Plan and Materials
The session was called Character Building
In this workshop, participants built a character together, starting with just one object image. Character is a key part of storytelling and storytelling is a key part of Illustration as a subject discipline. The session aimed to build research and development skills relating to narrative.
The plan was:
| 2.5 mins | Intro: Background and reasoning behind session Structure of session |
| 2.5 mins | Setting the scene regarding approach: Discussing these questions What characters can you remember or that have been important to you and why? At any time of life, in any format, for any reason Did you used to play pretend when you were a child? Can you remember any details? |
| 3 mins | Task 1. CHOOSE – Together Choose an object, through drawing on the presentation slide |
| 5 mins | Task 2. DISCUSS – In pairs or groups Discuss and answer given questions about the potential owner, in breakout groups Group 1 What is their name?What do they look like?Do they have family? If so, what are they like? What is their favourite thing to do? Group 2 Where do they live?When do they live?What does it sound smell and feel like?What did they do today? |
| 5 mins | Task 3. COMBINE – Together Share and combine answers to build a complete picture, through writing on the presentation slide |
| 2 mins | Conclusion Participants reflect on experience of session. I give idea of future application of skills developed in session |
This is the presentation used in session: https://artslondon-my.sharepoint.com/:p:/g/personal/m_elgon_arts_ac_uk/EaK53G-RmxBPmvrs-OqZIekB8n917PyG7AuXeS7JDui9Fw?e=5U54tt
I tested the session out on a couple of people beforehand and discussed it with my peer observation partner. This led me to choose the object through drawing rather than a poll as it would be more engaging and organic and that I needed to scale down from my original idea of story building to character building.
___________________________
Design
In choosing ‘character building’ as a subject, I was sharing a key part of my discipline which I thought could be meaningful and interesting for the group.
When explaining the reasoning behind the session to participants, I wanted the aims and value of the session to be clear so that understanding and motivation were increased. This is described in Biggs and Tang (2011, p. 27) as ‘teaching that supports explicit aims and outcomes’ and encourages ‘deep learning’.
Requiring participation, discussion and activity at every stage was meant to be ‘teaching to elicit an active response’ and also intended to promote ‘deep learning’. (Biggs and Tang, 2011, p. 27)
Through running parts of the session together and parts in break-out groups and through using jigsaw groups that each work on a piece of a larger whole and meaning I intended to create an exciting pace and varied experience.
When including visuals in the presentation, I wanted meaning to be carried and communicated through different ‘sensory modes’ which would make learning more effective. (Biggs and Tang, 2011, p. 63) I am also aware that memory is stored in procedural, episodic and semantic systems (Biggs and Tang, 2011, p. 63) and using visuals (episodic) can help lasting and future recall of meaning (semantic) for participants.
The combination of well-paced structure and varied materials are vital when helping students ‘learn complex ideas’ (Biggs and Tang, 2011, p. 67)
Linking to the participant’s past experience through the ‘setting the scene’ questions and illustration examples in the ‘intro’ section slides is intended to build new knowledge onto existing knowledge which improves understanding. Biggs and Tang talk about ‘building their knowledge in terms of what they already understand’ (2011, p. 22) and the importance of not rejecting the known (2011, p. 67). This approach also lets participants know that their previous knowledge and experience is as important as what they encounter in the session. Knowledge is shared by everyone, as Ngugi wa Thiong-o says ‘cultures should relate as a network of equal give and take and not as hierarchy of unequal power relationship.’ (Sodha, 2018)
___________________________
Feedback and Experience
Feedback
Participant behaviour
High energy and enthusiasm
Material produced in response to the questions included evocative and atmospheric details of environment and character.
Highly successful completion of tasks and reflection on material produced and overall session
Large contribution at each stage, sharing information and generated in response to tasks
In break-out groups, free flowing imaginative, supportive discussion
Asked for affirmation and confirmation of right direction of behaviour when needed it
Verbal comments
‘Really enjoyed it!’
‘This is great’
‘I want to be on your course!’
Written chat comments
‘Well-structured’
‘Clear Slides, not overloaded’
Experience
Enjoyed the session immensely. Material shared and generated was so interesting. Great atmosphere and sense of fun.
Frustrated that I couldn’t spend even more time valuing and reflecting on people’s contributions – They were magic!
Frustrated at containing participant’s responses. People could have carried on longer in the ‘setting the scene’ and Task 2 discussions. Felt bad about cutting their energy and enthusiasm.
Felt challenging to keep to time.
___________________________
Evaluation
Strengths:
- Everyone motivated and interested
- Positive atmosphere created
- Learning aims achieved and value of them understood
- Students felt they could share experiences and that they would be valued
- Good communication in learning materials
- Structure worked well for understanding and excitement
Areas for Development:
- Not enough time to reflect and value people’s responses
- Not enough time for people to discuss and engage with each other
- I should have pushed for more in feedback based on areas of development, I didn’t do so, because I felt the pressure of running over time
Possible solutions:
In the answer, reduction in coverage? However, people found content and structure helpful and with a less communicative group there would be less time pressure. So maybe it’s about finding a way to record responses, so that participants and myself could reflect after the session? Also, about creating space for discussion to continue beyond the session?
Re responses, a padlet during the session would have taken too much time to contribute to, but I could have screen grabbed material and uploaded to a padlet later. Re discussion, I could have created a collaborate ultra/teams space that discussion could have continued in.
I think both of these measures would also have allowed me to curtail contributions more stringently and created more space and time in the structure. As I would not have felt bad about dampening and stopping the energy and enthusiasm to connect with each other and share.
___________________________
Lessons learnt from Peers
J:
- Honest transparent attitude made me feel like I could ask questions and make mistakes safely
- Incredible energy that made me feel the vital importance of the subject and enthused myself
- Playfulness and creativity of the central idea of fashion being experienced by someone from another planet. Really made clear for me the imagination and fun at the heart of inspiring pedagogy.
JA:
- During a large middle part of the session, we were making together and asking questions if needed. This felt so warm and enjoyable. There was a strong sense of solidarity and community. I could see and hear people working even though we weren’t speaking.
S:
- Sensitive and supportive facilitation
- Thoughtful bringing together of images and ideas in the presentation. It was both informative and gave me space to think around the material.
G:
- Aims of session and future uses were really clear and accessible – communication excellent
- Engaging with intuitive and spontaneous aspects of making whilst combining this with thorough and methodical approach
- In light of the time and our progress, they curtailed tasks and moved around the structure. This showed focus and responsiveness to us and aided our understanding and engagement. We weren’t overloaded.