Reflecting On: The Experiential Learning Cycle By David Kolb

Within my introduction I aimed to merge my creative/research interests within my teaching pedagogy. I was intrigued the moment I first read the following quote about Kolb’s Experiential Learning Cycle (ELC):

 “Learning is the process whereby knowledge is created through the transformation of experience”(Kolb, 1984, p. 38 cited in Mcleod, 2024, n.p.).

This quote resonated with me and my own research interests such as Andrea Gaggioli’s Transformative Experience Design (2015). A theory that posits that certain experiences have the ability to radically transform an individual’s perception of themselves and the world around them, citing that some things can only be learned through experience, such as having a child (The Possibility Studies Network, 2021). So when I considered the application of this fundamental idea within a classroom setting, I was hooked.

Although I was just a little disappointed that there was no justification for creating entire fictional worlds in which learners would be thrown into, learning through predetermined narratives/experiences,but was still interested in how Kolb outlined multiple different learning styles: The visual, auditory & kinesthetic (Fallace, 2023). Within Kolb’s writing he explains that (below is not a direct quote from Kolb):

“Effective learning is seen when a person progresses through a cycle of four stages: of (1) having a concrete experience followed by (2) observation of and reflection on that experience which leads to (3) the formation of abstract concepts (analysis) and generalizations (conclusions) which are then (4) used to test a hypothesis in future situations, resulting in new experiences.”(Mcleod, 2024, n.p.)

Kolb’s cycle makes it “…possible to enter… at any stage and follow it through its logical sequence.”(Mcleod, 2024, n.p.), the relationship between the learning styles and learning cycle (see figure 1) is that the cycle will encompass the learner in at least one of their preferred learning styles but also developing their non-preferred style through the linking structure. It is important to not note that:

“… effective learning only occurs when a learner can execute all four stages of the model. Therefore, no one stage of the cycle is effective as a learning procedure on its own.”(Mcleod, 2024, n.p.)

Kolb’s theory does have some controversy around this idea of the visual, auditory & kinesthetic learning styles and experiential learning cycle. Such as how it can lead to a non authoritative classroom dynamic (Valiente-Riedl, Anderson and Banki, 2022) contradicting Barrow’s (2006) benefits (see case study 3). Nonetheless many educators claim benefits from their implementations (Pourhosein Gilakjani, 2011; Suaib, 2019) such as a way to break-up “…monotonous teaching technique…”(Suaib, 2019, p. 252) and create a more engaging classroom environment.

Figure 1. Kolb’s Learning Styles

Considering how to integrate ELC into my teaching raised questions. The broad applicability and positive reception across disciplines suggested its benefit, despite critiques. Its versatility aligns with my prior reflections on reinforcing learning through circular approaches (see figure 2) (seen in case study 2) and so would like to trial running ‘taster’ or introductory sessions that break down the fundamental concepts to compare. Within these sessions I could use the ELC framework to break down important fundamental concepts such as PWM (Hirzel, 2022) and Breadboards (Shawn, 2020) – something notoriously difficult to wrap your head around without experiencing.

Figure 2. Circular Approach

An example of how this could be implemented into my session (see figure 3):

Objective: Teach PWM and why we would want to use it.

  • Concrete Experience: Provide students with pre-written code based on a diagram; students then observe an LED’s behaviour.
  • Reflective Observation: Ask the students what is happening, asking questions like “what are the limitations of this” (i.e it is only either on or off)
  • Abstract Conceptualisation: Introduce the concept of PWM as a technique to simulate an analog output using digital means.
  • Active Experimentation: Challenge the students to modify the code to use PWM to control the brightness of the LED.
Figure 3. Proposed Implementation of Kolbs Learning Cycle into Wearable Tech Workshops. 

To conclude, I feel that Kolb’s ELC offers valuable insights for teaching complex concepts. Its application could potentially enhance my entire workshop strategy. I’m excited to test these methods and observe student engagement with this approach.

Bibliography

Barrow, M. (2006) ‘Assessment and student transformation: linking character and intellect’, Studies in Higher Education, 31(3), pp. 357–372. doi: 10.1080/03075070600680869.

