Navigating Hierarchies in Education

The range of perspectives shared during the first day of discussions led to a key realization about how deeply hierarchies shape educational experiences. One of the most powerful themes that emerged from the session was the influence of power structures, based on position, class, race, gender, and even religious background, of both students and teachers. This theme not only resonated with me but also prompted deep reflection on my own teaching practice.

The concept of position and power in the classroom was a central point of discussion. Students often perceive instructors as gatekeepers of knowledge, and this power dynamic, whether intentional or not, can shape the classroom environment. This made me reflect on the challenges of providing constructive feedback to course leaders, technicians etc, particularly when there is an inherent power imbalance that may limit the exchange of diverse perspectives. As Shreeve (2009) notes, “The role of the tutor is not just to impart knowledge, but to shape an environment where learning can flourish,” underscoring the need for a collaborative and open space.

Discussing the intersection of class, race, gender, and religious background, the conversation illuminated how these factors shape educational experiences, with those from marginalized backgrounds often feeling their voices are undervalued or disregarded. This sense of invisibility can lead to self-doubt or feelings of not belonging. Conversely, students from more privileged backgrounds might be unconsciously afforded a sense of authority based on their class or race, which perpetuates inequality. These social hierarchies within educational settings limit opportunities for full participation and authentic learning. As Gonzalez (2018) argues, “Intersectionality reveals the complexities of how power operates and how individuals are shaped by multiple, intersecting identities,” reminding me of the layered dynamics that can impact engagement.

Themes of gender, superiority of mind, and political leanings also emerged, revealing how education is rarely neutral. A person’s intellectual capacity, political stance, or personal beliefs can impact their experience in the classroom, either reinforcing existing power structures or challenging them. This reflects a need to be mindful of how we engage with different perspectives, especially when power dynamics are at play.

As an AL reflecting on these issues, I’ve become more aware of how hierarchies shape dynamics and staff/student engagement and the importance of actively challenging these structures to create an inclusive environment where everyone, including those from marginalized backgrounds, feels valued and heard. Additionally, reflecting on power dynamics has made me consider how my role as a tutor may impact the learning experience, highlighting the need to foster open communication and mutual respect.

I hope to incorporate more opportunities for critical self-awareness and empowerment within my teaching practice. This includes creating a classroom environment where students feel encouraged to challenge assumptions, are accountable, self-reflect and express themselves freely. Influencing activities that allow for self-empowerment and collaborative learning, helping to flatten the hierarchical structure that often dominates traditional education.

To deepen my understanding of these themes I will read ‘Black British Intellectuals and Education: Multiculturalism’s Hidden History’ by Warmington (2014) to understand how historical and cultural contexts shape educational hierarchies. A particularly valuable addition is Freire, P. (2000) ‘Pedagogy of the Oppressed’. This text explores how education can either perpetuate or challenge societal inequalities, offering a framework for creating a more inclusive, collaborative classroom environment.

References

Freire, P. (2000). “Pedagogy of the Oppressed”. Continuum. 

Gonzalez, C. A. (2018). “The Illiberal Logic of Intersectionality”. Quillette. Retrieved from https://quillette.com/2018/05/08/illiberal-logic-intersectionality/ 

Sams, C. (2016). ‘How do art and design technicians conceive of their role in higher education?’. Spark: UAL Creative Teaching and Learning Journal, 1(2), 62-69. 

Shreeve, A. (2009). “Identity work in Part-time Art and Design Tutors”. International Journal of Art & Design Education, Blackwell Publishing Ltd,151-159. 

Warmington, P. (2014). “Black British Intellectuals and Education: Multiculturalism’s Hidden History”. Taylor & Francis Group. 

Fostering Engagement and Effective Feedback in the Classroom

After reading Harris’s ‘Embracing the Silence: Introverted Learning and the Online Classroom’, I began reflecting on my approach to critiques (Crits) and how they’ve evolved with the shift to online learning during the COVID-19 pandemic. Before this transition, I cultivated a reciprocal, interactive atmosphere in the classroom, where students actively engaged in peer-to-peer feedback. However, the shift to online teaching presented new challenges, with many students disengaging, turning off cameras, and remaining silent unless prompted. This prompted me to adapt my feedback strategies to ensure all students felt encouraged to participate. As we return to in-person learning, I am rethinking how to integrate these lessons into creating a more inclusive classroom dynamic.

As a tutor on the BA Textiles course, critiques are vital to the learning process. Mirroring the real-world design environment, where receiving and offering feedback is crucial for professional growth. The pandemic disrupted this dynamic, especially as students became passive in the online environment. Harris (2022) describes how introverted learners struggle in these settings, feeling isolated and hesitant to engage in real-time discussions. I have realized that these challenges extend beyond online learning and can affect in-person critiques if we don’t consider the diverse needs of students.

Damiani (2018) suggests that “social media and the web… can actually be constructive platforms for being social, engaged, and present.” This made me question if we can adapt online engagement strategies to in-person teaching. While face-to-face communication remains essential, there are elements of virtual learning that can enhance the classroom experience. For example, small group discussions in online settings allow for quieter students to contribute in a more comfortable environment, and I plan to incorporate this approach into in-person critiques.

