Belonging in the Studio: A Critical Reflection
I have been a Garment Technician at London College of Fashion for 5 years, coming from an industry background. I grew up and attained my degree in Fashion Design in Canada, so having no experience of Higher Education in the UK, starting work in this sector has been a steep learning curve. I remember my first days in the studio. I felt nervous, disoriented and overwhelmed by the things I didn’t know and the people I had to meet. Eventually I settled in, but I will never forget that feeling, especially when I see it echoed in the face of a student wandering around the studio looking a little lost.

It is only now, being introduced to critical theories of pedagogy in the PGCert, have I started to examine the reasons behind this feeling and situate it within the wider context of my practice at the University. Applying these insights, I have begun to recognise that there are structural inequalities independent of an individuals’ characters or abilities, which affect the experience and outcomes of our students.

Because I do not have formal training in teaching, my approach to pedagogy has been largely intuitive. I try to be fair and equitable in my interactions with students, understanding that each student has unique positionalities that affect their behaviour and approach to learning. However this will never be enough to ensure parity of opportunity if it takes place within a structure that is exclusionary. We need to challenge ‘the ways in which educational systems reproduce and perpetuate social inequalities with regard to marginalised and excluded groups of students across a range of abilities, characteristics, developmental trajectories, and socioeconomic circumstances’ (Liasidou, 2012). This idea of Inclusive education has given me a theoretical framework to approach the development of my artefact, aligning as it does with my beliefs about teaching as an action of care.

I began by asking some students about their experience of using the studio space and accessing Technical assistance. While most students reported feeling comfortable, I noted that many of the students of colour admitted they found it difficult in the beginning. One student reported being reluctant to ask Technicians for help as he felt they were ‘a little scary’. These observations along with comments from my colleagues and from T&L research at UAL (Appendix 1), supported my supposition that some students were being excluded from accessing our technical support and that this could have consequences for their learning outcomes. Recognising and acknowledging this, I was inspired to develop an artefact (Appendix 2) which might help to overcome these barriers.

My fellow Technicians and I work variable shifts across a number of studios. We look after the machinery and the safety of students as well as working individually with them on their projects on a first come- first served basis. Students are introduced to one or two Technicians during Induction Workshop. But in the studio, they must rely on spotting the tiny staff button we wear to identify the rest of the Technical team. This arrangement can seem quite opaque. Adopting a Universal Design Approach, where ‘each initiative should be of benefit to the whole community while of specific benefit to those currently disadvantaged’ (Universities UK, 2019), I felt that explaining the working practices of the studios, making the implicit explicit, and introducing all the Technicians to the students, would enable them
to fully participate in studio practice. It would empower students by helping them to decode the tacit knowledge of how the studio spaces and the Technicians who work in them function, reducing social anxiety and fear of the unknown. This removal of doubt acts to democratise the use of the studio space for all students, because to achieve Social Justice it is essential that we consider ‘the equity of support and professional services between international and UK students’ (Arshad & Lima, 2012).

This fear which is manifested in the students ‘a little scary’ comment, also links to ideas of identity and belonging. It resonated with me because, as a person of colour myself, growing up in a white dominant society, I have personal experience of ‘othering’ and through this, an appreciation of what it feels like not to belong. This feeling of alienation is cited as an important contributing factor in attainment and retention outcomes in Higher Education (Bunting & Hill, 2021).

At UAL the data shows BAME students have a disparity of attainment compared to their White Home counterparts (UAL, 2023). They also exhibit a lower rate of retention. UAL has pledged to eliminate the continuation and awarding gap between White and BAME students as part of their Anti-racism strategy (UAL, 2021) as well as their Equality, Diversity and Inclusion strategy, which seeks to ‘create a fairer and more inclusive institution for all’ (UAL, 2023).

One of the methods UAL has identified to address this, is to increase recruitment of BAME staff to reflect our countries diverse population. Our team of Technicians at LCF already surpasses this target. However, issues of inclusion continue to be problematic. Crenshaw’s theory of Intersectionality points to a more nuanced overlapping of identities among individuals (Crenshaw, 1989), not something that can simply be homogenized within the umbrella term BAME. A queer, Chinese student may not feel any more understood by a heterosexual Black British tutor, than a White one. The binary nature of ratios of representation can only go so far towards creating a sense of belonging in the student body.

In the strand of my artefact where the Technicians construct their own descriptor using the ‘fun fact’ methodology, I hope to engage with this complexity of intersectional identity, by a ‘focus on the local-cultural characteristics of the groups involved’ (Hahn Tapper, 2013). This approach encourages each Technician to examine their own positionality and responsibilities towards building an inclusive community with our students, in a way that is not prescriptive. ‘Our narratives, through intersectional reflexivity, acknowledge our privileges and disadvantages as well as the power of our positions in academia.’ (Jones & Calafell, 2012)

These narratives built around the Technician as a person, with activities and interests that could resonate with students, make us seem more approachable. The feedback I received from my PGcert cohort reinforced my belief that this artefact could help to humanise us by ‘breaking down those hierarchies of authority’. Another of my cohort added that she often uses this methodology. ‘We all get to know each other that way … I remember stories more accurately than a name.’ Creating these connections on a human level can help ‘to break the vertical patterns characteristic of banking education. Through dialogue, the teacher is no
longer merely the one who teaches but one who is taught in dialogue with the student, who in turn while being taught also teaches. They become jointly responsible for a process in which all grow.’ (Freire, 1970)

When speaking to colleagues about this artefact, the response was positive. They, like myself, have observed that look of confusion, so welcomed the development of a formalised device which could increase the equity of access for all students.