Fallace, T. (2023) ‘The long origins of the visual, auditory, and kinesthetic learning style typology, 1921–2001.’, History of Psychology, 26(4), pp. 334–354. doi: 10.1037/hop0000240.

Gaggioli, A. (2015) ‘Transformative Experience Design’, pp. 97–122. doi: 10.1515/9783110471137-006.

Hirzel, T. (2022) Basics of PWM (Pulse Width Modulation), Arduino. Available at: https://docs.arduino.cc/learn/microcontrollers/analog-output/ (Accessed: 20 March 2024).

Kolb, D. A. (1999) Experiential learning: experience as the source of learning and development. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. Available at: https://learningfromexperience.com/downloads/research-library/experiential-learning-theory.pdf (Accessed: 20 March 2024).

Mcleod, S. (2024) Kolb’s Learning Styles & Experiential Learning Cycle, Simply Psychology. Available at: https://www.simplypsychology.org/learning-kolb.html (Accessed: 20 March 2024).

Pourhosein Gilakjani, A. (2011) ‘Visual, Auditory, Kinaesthetic Learning Styles and Their Impacts on English Language Teaching’, JSE, 2(1). doi: 10.5296/JSE.V2I1.1007.

Shawn (2020) How To Use A Breadboard For Beginners? Wiring, Circuit, Arduino – Latest Open Tech From Seeed, seeedstudio. Available at: https://www.seeedstudio.com/blog/2020/01/06/how-to-use-a-breadboard-wiring-circuit-and-arduino-interfacing/#:~:text=A%20breadboard%20is%20a%20solderless,getting%20started%20with%20using%20one. (Accessed: 20 March 2024).

Suaib, R. W. (2019) ‘The Use Of Visual Auditory Kinesthetic (Vak) Learning Styles To Increase Students’ Vocabulary’, Didaktika, 11(2). doi: 10.30863/DIDAKTIKA.V11I2.169.

The Possibility Studies Network (2021) ‘Andrea Gaggioli: Transformative experience design: Exploring novel spaces in the phygital era’. Youtube, 11 May.

Valiente-Riedl, E., Anderson, L. and Banki, S. (2022) ‘Practicing what we teach: Experiential learning in higher education that cuts both ways’, Review of Education, Pedagogy, and Cultural Studies , 44(3), pp. 231–252. doi: 10.1080/10714413.2021.1985372.

Image Index

Figure 1. Mcleod, S. (2024) Kolb’s Learning Styles. simplypsychology. Available at: https://www.simplypsychology.org/wp-content/uploads/learning-styles-kolb.jpg (Accessed: 20 March 2024).

Figure 2. Hall, E. (2024) Circular Approach.

Figure 3. Hall, E. (2024) Proposed Implementation of Kolbs Learning Cycle into Wearable Tech Workshops. 

Posted in Blog Posts Term 1, Term 1 | Leave a comment

Reflecting On My Teaching with Brookfield’s Four Lenses

Approaching the end of this term, this course has already impacted my teaching practice beyond my initial expectations of learning new theories. Indeed the breath of literature was enlightening, however, the significant impact has come from the examination of my teaching practice through others perspectives – notably influencing my self-development (See Case Study 3). Instead of breaking down Brookfields theories ​​(Brookfield, 1995), I’ll instead share my reflections, takeaways and future intentions. For clarity here is a breakdown of Brookfields Four Lenses, for anyone unfamiliar:

“The goal of the critically reflective teacher, for Brookfield, is to garner an increased awareness of his or her teaching from as many different vantage points as possible. To this end, Brookfield proposes four lenses that can be engaged by teachers in a process of critical reflection: (1) the autobiographical, (2) the students’ eyes, (3) our colleagues’ experiences, and (4) theoretical literature.”(Miller, 2010, p. 1)

1. The Autobiographical

Self-reflection has been the predominant viewpoint of my practice. Recently graduating and rejoining again as a student, I initially believed I had a grasp on these experiences. However, this process has revealed to me that the student experience is nowhere near universal, although we share the same university title, the needs and abilities don’t just vary from college to college but instead from student to student. With this in mind, I have committed myself to making sure I do not lose sight of my positionality (see blog post 1) and how it leads me to hold the values I do, and therefore the leverage it has on my decisions/teaching.

