I have been a Specialist Garment Technician at London College of Fashion for over 5 years, teaching garment construction skills to BA students in a workshop setting. The students come to these workshops with a widely differing range of knowledge and abilities; some having never touched a sewing machine, to others who have made garments for a living.
The procedure in these workshops, is to demonstrate step by step how to construct a garment, giving the students time to practice each step before moving on to the next one. Sometimes, in these workshops, students will struggle to complete the step before I have moved on to demonstrate the following one. However, if I wait for every student to catch up, I may not be able to deliver all the required content in the available time.
One student in this situation complained that, as a ‘visual learner’, the sections of the demonstration were too much for her to follow and she wanted me to slow down. Her very evident distress when expressing this to me, remains in my mind when I teach and as this issue continues to regularly occur, I was interested in using the ARP as an opportunity to critically explore ways to address this. Do students with different learning styles need to be taught differently to be able to achieve the learning outcomes?
Investigating the idea of learning styles theories, I found that although the categorization of learners’ styles were generally accepted, there was contested evidence of its validity as a method of teaching. Many of the research studies in to the practical application of these theories used small sample groups, were applied under very specific circumstances and had little re-test confirmation (Coffield, 2004). There were concerns that the emphasis on learning styles might even impact negatively on learning outcomes, through limiting access to teaching that could be beneficial because it did not match the learners style, and through the affect on individuals’ motivation. It is also possible that the student self-identifying as a ‘visual learner’ could have a specific learning difference rather than an issue with a style of learning. Students with learning differences are quite common in our student body, and I am interested in developing teaching practices that would benefit this group as well as those with English as a second language, who also share some analogous characteristics. Some of the literature sceptical of the application of learning styles to teaching methods, instead propose alternatives which align with my practice.
Educators should instead focus on developing the most effective and coherent ways to present particular bodies of content, which often involve combining different forms of instruction, such as diagrams and words, in mutually reinforcing ways.
(Rohrer, & Pashler, 2012)
As part of my work as a Technician, I have been involved in creating learning materials to support our workshops and many of my conversations with my colleagues (Initial Observations) revolve around how best to incorporate these materials into our teaching practice for our students’ benefit. These informal conversations, reflections, together with my initial scoping of literature, led me to focus on which forms of information might be more effective for individual students and if they could be applied specifically to aid students with differing learning styles.
However, it was not until I read Jean McNiff’s introduction to Action Research, where she explained the importance of approaching the project with social justice paramount (McNiff, 2002), that I was able to re-frame my thoughts into a coherent research question. Rather than trying to approach it by attempting to balance the various educational needs of individuals against those of the group, I found it useful to design my ARP with critical disability theory (Shildrick, 2012), rather than a deficit model, in mind. I would try to determine what interventions in my teaching I could develop that might enhance ALL students’ learning, thereby increasing the equity of access to learning of core technical skills and consequently increasing student attainment and retention (Bhagat & O’Neill, 2011) (Finnegan & Richards, 2016).
I began by mapping the factors involved in delivering a garment construction workshop.
Then through my scoping of literature, I identified some research on effective use of demonstration in technical teaching, and also the use of supporting material to augment demonstrations (Billett, 2010). But with limited research available in my field of garment construction, I looked to documentation and research on the teaching of technical skills from other, diverse disciples.
In my readings on learning theories, teaching technical skills and tacit knowledge, from across disciplines like medicine and engineering, a common theme emerged around actively observing and synthesising those observations.
Learning through action, learning through experience. . . each student in a separate and individual way has a possibility to solve a problem and make a decision. Using active methods breaks the routine and boredom of the school reality.
(Noga, 2014)
Peyton’s 4-Step Approach, a medical model of teaching technical skills such as surgical procedures, advocates introducing the learner to the procedure by using a non-verbal example first, to focus attention on seeing, before repeating the procedure accompanied by verbal explanations to help to deconstruct the learning. The learner synthesises the knowledge and then practices the procedure. These 4 steps are demonstration, deconstruction, comprehension and performance, developed from Constructivist Learning Theories. When learning outcomes for this method were compared with Halstead’s ‘See one, do one, teach one’ approach, a ubiquitous method of teaching surgical skills developed in the late 19th century, students of Peyton’s approach performed better upon assessment (Romero, 2018).
Those trainers who effectively combine opportunities for their trainees to mentally rehearse the skill with opportunities for the physical practice of each new skill can increase the accuracy with which the procedure is conducted significantly quicker than physical practice alone.
(Allery, 2020)
A systematic review of Peyton’s 4 step method (Giacomino et al., 2020) also finds it more effective for speed and accuracy when performing the skill upon completion of learning and also for long term retention of the skill technique. This was, however, qualified by factors like size of student group and the quality and professionalism of the teacher.
These ideas, combined with the developments arising from evaluating some of the Learning Style theories, helped me to construct an intervention for my ARP; introducing students to the garment construction skill they will be learning in the workshop with a non-verbal, visual preview before the live demonstration. This resonates with key ideas from inclusive teaching practices as well, by presenting information in advance and in accessible formats. The introduction gives students an example from which to identify key moments, an opportunity to synthesise the information and a benchmark against which to assess their work. The idea is to give the student time to study and mentally rehearse the skill before trying it themselves. While I would not be able to formally incorporate all the elements of the 4-step approach into my intervention, I would be utilising the principles that are most appropriate for the context of my teaching. The intervention will include a visual preview of the demonstration, step by step instruction which breaks down the skill into key elements, discussion with students as they practice and feedback in the form of checking the sample on completion.
the purpose of demonstration and these set-ups is to guide the students in the art of noticing, to help them to learn how to see.
(Harris, 2021)
I hypothesise that following this approach could increase positive learning outcomes for my students.
References
Allery, L. (2020) How to Teach Practical Skills. Cardiff: Centre for Medical Education.
Bhagat, D. and O’Neill, P. (2011) Inclusive practices, inclusive pedagogies: learning from widening participation research in art and design higher education. Croydon: CHEAD.
Billett, S. (2010) Learning Through Practice: Models, Traditions, Orientations and Approaches. Dordrecht: Springer.
Coffield, F. et al. (2004) Learning styles and pedagogy in post-16 learning: A systematic and critical review. London: Learning and Skills Research Centre.
Finnegan, T. and Richards, A. (2016) Retention and attainment in the disciplines: Art and Design. York: Higher Education Academy.
Giacomino, K. et al. (2020) ‘The effectiveness of the Peyton’s 4-step teaching approach on skill acquisition of procedures in health professions education: A systematic review and meta analysis with integrated meta-regression, PeerJ, 8(10129), pp.1-26. Available at: http://doi.org/10.7717/peerj.10129
Harris, A. (2021) A Sensory Education. Abingdon and New York: Routledge.
McNiff, J. (2002) Action Research for Professional Development. Jean McNiff.
Noga, H. (2014) ‘Applying Chosen Teaching Methods in Technical Education’, International Journal of Engineering Pedagogy, 4(4), pp.23-26.
Rohrer, D. & Pashler, H. (2012) ‘Learning styles: Where’s the evidence?’, Medical Education, 46, pp.634-635.
Romero, P. et al. (2018) ‘Halsted’s “See One, Do One, and Teach One” versus Peyton’s Four-Step Approach: A randomized trial for training of Laparoscopic Suturing and Knot Tying’, Journal of Surgical Education, 75(2), pp.510-515.
Shildrick, M. (2012) Critical Disability Studies: rethinking the conventions for the age of postmodernity. London: Routledge.