As Rosenberg (2005) asserts, “When we combine observation with evaluation, others are apt to hear criticism and resist what we are saying,” which resonates deeply with my approach to feedback. To avoid this, I plan to continue focusing on providing feedback through observation rather than evaluation. This method ensures that students can engage with the feedback without feeling criticised. I will also be more intentional with my verbal feedback, making sure it remains constructive and empathetic in the physical classroom setting.

Now that we are returning to physical classrooms, I intend to bring these strategies into the critique process. To ensure an inclusive environment, I will encourage every student to contribute, ensuring that no one is overshadowed by more vocal participants. Drawing from online teaching, I’ve learned the importance of structuring smaller group discussions and providing clear prompts. In the physical classroom, I’ll implement structured group critiques, giving students a chance to share feedback in smaller, less intimidating settings before contributing to the larger group discussion.

Moreover, I will implement regular check-ins throughout the course to encourage ongoing feedback, ensuring that students feel supported in their learning journey. Rather than waiting for formal critiques, I will foster a continuous feedback loop where students can share their thoughts and concerns as they work. I’ll also introduce more peer-led critiques, allowing students to lead discussions and practice giving constructive feedback.

To further refine my approach, I’ll continue reading ‘The Art of Feedback in Online Learning’(Leibold, N. & Schwarz, L.M, 2015) and ‘Rethinking Feedback’ (Hattie & Timperley, 2007), to better understand how to bridge the gap between online and in-person feedback practices and further improve my feedback techniques.

References

Damiani, L. M. (2018). “On the spectrum within art and design academic practice“. Spark: UAL Creative Teaching and Learning Journal, Vol 3 / Issue 1, pp. 16-25. (Accessed 12/01/25).

Harris, K. (2022). “Embracing the silence: introverted learning and the online classroom“. Spark: UAL Creative Teaching and Learning Journal, Vol 5 / Issue 1. (Accessed 06/01/25).

Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). “The Power of Feedback“. Review of Educational Research, 77(1), 81-112.

Leibold, N. & Schwarz, L.M., 2015. “The art of feedback in online learning. The Journal of Effective Teaching“. 15(1), pp.34-46.

Rosenberg, M. (2005). “Observing without evaluating. Nonviolent Communication: A Language of Life”. CA: Puddledancer Press. (Accessed 15/02/25)

Teaching Real-World Studio Practices without a Physical Space

Returning to academic reading has been both energizing and daunting, particularly with the physical demands of moving my studio equipment across the UK have made me reflect on the privileges of having a dedicated creative space and reading “Teaching Practices for Creative Practitioners’ by Orr & Shreeve, resonated deeply with me. One concept that really stood out was “cultures residing in the studio,” a relatively new idea discussed in ‘Studio Culture’ by Shaughnessy (2009), where he explores “the mechanics of building and maintaining a vibrant studio culture.” This concept speaks to the collaborative, dynamic environment that a physical studio can foster. I realized that many creative programs, particularly at CSM, do not have a dedicated physical space for students, which contrasts with my own experience as a creative practitioner.

Having a studio where ideas flow freely and collaboration occurs organically is invaluable. This collaborative energy, fuelled by shared space, is essential to the creative process. However, I’ve begun reflecting on how to teach students the benefits of a physical studio when they may not have access to one during or after university. Having worked in various creative environments, I’ve seen how studio culture fosters spontaneous collaboration, feedback, and problem-solving, all of which enhance the creative process.

Reflecting on my role in preparing students for the creative industries, I realize not all will have access, due to rising costs and changing dynamics of creative work means many will enter the workforce without this luxury. This raises questions about how to replicate the collaborative, hands-on environment of a studio in the classroom and what strategies we can employ to offer students an authentic real-world experience. As Orr & Shreeve (2017) suggest, the digital space might offer a different kind of collaborative culture and whilst I value a physical space, I can prepare students for the diverse ways creative work is now shared and produced.

My aim is to create more opportunities for students to engage in collaborative, real-world experiences within the classroom, even if physical space limitations exist. Suggesting project-based workshops where students work on shared themes or problems, mimicking the collaborative energy of a studio. I intend to incorporate more peer-led critiques and group-based activities to simulate the kind of group discussions and feedback that naturally occur in physical studio environments.

I will also emphasise resourcefulness and adaptability in creative practice, if students leave university without a dedicated work space, they will need to be able to create environments that foster creativity, even in unconventional settings. As Hall (2022) states, “the artist’s studio is not simply a place of work but a site of cultural exchange.” I will encourage students to think about how they can set up their own studio environments at home or within other creative communities, remaining agile and flexible in the face of challenges.

To expand my approach, I will read more about how other creative programs and tutors tackle the issue of limited studio access, particularly focusing on how students can be prepared for creative careers without relying on a physical space. *The Artist’s Studio: A Cultural History* by Hall (2022) will inform my understanding of the historical and cultural significance of studios, helping me think about how these spaces translate into the modern creative world.

References 

Hall, J. (2022). “The Artist’s Studio: A Cultural History”. Thames & Hudson. 

Orr, S., & Shreeve, A. (2017). “Teaching Practices for Creative Practitioners.” Art and Design Pedagogy in Higher Education: Knowledge, Values, and Ambiguity in the Creative Curriculum, pp. 88-106. 

Shaughnessy, A. (2009). “Studio Culture”. Unit Editions.