2. The Students Eyes

Gathering student feedback is challenging, as I have found students often hesitate to critique staff. However, the microteaching exercise revealed to me the value of experiencing workshops from a student perspective – revealing to me how my assumptions of knowledge can vary greatly. Going forward I want to make sure that I not only speak to students about the content, but also try to experience it.

3. Our Colleagues’ Experiences

Receiving peer feedback is terrifying as it has the potential to confirm our deepest insecurities – but understand it is crucial for development. Being able to make corrections early certainly outweighs the potential for an entirely different approach further on. Although I am early in my teaching career, I’ve found immense value in my peers’ feedback, which has prompted me to re-examine my approach to workshops to ensure baseline information is accessible to students, and providing resources that allow different types of learners to thrive. It has also highlighted things I am doing well such as simplifying complex concepts with analogies, a practice I plan to expand on – hopefully making it more engaging and digestible. Lastly, being able to experience and provide feedback on my peers’ teaching has led me to discover strategies and methods that I too can develop into my teaching.

4. Theoretical Literature

Reading a broad range of literature early in this course has been eye opening, especially as I am really not used to reading papers outside of my creative practice. Readings such as Barrow’s on self-development through education (Barrow, 2006), Brookfields critical reflection (Brookfield, 1995) and Kolb’s experiential learning theory (Kolb, 1984) has shaped my understanding of how teaching is more than just the transfer of knowledge. These insights have guided my reflection on small restructuring and the introduction of new resources and formats can enhance my teaching.

To conclude

Through Brookfields reflective practice has revealed to me my preconceived perceptions, successes and areas for improvement. This has shifted my understanding of what high-quality teaching is and can be.

Bibliography

Barrow, M. (2006) ‘Assessment and student transformation: linking character and intellect’, Studies in Higher Education, 31(3), pp. 357–372. doi: 10.1080/03075070600680869.

Brookfield, S. (1995) Becoming a critically reflective teacher. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Kolb, D. A. (1999) Experiential learning: experience as the source of learning and development. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. Available at: https://learningfromexperience.com/downloads/research-library/experiential-learning-theory.pdf (Accessed: 19 March 2024).

Miller, B. (2010) ‘Brookfield’s Four Lenses: Becoming a Critically Reflective Teacher’, Faculty of Arts Teaching and Learning Committee. The University of Sydney. Available at: https://valenciacollege.edu/faculty/development/courses-resources/documents/brookfield_summary.pdf (Accessed: 19 March 2024).

Posted in Blog Posts Term 1, Term 1 | Leave a comment

Am I a Technician? An Educator? Or both?

Even as a student I was aware of the devide between academic and technicians, so I wasn’t surprised when I started the role as a technician to find myself feeling valued differently within the university setting, be that through students or the way the university distinguishes pay and holiday differences – so after reading How do art and design technicians conceive of their role in higher education? (Sams, 2016) I was notably interested in the views that my colleagues took. I particularly appreciated how the paper challenged the traditional academic hierarchy and advocates for a more inclusive recognition within the educational ecosystem.

What struck me initially was how Sams’s talks about the underrepresentation of technicians within academic literature in an Art and Design context (ibid) – this surprised me, specifically within this sector, as art and design tends to be a vocation that requires practical skills and training and is a vital aspect within the student experience; according to technical managers, within student surveys, often students complain about the lack of access to technical services, showing technicians are in high demand.

I suppose the argument could be generated that technicians fall into the same remit as a factory worker or other skill based trade work and therefore lack the academic esteem required. But what about the times this is just simply not the case? In the case of technical colleagues with postgraduate qualifications, doctorates and supporting teaching qualifications? Could it not be argued that these technicians are more valuable, striking the balance between specialist skills and knowledge alongside the subject based specialist knowledge that comes from an intense program of training?

Or is there something more at play here? Is this instead a representation of archaic academia hierarchy where lecturers bestow upon the students the most valuable of knowledge and therefore deserve the place at the top of the food chain? This being said there is no disagreement that the work undertaken by lecturers and course leaders in particular is burdensome, including hitting measurable outcomes, learning objectives, teaching, marking and maintaining course productivity to name a few – and that certainly should not be devalued.

