Review of Teaching Form: Being observed by my tutor (Tim Stephens)

28.02.2025

Size of student group: 15 (at the time of observation it might be led in a smaller group or as a series of 1:1 tutorials)

Observer: Tim Stephens

Observee: Eden Chahal

 
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

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

This is the second session of Unit 3 in the first year of BA Interior and Spatial Design. The unit is based on the book Invisible Cities by Italo Calvino. Students are expected to each choose a city and transform the written fiction into a physical model.

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

This is part of a cover for the programme’s course leader. I am only covering this unit, and the observation will take place in the second session. I have been in contact with the students as part of my technician role, delivering software training.

What are the intended or expected learning outcomes?

  • LO1: Make appropriate choices regarding the selection of reliable sources and critically examine your ideas and findings (Enquiry).
  • LO2: Explore and analyse theoretical perspectives to question norms, practices, and biases embedded in societies and cultures (Knowledge).
  • LO3: Demonstrate the use of writing, drawing, and making to experiment, design, and construct a thematic scale model (Process).
  • LO4: Compose an illustrated and academically referenced journal that narrates the research and process of a theoretical and practical study (Communication).

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

Students will build a model reflecting their interpretation of the city they have chosen. They are all working with a 30 × 30 cm base, allowing them to assemble their models for a small presentation/exhibition. They will also submit a design journal documenting their process, research, ideas, and final outcome (2000 words).

Are there potential difficulties or specific areas of concern?

This is a new role for me, so the main challenge is the novelty. Additionally, as this is the start of the unit, the key difficulty is getting students to kickstart their work, enabling me to provide them with feedback on their progress.

How will students be informed of the observation/review?

They have been informed via email, and I will reiterate this at the start of the session, giving them the option to have their tutorial at another time if they prefer.

What would you particularly like feedback on?

Any feedback is welcome; however, I have noticed that I tend to struggle more with groups than in individual tutorials. Any feedback that could help in that area would be particularly useful.

How will feedback be exchanged?

I am happy to receive written feedback, as I will not be able to leave the classroom at the end of the observation for a verbal discussion.

Part Two

Summary and key points

Summary and key points

The design tutorials were wonderfully rich and complex interactions with students.

Boundary setting, you were very good at keeping the student focussed on the brief initially, great work.

Materials -you focus a LOT on the nature of the materials in terms of translating various ideas, concepts or points of view and interpretations, this is a fascinating aspect of you work and certainly a skill-strength.

Exploration, speculation – you do a LOT also of looking and sensing of their ideas in all the expressed forms and materials, then you add possibilities and speculation in the form of questions or suggestions. You have a great method of inquiry…testing questions, is this, what is this…do you feel happy with…how could you, etc, etc. Excellent, really.

Problem-solving; and technical advice -you focus a LOT equally, on technical advisory and skills sharing ideas and techniques, from the very practical, bring your work in a box, to the very technical, clay has water in, the differences between acrylic and wood in a particular maquette. And so o and so forth. This is an excellent approach to cover both ideation and technical simultaneously, that you accomplish with ease…

The first student brought lots of technical challenges which you met fully and made sure all aspects of her time outside the tutorial (her working interpedently) was structured and productive, this is honestly, again also excellent. We want to know students know what to do when they are on their own …in content, process, planning etc. You did this well.

Conversational flow – this was noticeable in the 2nd tutorial, where her realisation of your understanding really allowed the pace to pick up and the flow of ideas and conversation between you was wonderful and synergistic; her happiness and satisfaction was evident.

Additional capture questions, you had a number of ways of asking final questions, partly through care, as a net to catch any stray missing or absent thoughts or ideas, very wonderful technique – you are extremely competent about the integration of practice technique, method, ideation and process/planning.

You wanted feedback on working with groups. I’d say to use your strengths to deal with your weaknesses, as I might say in an educational sense. Talk aloud about what you (would) do and how you (would) do it, and people will listen because it makes sense. This is your expertise. Group management is clearly about boundaries, pointing them out and monitoring them, you do this well. We do not have to talk to the whole group as if they were one person; that can feel a bit thin, and sometimes people have to enact a well tested ‘persona’ which is performative to do this…and make it feel that way. Lots of public figures, teachers, or stand up comedians do this. But it’s an illusion! A bit of educational magic trickery.

We can share our process with groups as a form of acculturation, true, this is professional sharing, and very educative.  However, You can ask groups similar questions to the very good ones you ask individuals. They simply need to find ways to answer them, and in doing so, will discover a group process. You then have to give them time enough and some practical steps sometimes, permission giving, to allow themselves to work in a group.

Wonderful work, great session; you should be very proud of your capabilities as a teacher indeed!

Part Three

This is valuable feedback, pointing to specific details that I hadn’t all consciously noticed and for part was doing in an instinctive way. Seeing these through an external perspective has helped me refocus my attention and develop a more conscious awareness of my approach. It is also incredibly helpful in terms of confidence building—this was only my second time teaching as an Associate Lecturer (I’ve worked at UAL for a year as a technician, but this was a new and challenging opportunity). Knowing that Tim perceived and described positive aspects in my teaching has been encouraging and much needed at this early stage.

The focus on materiality was intentional, but I realised—unfortunately too late—that I hadn’t placed enough emphasis on the use of sustainable materials. This is something I should have been more aware of from the outset, and I felt a sense of regret towards my group of students. I could have better advised them on material choices, especially knowing that some tutors might view, for example, the use of acrylic less favourably than reused or repurposed materials. In the future, I will actively highlight sustainable options and integrate this into the way I frame experimentation with materiality.

My technician background remains close in these moments, and I naturally refer students to available resources in the 3D workshop. However, there are real constraints—such as health and safety limitations around cutting unknown plastics with the laser cutter—that can restrict access to sustainable alternatives. I think this reveals a broader issue and would benefit from a shared conversation between academic and technical staff (both workshop- and student-facing). Having now experienced both roles, I’d like to be part of that conversation and would be interested in proposing a dedicated discussion or workshop on the topic.

Regarding teaching in groups versus 1:1, I couldn’t demonstrate group teaching during the session Tim observed, and I recognise this as an area I need to develop with time and experience. The condensed microteach session earlier in the year was helpful in this regard. I recall Tim describing one of my colleagues as having an “authentic” style—he had a natural ability to smile, be present, and create a relaxed atmosphere. I don’t possess this instinctively. I tend to be shy and quite serious, which creates a certain distance when addressing a group. Connecting individually with students comes much more naturally to me.

This difference is something I’m now reflecting on more seriously, particularly because I can see the positive impact it could have on my teaching. Although not directly linked to my current job description, I am considering taking theatre classes in the future, in the hope that they might help me to loosen up and deliver with greater ease and presence in group settings.

This entry was posted in Unit 1. Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *