - where now and where next? A literature review and recommendations. Staff and Educational Development Association. https://libsearch.arts.ac.uk/cgi-bin/koha/opac-detail.pl?biblionumber=233888

Lindsay, S. (2011). Do students in UK Higher Education Institutions need personal tutors? Learning at City Journal, 1(1), pp40-45. http://openaccess.city.ac.uk/1263/

Shreeve, A. and Batchelor, R. 2012. Challenges to learning and teaching relations in higher education studio environments. Networks (18), University of Brighton.<link to article>

Thomas, L., and Hixenbaugh, P. (Eds). 2006. Personal tutoring in higher education. Trentham.https://libsearch.arts.ac.uk/cgi-bin/koha/opac-detail.pl?biblionumber=232630

Cohort A:Small group teaching

Cohort B:Small group teaching

Cohort C:Small group teaching

Small groups: Opportunities● Less intimidating than bigger groups● Space to move around● Ideal for practical/technical skill development● More democratic, less hierarchical? ● Intimate, personalisable● Facilitates exchange of ideas, participation● Peer to peer learning● Cover more ground than in 1-2-1 teaching?● Easier to pitch at right level than with large groups● Good for technical/hands on teaching● Good for brainstorming● Reflects many aspects of professional practice● More onus on students● Build students’ confidence● Can explain or set outcomes at the start

Small groups: Challenges● Enforced participation● More time-intensive than with larger groups● Balancing contributions from participants● Feedback more generic/less personal● Forming the groups● Keeping students off their mobile devices● Placement of multiple groups in room● Individual personalities/attitudes have more impact● Attendance/punctuality can radically alter group dynamic● Getting feedback from group● Evaluating learning/grading e.g. collaborative projects● Keeping up momentum● Relies on verbal communication

Small groups: Strategies & references● Group composition - bear in mind Lou et al. (2000)’s findings that lower ability students gain the most from participating in small

group work with higher ability students, while medium ability students also benefit from mixed ability groupings. Also check out Jaques (2011) on group composition - http://www.brookes.ac.uk/services/ocsld/resources/small-group/sgt104.html. The whole resource is worth a look.

● Ways of being with small groups - Rogers (1967) argues that teachers must strive for ‘realness’ in not claiming more knowledge than they have, and being truthful to their identity or emotions, because acting ‘normally’ encourages honesty and engenders trust and respect. Macfarlane (2004) is also good on authenticity and honesty in small group teaching, particularly p55-62.

● Assigning roles - I wrote a case study for the HEA that might give you some ideas for designing online and offline role-based group learning, also about using it to assess students.

● Think critically about the social interactions that are developing. Mills & Alexander (2013) are great on this (p17-18) - they take a critical social justice perspective that links in nicely with the reading you did previously on Inclusivity. Again, the whole booklet is definitely worth a read.

● Peer review - There is a lot of literature on this but I would thoroughly recommend Nicol and Macfarlane-Dick’s seminal 2006 paper on formative feedback and self-regulated learning - http://www.reap.ac.uk/reap/public/Papers/DN_SHE_Final.pdf.

● Assessing group work - to follow Gibbs’ (2009) literature review, the ASKe research centre at Oxford Brookes produced a nice brochure on the peer assessment of group work: https://www.brookes.ac.uk/WorkArea/DownloadAsset.aspx?id=2147552288.

Small groups: Strategies & referencesGibbs, G. 2009. The assessment of group work: lessons from the literature. Oxford Brookes University.https://www.brookes.ac.uk/aske/groupwork-assessment/.

Jaques, D. 2011. Small group teaching [Online]. Oxford Brookes University. http://www.brookes.ac.uk/services/ocsld/resources/small-group/index.html.

Jordan, L. 2009. Using Online Role-play to Assess Distance Learning Students in Construction Law. The Higher Education Academy. https://www.heacademy.ac.uk/knowledge-hub/using-online-role-play-assess-distance-learning-students-construction-law.

Lou, Y., Abrami, P., Spence, J., (2000) Effects of Within-Class Grouping on Student Achievement: An Exploratory Model. Journal of Educational Research, 94(1), pp101-112.

Macfarlane, B. 2004. Teaching with Integrity: the Ethics of Higher Education Practice. Routledge.

Mills, D. and Alexander, P. 2013. Small group teaching: a toolkit for learning. The Higher Education Academy. https://www.heacademy.ac.uk/system/files/resources/small_group_teaching_1.pdf

Rogers, C. 1967. On Becoming A Person: A therapist’s view of psychotherapy. London: Constable.

