Charlie Lewis PG Cert

After my conversation with Linda after the initial workshop I withdrew some books from the library which I intend to work my way through to aid my studies and exploration of gender within teaching.

In ‘The Fashioned Body: Fashion, Dress and Modern Social Theory’ Entwistle, J. 2000, Entwistle refers to”Butler’s work on performativity (1990, 1993), influenced by Foucault, looks at the way in which gender is the product of styles and techniques such as dress rather than any essential qualities of the body.” pg 33. When teaching garment construction, we still implement rules of the direction of fastening buttons to determine the gender of a garment. The female garment fastens right over left, whereas the male garment fastens left over right. Explanations for this include ease of breastfeeding for women or drawing a sword for men.

We also refer to mannequins as male and female due to their differing builds. Entwistle also refers to Gaines (1990:1) analysis of Foucault and how his theory ‘argues that dress delivers ‘gender as self evident or natural’ when… gender is a cultural construction that dress helps to reproduce.” pg 21 I would like to explore new ways of defining the mannequins which meet our less binary ideas of gender, to help create more inclusivity and equality within the studios. As teachers to the creators of garments and fashions or trends, I believe we have a responsibility to disrupt western ideas of gender norms and conformity.

It was also interesting to read about Edward Munby and his documentation (and fetishisation) of working class women in Victorian England, particularly the Wigan pit brow women. Due to their physical, laborious jobs, in a time when it was frowned upon for ‘respectable’ women to work, the pit brow women wore practical and traditionally ‘male’ garments such as trousers, shirts and waistcoats. After reading Munby’s less than flattering description of the women he photographed, it is interesting to consider the power imbalance and purpose of these images and the subjects’ consented, along with the effect social class has upon gendering people. “…A quite respectable woman… her dress was not noticed in the streets: in Wigan, a woman in trousers is not half as odd as a woman in a crinoline. Barbarous locality.” (Hudson 1974: 76)

Today we had our microteaching session. We had a great group, with a range of teaching styles and subjects. 

During Jade’s lesson about lace and embroidery placement, I found her referencing of techniques and production to industry to be inspiring and offered context to the technical concepts being explained. In the feedback we discussed ideas of boundaries in relation to teaching contour fashion. As we are working with the body, discussing anatomy, placement of fabric on the body and dressing or draping on models, it is important to establish boundaries with students around suitable topics of discussion and consent. We also explored ideas of gender and that the samples provided were quite gendered and conformed to particular body types. Disability, social class, environmental impact and race are all considerations I will be taking forward into my teaching practice.

During Matt’s microteach we explored the idea of transmission teaching and how feeling a need to provide as a teacher can lead us to overwhelm our students with information. Through further research I have found Paulo Freire’s “banking concept of education”. Freire believes that this practice of transmission teaching is oppressive and views teachers as ‘depositors’ of knowledge, filling the passive student’s mind or ‘receptacle’.

For my microteaching lesson I gave a brief overview of smocking, a hand sewing technique which is used in different cultures to provide texture and decoration through surface interest, embroidery or by creating a resist dye. I provided a visual handout which showed smocking in its various applications, from historical garments, traditional dyed textiles and high-end luxury fashion. I then handed out materials for students to use to create their own smocking, demonstrating the sewing myself and guiding the students through the process, referencing the book The Art of Manipulating Fabric by Colette Wolff. We ran out of time to complete the task of hand smocking however the class were left feeling inspired and wanting to continue the task, which was reassuring.

I received feedback that the facts I shared around smocking could have been sharper with more accurate dates to build trust in students of my expertise or knowledge. Next time I would include the diagrams from the book as additional guides for the students to follow to produce their samples, as well as demonstrating to the class. 

I was praised for the variety of references in my visual imagery and I had tried to use images and techniques that were not solely western and were used and worn in a variety of contexts, from rural agricultural clothing to couture runway shows. Physically moving around the room from student to student had an equalising effect and allowed me to check in on people’s progression. 

The idea of co-teaching was discussed frequently in the microteaching sessions today which was a concept I hadn’t heard of before. I touched upon some of this during my microteach, for example Jade doubled over her thread in the needle which was good practice. I highlighted this by raising the possibility that the group could double up their thread as Jade had done. This creates encouragement and positive reinforcement through peer learning and collapses hierarchies to create a sense of inclusion within the group. We discussed ways that I could further that positive reinforcement by asking questions such as “(student’s name) can you tell us how/why you did that?” or asking did everyone hear what (student’s name) said?” and then paraphrasing.  I discovered that my approach to teaching is student centred.

