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?
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.