Another aspect of the paper I found particularly interesting was:

“This trend links to those outlined by the findings a report on Highly skilled technicians in higher education (Smith et al, 2004), which indicates that many technicians move away from the traditional skills-based aspects of their role as they advance in their careers.”(Sams, 2016, p. 63)

I found this particularly interesting as there is an interesting divergence in comparison to academics and technicians here, as Sams’s points out technicians progress through management which in turn pushes them behind the scenes and causes a distancing between themselves and the student experience – although I would argue this is counter productive and leads to systemic internal bureaucracy that forgets the student. On the other hand those within the academic pathway go on to run courses, talks, publish books and papers – in a sense broadcasting achievements for the lucky few, but also widening the student contact – if not direct. To me as a technician, this puts me in a difficult position that already directly effects me, as a grade 4 technician I have already reached the top rung of the ladder without entering management, and leads me to the question of why I would want to pursue a management level job that removes the need for a craft based skill, but also removes me from students. It seems to me through conversation with colleagues is that universities already understand this question, and the simple answer is, there are hundreds of graduates ready to step up and claim the technical roles.

This paper has highlighted to me that technicians within art and design education are more than just the technical assistance, but are instead educators, mentors and artists in their own right (Sams, 2016). I sincerely believe there should be a larger voice for technical staff within the university below the management level in regards to the improvements that could be made to student education; and further question how the encouragement and celebration of our own creative practices would keep technicians feeling equally valued, seeing as only a dismal 40% felt this aspect was valued (Sams, 2016).

Bibliography

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

Posted in Blog Posts Term 1, Term 1 | Leave a comment

Case Study 3 | Assessing learning and exchanging feedback

Contextual Background

Given my role’s technical orientation, open access, and non-curriculum specific nature—as noted in my introductory blog—I’ve evaluated learning via workshops instead of direct student interactions. Reading Assessment and Student Transformation: Linking Character and Intellect (Barrow, 2006) highlighted education’s focus on self-development, not just academics, guiding my aim to support this in my educational role.

Evaluation

In my educational role, I aim to blend practical skills in wearable technology with personal growth, through workshops, guides, and individual guidance focusing on learning technical knowledge (Hall, 2024) (see Appendix A). However, this approach lacks emphasis on self-reflection and development, a contrast to my interest in Transformative Experience Design (Gaggioli, 2016), which promotes self-reflection through experience, a concept explored within education in Experiential learning: experience as the source of learning and development (Kolb, 1984) – a paper of interest (see blog post 4). This reveals a disconnect between my teaching methods and creative practice, leaning too heavily on technical expectations, something I had assumed within my expectations of the role (Sams, 2016). Within Barrows paper the lecturers role is  “…to guide and encourage, in the student, a self-examination of his or her own relationship to the discipline, intervening to ‘judge, punish, forgive, console, and reconcile’ (Foucault, 1990, p. 61).”(Barrow, 2006, p.367) – with an emphasis on the students revealing themselves for critique (Barrow, 2006). Barrow suggests that by creating space for self-reflection it enhances the student’s ‘self’ over purely academic achievement (ibid).

Moving Forward

While my goal is to equip students with practical skills to enhance their practice, I observe that technical education often focuses on imparting transactional skills rather than fostering long-term self-development and reflection, essentially trading skills for students’ time. In my area, there’s been no deliberate effort to allocate time for students to reflect and develop their creative identities during interactions; this may naturally occur as projects progress and through the development of long-term rapport, fostering confidence in students to open up (Barrow, 2006); no active effort is made. Within the papers mentioned (Barrow, 2006; Gaggioli, 2016), this action takes place over time with accountability practices at the centre, such as documenting and journals. This raises the question: can these outcomes be achieved in shorter durations through structured workshops or one-on-one project reviews in a technical setting?

