I am not sure if I am just meant to submit the: Record of Observation or Review of Teaching Practice  or if I then write anything further so I will do both……

Session/artefact to be observed/reviewed: 

Seminar 26^th February 2025. 

Size of student group: 8

Observer: Mike McShane

Observee: Katriona Beales

Note: This record is solely for exchanging developmental feedback between colleagues. Its reflective aspect informs PgCert and Fellowship assessment, but it is not an official evaluation of teaching and is not intended for other internal or legal applications such as probation or disciplinary action.

Part One
Observee to complete in brief and send to observer prior to the observation or review:

Katriona:

What is the context of this session/artefact within the curriculum?

This is a planned seminar for half of my existing tutor group, joined by some visiting students from NAFA, Singapore who are here on exchange. The NAFA students have been invited to give presentations to the group as an introduction with the hope that it encourages genuine exchange and interactions between the different student groups. The seminar also needs to give some direction for the Chelsea students who are engaged in planning for their OffSite Projects which are happening from the 10^th March. 

How long have you been working with this group and in what capacity?

These students have been in my tutor group since the beginning of the academic year in September 2024. I am their Tutor Group Leader and also Year Leader. 

What are the intended or expected learning outcomes?

• To introduce the visiting NAFA students and facilitate some introductory conversations
• To support the development of the Chelsea students OffSite Projects with key theoretical ideas around site and audience. 

What are the anticipated outputs (anything students will make/do)?

• NAFA students presentations x 3
• Reflective and critical response to presentations
• Theoretical discussion 
• Planned plasticene response

Are there potential difficulties or specific areas of concern?

• The NAFA and Chelsea students haven’t met before
• Cross-cultural dynamic – lack of knowledge of Singaporean context
• Context of Chelsea curriculum – there is some key work to do to support the OffSite Projects development and it is a bit out of context to have NAFA students present for this since they aren’t directly involved. 
• Balancing different needs of NAFA and Chelsea students 

How will students be informed of the observation/review?

I will introduce Mike and his role at the beginning. 

What would you particularly like feedback on?

Anything and everything. I am keen to develop all aspects of my teaching practice. 

How will feedback be exchanged?

In conversation and via this form. 

Part Two

Observer to note down observations, suggestions and questions:

Mike: 

Account

• Very Friendly atmosphere, personable, helping students through stresses on the course
• Getting each student to introduce themselves in a very friendly way.
• Ask students to present their work and then for other students to make notes and share feedback.
• Creation of a friendly atmosphere. Asks for feedback notes from peers. Offers Artists for students to look at.
• Makes jokes and allows space for students to discuss ideas without a ‘teacher’ presence.
• Phone doesn’t work to find reference, offers to send it on after session.
• Tech is all set up and very helpful in helping students prepare their presentations
• Asks for thoughts and reflections
• Engages in a very interesting conversation with the NAFA students and offers great feedback e.g. ‘Critique by enacting fully’ 
• Minority spaces vs gentrification, 
• Projection onto student to engage in queer scenes could be misconstrued but obviously intended kindly. [KB: this was in reference to them self-identifying as queer in their presentation]
• Initiated very interesting conversation about differences between Singapore and UK encouraged dialogue between student groups
• Really good at including and incorporating NAFA students into wider conversation

Site and audience in relation to offsite project

• Give handouts of two quotes, one by Constant Dullart in relation to audience; one by Miwon Kwon in relation to site.  
• Asks students to read out quotes
• Asks students if they know what everything means, goes through the meaning of the quote.
• Asks for a summary from students to be discussed
• Discussion around “Activating ‘Art’ – what happens to an artwork when it is taken out of the whitecube?
• Frames quote nicely in relation to the offsite projects that are coming up, and to consider the code and lexicon of the space that people occupy or show in. Asks how this might inform students offsite proposals/ frame their work/ and to discuss their proposal ideas with peers 
• Good at remembering student names.
• Encouraging for NAFA students to include them.
• Asks about engagement with the audience. Creates a discussion about art’s intention in relation to the audience. Framed within the context of social media and contemporary society.
• Excellent description of Michael Fried, loved the other quote
• Impressive amount of discussion generated from two quotes, very talented at teasing out connections between students without imposing onto them.

Summary 

Considering how you had to incorporate NAFA exchange students at the last minute to your session and how ill you had been prior (and to an extent during) the session I don’t think you could have run it any better.

I was especially inspired by your attentiveness to students’ needs throughout the session and the level to which you made sure they had each individually understood an idea, this you then further supplemented by encouraging discussion and debate about ideas in an incredibly relaxed atmosphere that felt very safe to exchange knowledge and ideas. 

Your use of humour throughout the session created an incredibly relaxed atmosphere. I would love to have seen how you would have incorporated this way of working into a more practical workshop using the plasticine.

It was particularly interesting to hear how you let go of the more making part of your workshop, in favour of giving the NAFA students more time to talk and discuss things with other Y2 students. I know from working with NAFA students over the last few years that they have often felt isolated and separate from the wider course, so it was amazing to see them so included.

I wonder if the Chelsea students had had to present to the NAFA students as well if more conversations and exchanges could have happened. I realise after the session this happened as students began chatting together, but it could have been interesting to have seen NAFA students feeding back to the Chelsea students in an act of reciprocation.

I would have really liked to have seen how the different students could have worked on an idea together in a physical way. From personal experience I know that some students struggle to retain ideas without having engaged in a material or creative process to encapsulate that idea: Some kind of tangible ephemera or enacted process as an embodied reminder or rehearsal of the concepts and ideas discussed to retain the new information. I realise that you ran out of time to do this in order to accommodate NAFA students. I just personally would have loved to have seen how you would have applied your humour, kindness and methodology to that type of teaching.

Finally, I was most impressed by the way you stepped back whilst they were most intensely discussing ideas, to set up the next step of the presentation to frame everything within their projects, and then to check in with how they are all doing on the offsite projects. The timing of when to be present leading and when to step back and allow students the space to engage with each other without a ‘teacher’ present is a real skill, especially in relation to the pacing of a session. I massively respected the way you used that space to prepare yourself for the next stage of the workshop so that by the time they finished discussing you were completely ready to take the lead again. Your pacing and ownership of the gaps in time was a true inspiration to me.

Observations

• Amazing at leading students into discussing ideas together.
• Fantastic for incorporating NAFA students so effortlessly into the group and dialogue.
• Really good at framing discursive text on site specificity within the context of what they are doing and where they are at in the course.
• Really good at creating a personable atmosphere where students are comfortable to share ideas your use of humour, to create a relaxed atmosphere proved very conducive to co-operation and sharing
• Really good at checking in to see how they are all getting on with their individual projects

Difficult to answer these 2 as I feel like I am forcing things to fit the matrix and that how the session played out was the best way for it to naturally happen given the circumstances

Questions

• What would you have done with the plasticine with them?
• Are the NAFA students incorporated into offsite projects?
• Do Chelsea student present to NAFA students at all?
• Is there a way to improve attendance? – Also, aware how the students who don’t attend are the ones who are struggling most and that this is a much wider issues? 

Suggestions

• More cross over/ symmetry between exchange and home students in terms of cooperation – although I am also aware of how limited the time is – it was nevertheless exciting to listen to the students from both discussing ideas and work together after the session had finished- avenues of potential collaboration between students? It could have been interesting to see the home students
• More humour! Humour seems to be central to how you create a relaxed atmosphere that is so conducive to students exchanging ideas. I wonder if there would be a session to incorporate that into a making session with them. 
• I would have really liked to have seen how you incorporated the plasticine into the session
• Fleetingness of discussion 

Part Three

Observee to reflect on the observer’s comments and describe how they will act on the feedback exchanged:

Katriona:

It’s very useful to have Mike’s very detailed, attentive and encouraging account of my teaching in the context of this seminar. I really appreciate the elements that Mike has teased out here, particular around the challenges of integrating students from NAFA into the session. 

I was balancing two different agendas in this session and was unsure how the need to host and welcome the NAFA students would balance with the need to prepare the Chelsea students for their OffSite Projects. I think Mike’s suggestion of the Chelsea students doing their own presentation would be excellent to take on. I would just need to take into consideration how many of my Chelsea students really dislike making presentations and would find them stressful, but there are ways to alleviate this. I wonder if I could make time for them to do informal ones, in which they could summarise their plans for the OffSite Projects in a more informal presentation style. 

I also am struck by how much Mike commented on the element of humour in the session, and the way he understood this as contributing towards a relaxed environment. This is quite instinctual and not something I was actively aware of, more a kind of learnt behaviour in a teaching context where people are meeting for the first time. One thing I am conscious of is actively dethroning or at least problematising the hallowed status of the academic or professor, and I think being humorous has a serious role to play in allowing students to have a different type of engagement with their tutor that isn’t overly serious or heavy. I want to put some more conscious thought into this, aware too of the challenges it can pose in terms of sensitives around what is deigned humorous and how this can manifest in a nuanced way. 

Things I am going to consider moving forwards: 

Humour as a deliberate strategy to disrupt hierarchies, create community, alleviate stress and increase enjoyment.