Month: February 2021

‘Love is a combination of care, commitment, knowledge, responsibility, respect and trust.’

bell hooks (2002)

What a fantastic session. We came prepared by having read at least two of the wide selections of reading exploring ‘love, care and belonging’, and a view on how it can be applied within our teaching context. Instead of it being a top-down approach to teaching, Linda invited us into a dialogic space to discuss our views on the readings, and to elaborate on why we thought love, care and belonging was necessary in teaching, particularly during these uncertain times. Apparently this was a new session planned in for the PgCert due to the additional challenges everyone is experiencing at the moment, to reflect on the vital role of the teacher-learner relationship in monitoring and enhancing the wellbeing of students. A very welcome one at that.

We reflected on how it’s a very difficult time for everyone, and how pastoral care is essential. There are sometimes students who have insecurities about their academic ability, and who question whether they are on the right course. There are lots of obstacles and difficulties students experience, and now more than ever could be more isolating for them during our third national lockdown.

It’s important to work as a team (rather than in isolation/silos) when supporting students, and to set parameters on what we do and don’t share. Fostering a sense of belonging is important (UAL, n.d.), and it’s equally important to recognise when a student has not attended, to touch base with them afterwards (by email) to see if they’re ok and to note that you noticed they didn’t attend. A little reminder that you care about their wellbeing goes a long way.

Even creating informal spaces for students to talk to each other, particularly when they are unable to do it in person, is a form of care and a way of creating a sense of community and belonging. What would have happened organically if the teaching were to be taking place face-to-face needs to be facilitated for. You can create a buddying system or encourage reading groups, you do not have to facilitate the sessions as an academic, but you can play a vital role in instigating the sessions which the students then take ownership from.

Care in an academic environment forces an individual to show a level of empathy, to put themselves in another’s shoes, and to consider the language used. Mutual patience between student and teacher is required, and if the wrong language comes up (e.g. colloquialisms) it can lead to the person feeling uncomfortable (e.g. if English is not their first language, the use of colloquialisms may make them feel inadequate in their language ability if it’s not understood). Care in teaching encourages a level of comfort and trust from the student to the teacher.

When discussing what people have done to create a sense of belonging and care, a few interesting examples were mentioned:

• relating wholeheartedly to another person (listening to the student(s))
• telling students that you are hearing them. e.g. paraphrasing what they have said to indicate that you are listening
• setting parameters and a routine of when you can meet with students – this managed their expectations. e.g. regularity in 20 minute weekly tutorials.

Megan shared a gem on the 5 levels of listening. To be a good listener, you want to aim for level 4 and 5, to be an attentive and active listener. Good listening encourages the person you are listening to to expand further on what they are saying, something which is vital within teaching. For example, during a tutorial, instead of interrupting, hijacking or advising the student too soon, it is better to listen carefully and to invite them to expand further on their ideas, or to even prompt them with questions which helps the student reflect on their ideas. This in turn gives the student the confidence in what they already know, with some prompting nudges for further investigation.

---

References

hooks, b. (2002) Communion: The Female Search for Love. HarperCollins: New York.

UAL (n.d.) Fostering belonging and compassionate pedagogy. Available from: https://www.arts.ac.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0019/223417/AEM3_FBCP.pdf [Accessed 17 February 2021]

Ward, L. (n.d.) How to increase your listening skills. Available from: https://www.slickpivot.com/bloginputpage/how-increase-listening-skills [Accessed 17 February 2021]

John Holmwood’s chapter on ‘Race and the Neoliberal University: Lessons from the Public University’ (2018) calls to question the impact of ‘privatisation’ of higher education following the 2008 global financial crisis, which sadly led to the removal of all public funding for HE courses for arts, humanities and social sciences courses (and the impact being seen through the increase in tuition fees). The value placed on a HE degree by the government is therefore reduced to the measurable economic return in the labour market. With the sudden increase in tuition fees (from roughly £3,000 to £9,000 in 2012) and the financial burden that students are now faced with (psychologically, may I add, for those taking out a SFE Student Loan… as technically speaking the likelihood of all students paying off their loans within 30 years of starting their career [plan 2 loan] is next to impossible, so ironically it still falls back to the taxpayers, see Holmwood 2018, p.46), the expectation students (and their parents) place on the economic return of a degree is greater than before, turning student to consumer and university as a hub of education and engine to social change to business.

