I have really enjoyed using the Shades of Noir resource throughout this unit. Some of the case studies it published, unfortunately, resonate with my own experience. And some, I have to admit, are also mistakes that I have made in the past and very useful to have them spelt out to me and know what I could have done differently – a very good self-evaluation tool. The Little Book of Big Case Studies, in particular, are very useful resources in giving us actionable options that we can take home and start practicing, as well as an index of external resources we can either use or direct our students to.
I read Paolo Freire’s seminal text Pedagogy of the Oppressed in the last TPP unit. This reading gave me new reflections which was invaluable. In my TPP blog, I wrote about Freire’s aversion to the banking model of the education and I reflected that this kind of model is less common in a fine art course, my teaching context. However, a few months on, I realized that this way of teaching is more common than I thought. In one to one tutorials and during group crits, yes, this way of working is less common. But beyond that, I could name a few examples where existing teaching sessions or seminars still operate in this “teacher-talk-student-listen” kind of manner.
This way of working also spills over to other elements of teaching such as assessment. This sentence particularly resonates with me: “it does not take into account their realities, their “situation in the world,” especially in terms of social status”. A situation occurred during assessment of a student’s work: a tutor gave a lower grade because the student did not reference a theorist. The student in question is a black student from a different cultural background where the academy or cultural theories do not reflect her reality. The other tutor rebuked that the student has actually chosen to not engage with that. It’s a choice that the student made.
This discovery made me pay more attention to Freire’s preferred approach of both teachers and students engaging in habitual, critical reflection, a model that takes into account their identities, where learning takes both directions; that tutors are guiding them rather than leading and that students are assisting in the steering. Reflecting on how this can actually be done in a seminar or lecture situation, it is actually not so different from what is normally done in a crit or tutorial, which is to ask the students questions and respond to those answers, and see how what I know could be useful to their realities and gauge their responses to what I suggested, rather than leading them to think that what I know/say is higher in the knowledge hierarchy.
The Robber Cave experiment under the section Social Identity Theory reminded me of the merits of the traditional Madrasa system. The Madrasa is a place of learning and training for Islamic sciences where traditionally, judges and Islamic scholars are produced. The way of education and structure is entirely different from the modern education system. Firstly, students can be of different ages and from different backgrounds. You are placed in a class based on level. You could be learning arabic with nine-year-olds if you are a twenty-two year old Muslim convert, as was the case for Shaykh Hamza Yusuf, the renowned American convert Islamic scholar. A class does not progress to the next level unless everybody in the class achieves together. This promotes cooperation and learning together rather than competing for the best grades or seeing how one can outshine another. The provocation is, the education system we have is built for the sake of the capitalist society where zero-sum thinking dominates. The degree classification is a case in point. If we could change our degree to pass or fail, like in German art schools, perhaps this kind of cooperative learning could begin to sprout?
On reviewing Finnigan and Richards’ report, two points jumped out to me. Firstly on widening participation. The university has embraced widening participation to make art education more inclusive which is great and worth celebrating. However, as discussed earlier, if we do not change our curriculum and pedagogy and start to take into account our students’ realities, their cultures and backgrounds, we are setting them up for failure. Secondly, a poignant point made in the report is that on emotional value of an artwork versus intellectual value. Our current course, although has changed in recent years, still has a great emphasis on a particular type of intellectual engagement which excludes certain practices, such as artworks that rely on emotion, personal experience and to a certain extent, popular culture. To be truly inclusive, us tutors need to make sure we make space for all of these practices.
According to the report, in the UK in the year 2006-07, only 3.6% of Creative Art and Design staff are BME. I believe the figure in UAL is higher than that. However, this brings to mind what Josephine Kwhali shared in the witnessing unconscious bias video where she argues that the system has worked and improved for white middle class women but not for the rest of the minority population. It was also shocking and saddening to hear her speak about how she learned about racism at the age of four. This reminded me of an anecdote from a podcast host who experienced racism as a young child in a school playground when he was called the n-word. If a young child can produce such verbal abuse in a playground, is it not indicative that this bias is very much conscious? Maybe if we confront them head-on instead of sweeping them under the carpet, we could see more improvements.
I like the way you articulate using Shades of Noir as “a very good self-evaluation tool”. I hadn’t seen it in that way, rather a resource. But it is as much a resource for us staff as for the students.
Your example of the student that didn’t reference a French theorist saddened me to read and highlights the challenges we have as a staff to unlearn our teaching methods and cultural references which don’t always support a students lived experience or world view. Of course there is a balance but the old theory and practice conundrum in Fine Art is real and not always useful for our students. Your comment “If we could change our degree to pass or fail, like in German art schools, perhaps this kind of cooperative learning could begin to sprout?” would support a more diverse teaching and learning environment. Maybe it’s something we can all push for…
That would be a game changer. Changes have been made to the course to make it more inclusive for less academic students to excel and I believe dropping assessment could help them really focus on what they are interested in rather than pleasing the system/tutors. I have seen this work very well at Slade and at Weisensee, one of the other Berlin art school in which I did my erasmus exchange.
I particularly like your reflection on the teacher and student relationship and how you bring elements you have learned/read in the first module and recontextualise when looking at systemic racism or biases.
For me aswell, “This sentence particularly resonates with me: “It does not take into account their realities, their “situation in the world,” especially in terms of social status”. It resonated on a personal level, having a similar experience at work with tutors validating or discriminating students based on their theory references. These quick judgments are often based on bias and a hierarchy of knowledge and not empathy.
There is almost a professional reflex when it comes to academics to value theory over personal input/experiences and, therefore, discriminate on the bases of cultural background and its intersectionalities.
I agree with your comment, “If we could change our degree to pass or fail, like in German art schools, perhaps this kind of cooperative learning could begin to sprout?”
I think there is a need to refocus the way we asses onto the student journey and on what they are interested in.