Blog Post Two & Three: Contemporary challenges in education and the need for safe learning spaces  

Part One

The assigned readings and workshops one and two of the PGCert have given fresh perspectives into specific areas of my teaching practice.

Engagement in the classroom has been unpredictable in the years since the pandemic, its destabilising effects evident in student behaviours and yet I and my students alike have found it difficult through our conversations to understand the root cause of them. How essential is it to understand these causes? Sharing work and opinions seems to be a particular ongoing challenge, where, in an oppressive digital age so many images are consumed after the heavy edit, leaving little room for confidence in showing critical development of ideas and the messiness of the design process.

A breath of fresh air then, when discussion in the first workshop centred on the principles of creating a safe and brave learning space, a relief to have some theoretical underpinning in the face of such challenges. Intuitively many of the principles are happening in my teaching practice and yet I found myself expressing a desire, but not knowing how to ‘acknowledge and address power dynamics’ (Arao, 2013) and ‘employ active listening and empathy’ (Arao, 2013) within the ever-tightening constraints of my role. I found myself asking whether the safe space might be one of the single most important things to foster, particularly given the current educational landscape where acute ‘fight or flight’ (Canon, 1929) reactions seem inherent in successive new year groups.

There were some fascinating ways the workshops facilitated a safe working space. Tasks were light on outputs but heavy on thinking which made room for the formulation of new ideas both individually and co constructed within groups. Silence was observed and held by tutors after questions to the group, which pointed ownership of the conversation back towards us, but also, as Harris says of silence, allowed ‘processing, considering and reflecting’ (Harris, 2022) to take place simultaneously. Another was to position the act of listening or non speaking as a generous act, rather than a signal of lack, which encouraged some particularly interesting insights from some self confessed introverted members of the group. This was achieved through a keen sense of timing and only when a solid foundational safe space had been made; at the very end of the day ‘good listeners’ were specifically encouraged to contribute. One insight was that the person tended to assimilate and reflect on information away from events themselves, needing time to balance intellectual and emotional inputs. This is echoed by Harris when she asks ‘might those periods of apparent ‘‘inactivity’’ actually be where a learner is at their most intellectually active?’ (Harris, 2022)

Part Two

Could it be that a section of the educational experience is missing with twenty minute tutorials serving only to encourage, the kind of ‘banking education’ (Friere, 2005) Friere talks about in ‘Pedagogy of the Oppressed’ (Friere, 2005) where students voices are cut short in favour of the tutor moving projects forward more quickly? The ideal model, as put forward, is one where ‘the quest for mutual humanisation’ (Friere, 2005) must be strived for by tutors being the ‘partners’ (Friere, 2005) of students, where ‘authentic thinking’ (Friere, 2005) happens through effective ‘communication’ (Friere, 2005). I may be guilty of working to a pre pandemic model, tried and tested through measurable results and one that I am trying in vain to reproduce because I know what it should look like. Am I one of the brutes Friere refers to, or are these feelings inevitable when alarm bells suggest shifts in practice that encourage new responses to ingrained frameworks?  

I think some of the themes of compromise have to be balanced with the recognised growing pains of creative practice. Guidance must be useful through the general ‘stickiness’ (Shreeve, 2017) students encounter with the realities of undergraduate studies, one example being ‘where no known specific factual outcomes are envisaged’ (Shreeve, 2017). Learning is a ‘process of discovery’ (Shreeve, 2017) which they will have to ‘manage and work through ambiguity to succeed’ (Shreeve, 2017). At once space must be made for newly sensitive facilitation and sometimes reluctance in tutor groups (brought about by external societal forces perceived especially in first year) but still hold firm the integrity of good creative practice. 

I don’t yet know how to reconcile some of the above into my practice, within the constraints of my role, but maybe awareness is a good starting point.

References

• Arao, B. a. C. K., 2013. From safe spaces to brave spaces; a new way to frame dialogue around diversity an social justice. Sterling: Stylus.
• Canon, W., 1929. Bodily changes in pain, hunger, fear and rage. Appleton : s.n.
• Friere, P., 2005. Pedagogy of the oppressed. New York City: The continuum international publishing group plc.
• Harris, K., 2022. Embracing the silence: introverted learning and the online classroom. London: UAL.
• Shreeve, O. &., 2017. Art and design pedagogy in higher education: knowledge, values and ambiguity in the creative curriculum. Milton: Taylor & Francis.