Teaching as a technician in its multifaceted aspects
My main role at UAL is as a student-facing specialist technician in digital design and fabrication. I work across six courses under the umbrella of the Interior Futures programme, supporting students from different age groups and academic levels, from BA to MA and Graduate Diploma. Within this role, I’ve learned that there isn’t one fixed mode or output to teaching. I often find myself moving between 1:1 software support, studio-based guidance where technical input needs to respond to creative thinking, lectures and demonstrations on digital tools, and collaborative delivery involving fabrication and workshop coordination.
Reading Sams (2016) on technicians’ conceptions of their role gave me insight into the way these positions have historically been defined within higher education. The article offered a helpful framework for understanding how technicians perceive their own practice—as facilitators, helpers, and teachers. However, as the text was written nearly a decade ago and is based on experiences within fine art disciplines, I couldn’t fully relate. My role is embedded in spatial and design practices, where the demands and types of teaching can be very different. This made me curious about whether the role of technicians at UAL has evolved, and whether expectations—especially around teaching—have shifted since the time the article was written.
In recent years, some progress has been made in recognising the teaching contributions of technicians—one example being that the PGCert is now open to technical staff. However, this does not come with the same conditions as for academic staff: technicians typically do not receive time allocation, workload adjustment, or cover to support participation. As a result, completing the PGCert often means working additional hours and managing the course alongside full-time duties. This creates an imbalance in how professional development is experienced and reinforces the idea that teaching—when done by technicians—is somehow “extra” rather than integral.
The PGCert has prompted me to explore how much of my teaching as a technician overlaps with more formal academic responsibilities.
My first experience as an AL and the key differences I perceived compared to my technician job
To reflect on this, I was offered an exciting opportunity to teach as an Associate Lecturer on a BAISD Year 1 unit. The unit was based on The Invisible Cities by Italo Calvino (1972), and students were asked to interpret one fictional city as a conceptual physical model. I wanted to use this opportunity to reflect on the differences and overlaps between my work as a technician and more traditional academic teaching.
One key difference was the continuity of engagement. As an AL, I followed the same group of students weekly and worked with them toward an outcome. This is different from the more fragmented, reactive nature of my technician role. Supporting students in a consistent, project-based way made me realise how powerful it is to build rapport over time, and how much teaching also means guiding through uncertainty—not only delivering clarity.
Sams (2016) and Smith et al. (2004) both point out that while technicians are highly valued by students, their input when it comes to planning and autonomy often goes unrecognised institutionally. That is reflected in pay, professional development, or access to curriculum-building opportunities.
The PGCert has been an opportunity to explore these questions openly. I’m left wondering whether we need to reframe the boundaries of teaching roles in design education—and what changes could be made to create more equity and clarity between technician and lecturer roles, especially when expectations and impact overlap.
References
Advance HE (2023) Professional Standards Framework for Teaching and Supporting Learning in Higher Education. Available at: https://www.advance-he.ac.uk (Accessed: 20 March 2025).
Calvino, I. (1972) Invisible Cities. London: Vintage Books.
Gibbs, P. and Unwin, L. (2021) Enhancing the visibility and status of technical staff in higher education. HEPI Policy Note 32. Available at: https://www.hepi.ac.uk/2021/09/16/enhancing-the-visibility-and-status-of-technical-staff-in-higher-education (Accessed: 20 March 2025).
Sams, C. (2016) ‘Technicians’ conceptions of their role at University of the Arts London’, Spark: UAL Creative Teaching and Learning Journal, 1(2), pp. 62–69. Available at: https://www.arts.ac.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0020/229470/Technicians-conceptions-of-their-role-at-University-of-the-Arts-London.pdf (Accessed: 20 March 2025).
Smith, D.N., Adams, J., Mount, D., Reeve, N. and Wilkinson, D. (2004) Highly Skilled Technicians in Higher Education: A report to HEFCE. Leeds: Evidence Ltd. Available at: https://www.sheffield.ac.uk/polopoly_fs/1.568318!/file/HEFCE_technicians_in_he_2004.pdf (Accessed: 20 March 2025).
UAL (2023) Technician Commitment and Professional Development at UAL. Available at: https://www.arts.ac.uk/about-ual/teaching-and-learning/technical-roles-and-development (Accessed: 20 March 2025).