Observing David was a really illuminating experience, his teaching context is entirely different – he is an associate lecturer of writing and journalism, I am a senior technician on Contemporary Crafts.
His approach to teaching was really refreshing, he was very much the facilitator rather than the teacher. He design teaching and learning activities that promoted collegial dialogue, discussion and debate between the students. The choice of learning resources was varied, catering for students with a variety of learning preferences. The learning resources were often controversial, which sparked debate. If you would like to sample an example of these, here is the poem 1-100 by Charles Bernstein:
David considered the learning environment by getting the students to rearrange the furniture into a horse shoe shape to promote discussion.
The intended learning outcomes were outlined well at the start of the session, which was to ‘define writing as performance’ opposed to ‘writing for performance’. The session started by asking the students to collegially pen a boring definition. I like how David returned to the definition at various points throughout the session to consider if/how it had change based on the activities the students had done.
There was little to criticise David for. I observed that the session was a bit slow to get going, and suggested he might consider using some of those really stimulating learning resources right at the start, even as students arrive perhaps.
It has been really refreshing to observe teaching in an entirely different context and it has made me consider how I might engage students in conversation and dialogue within my teaching practice.
More reflections on the all of the teaching observations can be seen in Assignment 7.