Initially, I hoped for a straightforward solution to integrating reflection into short technical deliveries, but it appears the issue isn’t so simple. An intriguing suggestion was having students write ‘a letter to their future selves’ discussing their aspirations and challenges they hope to overcome. This method uniquely facilitates reflection, potentially highlighting significant progress, especially in technical areas, without the long-term commitment of an assessed journal. Plus, it offers a novel and engaging approach

To develop the idea further in relevancy within my technical space I propose an example of what this could look like; In its simplest implementation, a form/document that requests students to outline their current skills, their current project idea/context, the skills in which they hope to learn – revisiting this at technical/project milestones, for re-evaluation and reflection. This implementation could then support technicians to support students, but also be a great benefit  for students when compiling their project documentation as it would help to outline the practical journey the students took when completing their project (something academic colleagues often state is missed or rushed during final hand-in) – but most importantly, hopefully aiding in the students own reflective journey in developing ‘the self’.

Bibliography

Barrow, M. (2006) ‘Assessment and student transformation: linking character and intellect’, Studies in Higher Education, 31(3), pp. 357–372. doi: 10.1080/03075070600680869.

Gaggioli, A. (2015) ‘Transformative Experience Design’, pp. 97–122. doi: 10.1515/9783110471137-006.

Kolb, D. A. (1999) Experiential learning: experience as the source of learning and development. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. Available at: https://learningfromexperience.com/downloads/research-library/experiential-learning-theory.pdf (Accessed: 16 March 2024).

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

Appendix A

Posted in Case Studies Term 1, Term 1 | Leave a comment

Case Study 2 | Planning and teaching for effective learning

Contextual Background

Within my specialist area, ‘Wearable Tech’ (see introduction blog post), the biggest initial hurdle is the scale of foundational knowledge as Wearable Tech consists of a combination of programming, electronics and physical computing. My role requires me to condense three separate vocations into a small period of learning, but where do you begin?

Evaluation

Currently within wearable tech I offer a range of different learning opportunities and resources for my students. These include a series of workshops exploring different interest areas, such as example projects, industry use cases, workshops & guides (supplementary materials), additional guides (Such as setting up common hardware), hand-picked external resources, useful tools & interesting practitioners (Hall, 2024). The role of these teaching materials is to support student’s decision to commit; see the sort of outcome they could produce but also supply useful starting points. To-date the main aim of these workshops and supplied learning resources has been to reduce friction, to avoid putting students off learning a complex area.

An example is predicting types of projects students would like and creating relevant guides. Throughout my PgCert I have been questioning the challenges students face with learning and have come to a crossroad. Asking myself is this really the right approach? By designing simplified learning resources, am I as an educator sheltering my students from the reality of the complexities they will face when creating projects and therefor stopping the development of the problem solving required to achieve their desired outcomes –more importantly develop skills that can be applied in the real world.

Within the paper Implementing Technology Education Problem-Solving Activities (DeLuca, 1991) I particularly like the following quote:

 “…there is a difference between the product and the process when considering the value of problem-solving activities. Perkins (1986, p. 7) cautions against focusing on the products we produce and only indirectly the process by which we produce them.”(DeLuca, 1991, p.1).

This reflects my oversight in prioritising impressive final outcomes to inspire students with wearable tech’s potential, inadvertently side-lining the essential skills needed for success. Reflecting on this, student engagement issues discussed in other case studies led me to deviate too far from my original goal of teaching valuable technical skills.

Moving Forward

Moving forward I would like to focus on implementing debugging skills into the core teaching – arguably the most important skill within the area; “Troubleshooting/Debugging: Isolate the problem, identify possible cause, test, implement solution, test solution”(DeLuca, 1991, p.2).

Currently my workshop structure consists of: 1. Foundational Knowledge, 2. Reinforcing that knowledge through practical activity (See Figure 1). However, that activity is laid out in an almost infallible way, with most, if not all information required being presented. Moving forward I would like to begin experimenting with replacing my linear workshops with a circular approach (See Figure 2) that instead breaks the knowledge into smaller pieces, allowing for ‘1. Ingestion of the foundational knowledge, 2. Reinforcing that knowledge through practical activity’ – But then going further with ‘3. Testing that knowledge for practical problem solving’ – A form of reinforcement learning or problem-based learning (Hemker, Prescher and Narciss, 2017).