Cohort A:One-to-many teaching(e.g. lectures)

Cohort B:One-to-many teaching(e.g. lectures)

Cohort C:One-to-many teaching(e.g. lectures)

Lectures: Opportunities● Can pre-determine structure● Good for giving an overview of a subject● Good for introducing complex ideas● Can help to develop the lecturer’s own thoughts● Easy to use multimedia - videos, images, etc● Can see lots of students in one go● Can help to create a community● Student perception of contact time and value for money● Parity of student experience● Can record/lecture capture● No repetition● Bringing in guest lecturers● Suits students who are ready to engage

Lectures: Challenges● Not personalisable● Managing large numbers● Ensuring attendance● Difficult for those on the language boundary● Meeting diverse learning needs● Gaining and maintaining attention● Performance anxiety● Keeping them awake● Limited opportunity for dialogue● Difficult to check understanding● How can they ask questions?● Reliance on IT, Tech

Lectures: Strategies & References● Organise cross-programme lectures● Display key terms as they are used and/or provide vocab list● Give handouts/slides in advance● Book tech support and/or visit room in advance● Check for ISAs within cohort● Use electronic voting or a quiz to start each topic● Use Googledocs for collaborative idea-generation or asking questions● Other ways of scaling up/anonymising Q&A include twitter (via hashtag), slips of paper ● Think & pair discussion activities● Use coffee breaks - give students something to think about/discuss over coffee, or on a walk around the block!● Get them to sit somewhere different after a break● Show video examples/case studies● Use interesting props and artefacts● Use One Minute Papers to check comprehension, fuzzy areas - http://provost.tufts.edu/celt/files/MinutePaper.pdf

Lectures: Strategies & ReferencesHaynes & Haynes (2012) have updated the original ‘53 things’ publication written by Graham Gibbs, who along with Donald Bligh (1998) are acknowledged as seminal thinkers, researchers and writers on traditional lecture-format teaching.

There is a short guide from Nottingham Trent CADQ (2013) which is also quite good (well, it’s concise at least), and I’d also recommend the JISC (2013) resource on using technology to enhance lectures.

Bligh, D., 1998. What’s the use of Lectures? Jossey-Bass.(Hard copies available through the UAL Libraries).

CADQ. 2013. Teaching Large Groups [Online]. Nottingham Trent University. https://www4.ntu.ac.uk/adq/document_uploads/teaching/137815.pdf

Haynes, A., & Haynes, K. 2012. 53 interesting things to do in your lectures. Wicken: The Professional & Higher Partnership.(E-book and hard copies available through the UAL Libraries).

JISC. 2013. How to use technology to enhance lectures - tools, techniques and content [Online]. https://www.jisc.ac.uk/news/how-to-use-technology-to-enhance-lectures-tools-techniques-and-content-05-dec-2013

Cohort A:Crits (open feedback exchange)

Cohort B:Crits (open feedback exchange)

Cohort C:Crits (open feedback exchange)

Crits: Opportunities● Formative assessment - student can see how they are doing● Student learns to articulate and reflect on own work● Identify strengths and weaknesses● Peer feedback● New perspectives, varied feedback● Sharing info & references● Strengthening of group/sense of community● Develop critical analysis skills● Build confidence in presenting● Can see students’ work as a whole● Can involve everyone● Preparation for ‘real world’

Crits: Challenges● Negative affect (emotions, stress)● Potential for tutor to dominate● Potential for some students to dominate● Student absence due to fear● Developing an open, honest process● Cultural friction? ● Requires full engagement● Takes a long time● Breadth of knowledge needed

Crits: Strategies & references● Run a ‘what is a crit’ workshop at start of programme/unit● Moderate the discussion (see small group strategies)● Choose a less formal location● Pub (During? Afterwards? Before?!)● Other forms of ‘social lubrication’● Provide a framework for peer/self critique e.g. suggested questions● Discuss resilience● Decide on rules of engagement● Meta-discussion (a discussion about discussion!)● Make it mandatory● Follow up with students afterwards - especially where feedback has varied widely● Nominate first student to give feedback in advance and on rotation● Post-its to anonymise feedback● Don’t be afraid of silence - ‘wait seven seconds’● Use timer

Crits: Strategies & referencesQ-Art produces some great stuff on art education and professional practice. Their booklet on crits (Rowles 2013) really is worth a look.

A few years ago our Dean of Learning, Teaching & Enhancement Susan Orr collaborated on a comprehensive critique of the crit (Blythman et al. 2007), drawing on practices at UAL and other institutions. There are a number of outputs from the project including a staff and a student guide and other resources, a discussion paper and an overarching report.

N.B. the links from the HEA Art, Design & Media archive seem to be broken but I will look into this and ensure you have access to the materials somehow.

Rowles, S. 2013. Art Crits: 20 questions - A pocket guide. Q-Art https://libsearch.arts.ac.uk/cgi-bin/koha/opac-detail.pl?biblionumber=268576 or buy it from Q-Art for £7 http://q-art.org.uk/portfolio/art-crits-20-questions/

Blythman, M., Orr, S., & Blair, B. 2007. Critiquing the Crit [Online]. HEA ADM. http://www.adm.heacademy.ac.uk/projects/adm-hea-projects/learning-and-teaching-projects/critiquing-the-crit/index.html