To what extent are individuals personally responsible for their success?

The idea of higher education as a personal responsibility would seem to reinforce existing socioeconomic inequalities.

Holmwood, J. (2018 p.38)

To think that individuals are personally responsible for their own success is a very neoliberal view which would have been championed by Margaret Thatcher (and Ronald Reagan) in the 1980s. This individualistic view does not take into consideration an individuals socio-economic background, implicit biases and structural racism, gender biases, or the intersectionality of these barriers which would impact the ease at which ‘success’ is achieved. Nor does it consider the differing levels of privileges individuals inherit, such as economic, social or cultural capital. What even is the definition of success? Is it to make a difference in the world, or to make £150k per annum? This very much depends on where value is placed, so is very subjective.

Within the Cultural and Creative Industries (CCIs), a blind eye is turned to the levels of free labour individuals feel is a necessity to undertake in order to succeed. In this instance, I frame ‘success’ as breaking into the industry. Unpaid (or low paid) internships (or ‘volunteering’ which have replaced some internships as a loophole to avoid the now illegal unpaid internships) are at the heart of the meritocratic discourse, paintings those who are able to undertake these internships as passionate and ‘doing it for the love of it’, and those who cannot (for many reasons such as not having the time, money or contacts) as not wanting it enough. To suggest that an individual is personally responsible for their own success is shortsighted.

Even within higher education, the BAME attainment gap (or what Dr Gurnam Singh likes to rephrase as the awarding differential) is evidence that there is something which creates a difference in experience for success (in this instance, success is framed as attainment – achieving a high grade (1st or 2:1, A-B grades, merit or distinction)). Be that the sense of belonging, the curriculum which they may not identify with or how assessment is carried out does not align with the wider student population, this highlights the different needs an individual requires to achieve success. See AEM’s ‘supporting attainment with unit design‘.

As Holmwood says, ‘Personal responsibility is the ideology that maintains the status quo, not the means of challenging it.’ (2018, p.47)

What is the justification for some people earning more than others?

The paradox of neoliberal ‘credentialism’ is that it makes participation in higher education necessary for any job beyond those paying the minimum wage, while, at the same time, the increased stratification of higher education makes place of study as important as a degree as such.

Holmwood, J. (2018 p.45)

You would expect that the justification would be the level of responsibility, job difficulty or amount of work they have to do compared to others would increase earnings. However, in a neoliberal climate where individualism has excelled, it appears that the amount of value that is placed on a role and how it is reflected in pay is very much dependent on whether it sits within the public or private sector (e.g. NHS staff, teacher vs banker, recruiter).

According to a public survey, the top three key factors which dictate the amount of earnings are: the amount of responsibility; how well the person does the job; and finally the job difficulty. The level of education or qualifications required is also valued – so does obtaining a degree give you more justification to be able to do a job? According to UAL’s PRA system, obtaining a relevant qualification does enable the recommendation of an increase in pay progression (an additional spine point), but who decides how relevant the degree is to the role?

What does ‘social solidarity’ mean to you?

In sort, social rights, in their development, were partial, but might have been universalised and extended to others previously excluded. To do so would have been to address the racialised exclusions that they contained. in the case of higher education, this would have been to ‘decolonise’ the university in terms both of access and curriculum (the latter would be likely both to follow greater access as well as facilitating it, as was the case with gender and the impact of feminism, for example).

Holmwood, J. (2018 p.44)

Social solidarity in an educational context means to empower an individual to have a sense of belonging to the wider society and to have the same shared values of society. As French sociologist Emile Durkeheim (1972) said, ‘society can survive only if there exists among its members a sufficient degree of homogeneity; education perpetuates and reinforces this homogeneity by fixing in the mind of the child, from the beginning, the essential similarities that social life demands.‘ His perspective on education was that education plays an essential role in shaping modern societies through embedding shared social values.