Figure 1. Shows my linear approach my workshops take.
Figure 2. Shows my suggested circular approach of reinforcing this learning through trial and error.

Practical problem solving is already in place, however, I believe through the imposing of common example problems, students will be able to test the knowledge they have learned and apply it in a way that will reinforce learning. I look forward to seeing how this implementation of reinforcement/problem-based learning could improve the self-efficiency of my students – empowering them to tackle projects in the future.

Bibliography

DeLuca, V. W. (1991) ‘Implementing Technology Education Problem-Solving Activities’, JTE, 2(2). doi: 10.21061/jte.v2i2.a.2.

Hall, E. (2024) Wearable Tech & Physical Computing. University of the Arts London. Available at: https://wt.lcfdll.com (Accessed: 15 March 2024).

Hemker, L., Prescher, C. and Narciss, S. (2017) ‘Design and Evaluation of a Problem-Based Learning Environment for Teacher Training’, Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-Based Learning, 11(2). doi: 10.7771/1541-5015.1676.

Image Index

Figure 1. Hall, E. (2024) Linear Approach

Figure 2. Hall, E. (2024) Circular Approach

Posted in Case Studies Term 1, Term 1 | Leave a comment

Teaching Observation Reports

Please see attached here the records from all three-teaching observation:

  • Me Observing → Sidney
  • Sidney Observing → Me
  • Lindsay Observing → Me
Posted in Additional Task Term 1, Term 1 | Leave a comment

Case Study 1 | Knowing and meeting the needs of diverse learners

Introduction & Background

My role as a specialist technician in wearable technology at the London College of Fashion, is to introduce and support students in the field of wearable technology (see my first blog post for context). This includes drumming up interest, developing a workable/usable knowledge base whilst lastly supporting students.

Evaluation

Over the past year, I’ve been placed in a fortunate position where I have been funded to be able to design an ideal lab environment and generate my own curriculum of workshops outside of academic scrutiny. Despite this prime position the largest issue I face is student engagement within the college – and further the consistent lack of experience alongside varying levels of expectations.

Although interest within the subject seems high at initial contact, the reality is without direct 1-to-1 support the learning curve is steep without any prior knowledge; this results in the labs underutilisation albeit a handful of highly dedicated students – mostly grouped from the MA Fashion Futures course.

My biggest concern and challenge is to balance the recruitment of students, with the over reliance on myself in supporting students work, striking a line between teaching instead of running a production-level support service for students.

The issues that need to be addressed are:

  • The Large Barrier to Entry
  • The Underutilisation of the Lab
  • Students Expecting Too Much Out of The Technician, To the Point of Being Detrimental to The Students Learning Experience

Moving Forward

Within the rest of this case study I will attempt to take steps to address these issues going forward.

1. Large Barrier To Entry

To help students negotiate with the large learning curve I had initially developed a curriculum of different workshops to cover a range of different areas (see figure 1), however, on reflection I believe it could be beneficial to in addition create clear learning pathways for example if I wanted to create an ‘AI enhanced Jacket’ laying out a clear route through workshops 2, 3, 8 & 9 may make it more manageable (see figure 2) – which could further be supplemented through additional learning materials and guides for specific areas.

Figure 1. Wearable Tech Workshops Available at wt.lcfdll.com
Figure 2. Conceptualised ‘Learning Pathway’ for an AI Garment. For Illustrative Purposes Only.

Additional learning materials is something I have already attempted to implement (see figure 3), however, on reflection a much larger collection of resources paired with a learning pathway could really show a clear direction (Oliver & Herrington, 2003).

Figure 3. Wearable Tech, Additional Guides & Useful Information

2. Underutilisation of the Lab

Showcasing successful projects is something that feels like an obvious solution and is something that I have been doing already without thinking about it. However, I believe if I were to now fully lean into this, I could drum up a lot of interest in projects, but also use these projects as an opportunity to highlight the students experience, such as highlighting the project difficulties, timelines, skills learned – instead of just showing the final outcomes. This further feeds into my other difficulties regarding barriers to entry and student expectations.