When holding workshops or teaching sessions in future I will also provide extended reading references and resources for the students to explore ideas further.

Linda used the phrase of ‘planting the seeds’. I liked this concept of how a small statement can prompt students to consider the environmental and social impact of what they are learning, whether through gendering, class, race, and empower them to take action through their practice. Rather than telling a student how to think or feel about what they are doing, you are raising the idea for them to explore and work towards a resolution or implementing a meaningful change through their actions.

I reached out to Linda as after reviewing the readings and resources on Moodle I was concerned I did not understand the course criteria and how it relates to my teaching practice as a technician.
After speaking with Linda I feel reassured that I understand the criteria. It was also good to discuss what the micro teaching could look like in relation to my practice. We discussed the gendering of mannequins, sewing techniques and rules and the possibility of exploring this within micro teaching.
It also helped to discuss the case studies and begin to consider issues we encounter as teachers. I have been teaching shirt and jeans sewing skills this week
Workwear gendering of clothes , lack of pockets in women’s clothing,
Directional fastenings
Gendering of mannequins
Learning differences ADHD
Use of phones within classes – disruption
Waste caused in use of fabrics and findings
Mistakes and waste of fabric
Students consideration of environment – sustainability induction and practices

During the workshop we discussed the texts and questioned the use of exclusionary academic language. We were encouraged to consider whether we would want our writings to be as such or whether we would take a more open, clearer approach to writings.

It was interesting to explore the use of language implemented by academic texts. I found the language to be a little pretentious and exclusionary. The reliance upon academic terms and language made some of the texts almost impenetrable and it felt unnecessary to write in this style to get their points across. Many of the texts did not lay out their definitions of key words and concepts mentioned throughout the writings, which I feel is imperative to making the study coherent and accessible.

When looking at the example texts of the ‘Charismatic Lecturer’ from ‘Teaching with Integrity: The Ethics of Higher Education Practice’ Macfarlane, B. (2004) which narrated the experience of Stephanie and her views of Max, a fellow lecturer, we discussed biases within peer assessment/case study which helped me to reflect on my own potential prejudices, experiences and pressures which may also influence my interpretation of colleagues and their teaching styles. The ‘Charismatic Lecturer’ text was anecdotal and through group discussion we highlighted the potential prejudices and biases of both the writer and Stephanie’s perception, along with Max’s lack of objectivity. The author’s inclusion of Stephanie’s religious beliefs did not seem relevant to her perception of her peer assessment. The groups response to Stephanie was varied but quite empathetic to her situation and considered factors that may be impacting her and her view of Max.

A group offered up their reflections on the text ‘Signature pedagogies in art and design’ Sims, E. and Shreeve, A. (2011) which analysed tools used within education to impart knowledge. This created discussion in the class around how the limits of space and studios is causing a lot of teaching to move online or into digital spaces, rather than physical. There was concern around how the removal from the physical could impact student outcomes. I was reminded of conversation I had with a primary school teacher recently, who was reporting the steep decline in children’s fine motor skills, with some unable to use a pair of scissors. I felt this was an interesting point and would like to explore further how this may relate to my work as a technician.

We explored changes in laws, technological developments, economic and social shifts and climate change and their impact upon higher education, the student and academic experience and how we may use the wider context to inform our approaches to teaching. I was interested to hear of the discussions of equity and how we as educators within HE can contribute to creating a more equitable environment within universities. What is my voice within the university?

https://www.rwjf.org/en/insights/blog/2022/11/we-used-your-insights-to-update-our-graphic-on-equity.html

I am still struggling with understanding what is expected of me from the PG Cert and how I can make this relate to my work of teaching technical, objective skills. I am planning to read a fellow technician’s PG Cert submission to help gain an understanding of how these ideas can relate to my practice as a technician.

I have also been thinking about a knowledge exchange I participated in with a fellow technician and how this helped me reconsider approaches to teaching and creating methods of working when a student is differently abled.

I am a BA fashion technician at Central Saint Martins Kings Cross campus. I have worked at UAL  for 5 years. I hope to gain a deeper understanding of teaching and apply this to my practice and my interactions with our students.