The call to decolonise the university is a call to extend and enact social justice in education. The alternative to public higher education is a market-based system operating on neoliberal principles. This purports to be race-blind, but insofar as racialised difference and inequality is a product of social structures of disadvantage, those structures will be reproduced in any arrangements that make change a matter of personal responsibility. Personal responsibility is the ideology that maintains the status quo, not the means of challenging it.

Holmwood, J. (2018, p.47)

---

References

Holmwood, J. (2018) Chapter 3. Race and the Neoliberal University: Lessons From the Public University. Decolonising the University. [Online]. pp.37–52. Available from: http://library.oapen.org/handle/20.500.12657/25936 (Accessed 06 February 2021).

Morrison, A. (2016) How do people justify earning more than others? [Online]. Available from: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-33613246 (Accessed 06 February 2021).

Thompson, K. (2017) Durkheim’s Perspective on Education. [Online]. Available from: https://revisesociology.com/2017/08/22/functionalist-durkheim-role-education/ (Accessed 06 February 2021).

Gloria Dall’Alba writes her account of teaching development in universities for experienced university teachers in her piece, ‘Improving teaching: Enhancing ways of being university teachers’ (2005), and it was interesting to see how I reflected on my perceptions as a student entering the PgCert in Academic Practice as an academic with no prior experience.

There was a lot of mention of ontology and epistemology (areas of philosophy) within the educational context, terms which I still find a little difficult to fully grasp. I tend to try and simplify the definitions to ontology as what the knowledge is, and epistemology as how knowledge is obtained. As epistemology is an area of philosophy that is concerned with the creation of knowledge, individual epistemologies will differ depending on the lens in which the world is seen through (e.g. feminist lens). The text really expanded upon how you can learn from each other, through understanding each others epistemologies to expand your knowledge and to develop empathy through other perspectives.

Dall’Alba considers the pedagogical relationship and suggests that the conventional student-teacher model (in other words, the hierarchical top-down approach) as inappropriate, noting that ‘no one form or site of knowledge has privileged status’ (Dall’Alba, 2005 p.363). I like to break down hierarchies and to encourage a more mutual form of learning, where teachers facilitate these spaces of knowledge exchange, to spark an interest or to suggest further readings. 

Although I am in agreement of the collaborative approach to teaching and learning, it did cross my mind that this is a very Western style of education and questioned what things could be put in place to be supportive of students who are not familiar or used to questioning what they perceive as the authority or contributing so freely during class without the fear of ‘mistakes’. The teacher-centred classroom is still common practice in Japan, and I think it is important to consider how to break the balance whilst managing expectations. Perhaps preparing the students in advance with topics of discussion prior to the session, giving notice to come prepared to the class with views, experiences or thoughts to contribute would be helpful.

‘Against the background of this wealth of experience, I see the course as a form of collaboration among colleagues in which we all learn, in contrast to a conventional student-teacher model.’ (Dall’Alba, 2005 p.365)

I hope to be active in my learning as a new academic, and to heed the advice of ‘critical friends’ through discussing teaching methods/techniques. The paper noted how it is difficult to teach a toolbox of skills to be a ‘good teacher’, and highlighted the importance of the continuing process of learning as a teacher. Dall’Alba concludes by noting how important it is to continue ‘to be reflexive about teaching practice as the contexts in which we teach change’ (p.371). Lessons I have learnt through this is that lived experience can be a mode of knowledge, and the responsibility of learning is shared between teacher and student. I will aim to always be flexible and adaptable in my teaching by reading the room and being reflexive and modify when necessary.

---

References

Dall’Alba, G. (2005) Improving teaching: Enhancing ways of being university teachers. Higher Education Research & Development. [Online] 24 (4), pp.361–372. [online]. Available from: http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/07294360500284771 (Accessed 06 February 2021).