3. Lowering Expectation of Technician Offerings

As stated in point one, additional learning guides paired with a pathway could also lower student expectation through showing a clear route of the work that goes into a particular project – an array of these different project pathways (see figure 2) or ‘templates’ could demonstrate and make clear the hidden complexities in certain projects (Atkinson et al., 2000) – further allowing myself as a technician to refer students back to these, allowing the technician to be free to support students by focusing on specific support/problem when complex problems arise – which in turn should significantly improve the student experience.

Bibliography:

Atkinson, R. K., Derry, S. J., Renkl, A. and Wortham, D. (2000) ‘Learning from Examples: Instructional Principles from the Worked Examples Research’, Review of Educational Research, 70(2), pp. 181–214. doi: 10.3102/00346543070002181.

Oliver, R. and Herrington, J. (2003) ‘Exploring Technology-Mediated Learning from a Pedagogical Perspective’, Interactive Learning Environments, 11(2), pp. 111–126.
doi: 10.1076/ilee.11.2.111.14136.

Image Index:

Figure 1. Wearable Tech Workshops (2024) Available at: wt.lcfdll.com

Figure 2. Conceptualised ‘Learning Pathway’ for an AI Garment (2024)

Figure 3. Wearable Tech, Additional Guides & Useful Information (2024)
Available at: wt.lcfdll.com

Posted in Case Studies Term 1, Term 1 | Leave a comment

Micro-Teaching Exercise | Lightbulb Moment

My Micro-Teaching session was focused around Wearable Technology (electronics, programming, robotics etc). My role is to empower students to incorporate interactive wearables into their practice. Within the role I find the most important part is to get students with zero previous experience in the subject, to become interested and passionate about the field. I find this challenging as fashion is predominantly a traditional craft focused discipline with the vast majority of students visiting me, never considering the implementation of tech outside of software. Within my teaching practice I start by trying to achieve a ‘wow’ moment – the sort of feeling you get when you try something new, succeed in it, and have a tangible outcome; The trial flight, a heavily designed/controlled environment with minimal or expected pushbacks.

With this context in mind, and the limiting time period involved, I decided to try and isolate that ‘wow’ moment. To do this I stripped the activity to its core points and removed any additional aspects that would require a greater level of knowledge to understand – my aim was not to inform, but to enable a light bulb moment where a student begins to consider how this could be implemented into their practice.

To achieve this ambitious goal, I broke my micro-teaching into a first 5 minute contextualisation and a 15 minute activity (3 x 5 minute activities). The aim of the contextualisation was to inform the participants that they didn’t necessarily have to understand the complex inner-workings of the objects, instead that by following simple guides were able to build complex systems that could be integrated into a huge range of disciplines – and hopefully the interest or excitement to pursue the area further. This is crucial as I tell my students “nobody just wakes up and is able to program or create circuits – instead it’s just like very early levels of our creative endeavours, we copy, we paint by numbers, we follow recipes – and then we adapt.”

The object I was focusing on was a small little computer, that is the ‘brain’ of most interactive art. To remove complex learning curves, I created kits, to be shared one-between-two, with exact components needed to complete a series of tasks (print-out provided to all participants is attached below). The participants simply had to plug-in the components as shown on the diagrams. I would float around helping spot problems and support the groups when challenges rose.

The feedback I received was very positive and appeared to have been enjoyed. As expected there was the occasional technical blip – but this was resolved swiftly with the redundant kit I had bought incase. To my surprise, I believe I achieved that ‘wow’ moment, the moment after successfully plugging in their components (always after a slight little struggle or missed element – and would argue this is the most important aspect) the lights would light up, and so would faces, often followed by a quick picture on their phones.

The feedback was incredibly supportive, and seemed like they had fun, which is really important in making my area as engaging as possible to promote uptake and reduce barriers to entry such as elevated expectations. Participants found the handouts very useful, something I don’t usually provide – which has shown me that this is a much better approach as it allowed each group to go at a suitable pace. This showed me that a layered approach of building up small activities one at a time, rather than aiming for a more initial ambitious outcome – is a blueprint that I will be incorporating into my teaching practice going forward.

Appendix A

Posted in Additional Task Term 1, Term 1 | Leave a comment

Understanding My Positionality & Influence

Although we are only just beginning to start the curriculum, I’ve been struck by how important it is to just leave time to reflect – although obvious on paper. Within the brief time spent reading papers – especially ‘The New Life’: Mozambican Art Students in the USSR, and the Aesthetic Epistemologies of Anti-Colonial Solidarity by Polly Savage (2022); alongside understanding timelines and history of higher education and most importantly conversing with colleagues, it has led me to really question my position as an educator. It is then no surprise that I have found the readings related to positionality especially interesting and food for thought – often reflecting on my way into work of how my own experiences reflect on the way I teach. I find positionality particularly interesting as this brings both good and bad attributes to my assumptions and methods. One distinct aspect I’ve recognised as both a positive and negative is my economic background – as someone who struggled to fund their degree I tend to put an emphasis on trying to save my students money on their projects (although I believe this offers those in a similar situation a large benefit and equal opportunities that they should be privy to.), however, on the other hand of the spectrum I often come across students who simply want the easiest and quickest solution to their idea regardless of the costs associated and have to be able understand this and be responsive to those students regardless to how I would do it.

It’s funny really as this seems like such an obvious adjustment when written down, however, to me cost was not only just a limiting factor to my education, but also a motivator. As a child it motivated me to be able to create what other people had or could easily get, teaching myself the skills along the way (or more importantly the skills, in which to learn new skills) until I was able to use those skills to go beyond what others had, to create new and interesting ideas and believe that if I had not had these constraints my own knowledge and skill set would be significantly lower or even none existent. Now where this becomes important in my beliefs within my role as an educator is to understand that students come with a huge range of constraints that may not be economic, and instead could be social (such as family pressure to create the best work possible) or otherwise, and that I should not instantly draw my students into a workflow that I have developed due to my own circumstances.

Going forward I will instead try to recognise when I make assumptions and instead make sure I am taking the time to understand my students needs, goals and expected outcomes to the projects they wish to create – outlining the constraints they have and seeing how we can work together to work around those.

Bibliography

Savage, P. (2022) ‘“The New Life”: Mozambican Art Students in the USSR, and the Aesthetic Epistemologies of Anti-Colonial Solidarity’, Art History , 45(5), pp. 1078–1100. doi: 10.1111/1467-8365.12692.

Posted in Blog Posts Term 1, Term 1 | 1 Comment

An Introduction to Me | Start of My PgCert Journey

Hello, so this is my first blog post for my PgCert in Academic Practice. My name is Elliott Hall and I am a Specialist Technician in Wearable Technology at the London College of Fashion – essentially I work with students to help them incorporate physical computing elements into Garments, Artefacts and Retail Experience’s. On paper the main aspects of my role are to create workshops, run and maintain a safe and usable lab space for wearable tech including procuring the equipment that is needed to go with that, alongside supporting students directly. Examples of my some of the exciting work I have had the pleasure of supporting students with includes Ai enhanced garments that judge the garment owner for mistreating their clothing. Robotic installation work that questions the intersection of the physical and digital fashions worlds, but also garments designed for medical benefits such as inflating/massaging clothing.

An image showing how sensors can read real world data, and then the garment can react to this data using actuators. An example of an actuator is a motor, fan, speakers. An example scenario is a tempreature sensor may tell the jacket it is to hot, the garment can then cool its self down my turning on the fan.

Within my role I cover areas from conceptual design, programming, robotics and physical computing (embedding different types of sensors and actuators), 3D design and prototyping, projection mapping and VFX, alongside electrical skills such as soldering. I believe wearable tech / physical computing to be an exciting and cutting edge area in the field of art and design across a whole range of disciplines – but have accepted it will take some time to raise the interest and uptake in this area within the London College of Fashion, and hope to my best to create an ecosystem that supports students from conception, production to exhibition.

Outside of my Job at LCF, I am a design tutor with an MA in Interaction Design from LCC and wish to continue my research into a practice based PhD. With keen interests revolve around Phenomenology, Human Experience, Existentialism, Death Anxiety and Transformative Experience Design; and hope that I can bring my research interests into this work.

You can read more about my work at: elliotthall.co.uk

Posted in Term 1 | 2 Comments