As this artefact is still in development, I have not had the opportunity to gather data on its effectiveness in increasing student engagement with Technicians. However, there are a number of ways in which I will be able to do so once the artefact is put into practice.
It will be possible to quantify the number of students accessing the artefact because the hosting Sharepoint site records the number of views. Although I will not have information on who views the page, this can indicate how often the resource is used.

Whether it lowers the barriers to accessing technical support can be gauged qualitatively through observations, both in the frequency and confidence with which students request assistance. I will ask my colleagues at the beginning of the year to pay particular attention to the quantity and quality of student engagement. Then at the end of the year, I can collect their observations to see if the effect of the artefact has been realised. It would also be useful to collect data directly from students, possibly by adding some questions to their student survey to determine whether some increase in technical proficiency has been noted, improving the quality of their work and thereby increasing attainment and retention.

When I began the PGCert, I was revisited by that feeling of being out of my depth, faced as I was with a new situation. The academic language and theoretical learning in the course have at times felt rather remote from the day to day realities of my practice. However, on reflection, I now recognise how the pedagogic theories around inclusive learning and teaching have become the scaffold around which my artefact has taken shape and how the theory underpins the actions that I take in facilitating student learning. My artefact, in helping students decode the workings of the studio, mirrors my journey through the PGCert, which is helping me to decode the workings of becoming a Critical Educator. It has made me realise that I have a part to play towards creating a ‘shift in the field of higher education itself, so that HE moves toward inclusive practices to develop a transformative approach in all its actions: that is, to develop flexible and anticipatory approaches’ (Finnegan & Richards, 2016); that institutional transformation cannot happen without individual action.

Appendix 1
This transcription is from an interview with a UAL student where she describes her anxiety around asking for technical assistance:
‘I’ve never spoken to a technician until this year. I’ve wasted so much time to just to be afraid and scared to reach out to anyone. You don’t you just don’t know how to go ask for help from
tutors. Like if I’m phrasing my question this way. Does it sound too stupid? If I’m asking a technician about help for my project? Is it like, is it too rude? Is it am I taking too much of that time and what I think it would be great if tutors and technicians can be more engaged in what students, especially international students, in what they’re doing personally and try to, you know, kind of reach them out in the first step and try to start a conversation with them. Because it’s really, it’s hard for some of them to reach out at first.’
UAL Teaching, Learning and Employability Exchange (2022) Student focus: International Student Experience [Podcast]. 26 May. Available at: https://interrogatingspaces.buzzsprout.com/683798/10685297-student-focus-international-student-experience (Accessed: 14 July 2023)

Appendix 2
A description of the Artefact:
My artefact will be a short video introducing students to the studio and the Technical staff. It will explain where technical staff can be found and what we are able to assist them with. Each Technician will introduce themselves with their name and a fun fact about themselves designed to emphasize their approachability. Some examples of prompts to assist Technicians develop their script could range from: ‘My favourite food is a traditional dish called … ’, ‘I raised money for charity by taking part in a …’, ‘The scariest thing I’ve ever done is …’
Here is an example of an introduction: Hello, my name is E-Sinn. I am a Garment Technician with a background in men’s and women’s tailoring and draping soft separates. My fun fact is: I did some busking on the Charles Bridge in Prague, playing on a violin I purchased at a street market.
The artefact will be captioned and include a verbal (Name Drop) and written version of each Technicians name to accompany the video, to provide the information in different formats.
The artefact will be hosted on the Technical Resources Sharepoint which course teams link to Moodle. It will also be accessible through QR coded posters and free-to-take stickers at entry points to the studios.

Bibliography
Liasidou, A. (2012) ‘Inclusive education and critical pedagogy at the intersections of disability, race, gender and class’, Journal for Critical Education Policy Studies, 10(1), pp.168-184.
Universities UK (2019) Black, Asian and Minority Ethnic Student Attainment at UK. Univeristies: Case Studies. London: Universities UK.
Arshad, R and Lima, P (2012) Attracting international students: equitable services and support, campus cohesion and community engagement. London: Equality Challenge Unit.
Bunting, L. and Hill, V. (2021) ‘Relational Reflections: How do we nurture belonging in creative Higher Education?’, Innovative Practice in Higher Education, HE Special Edition, pp.139-165.
UAL (2022), Equality, Diversity and Inclusion Annual Report 2021/2022. Available at: https://www.arts.ac.uk/?a=389423 (Accessed: 12 July 2023)
UAL (2021), Anti-Racism Strategy Report. Available at: https://www.arts.ac.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0032/296537/UAL-Anti-racism-action-plan-summary-2021.pdf (Accessed: 12 July 2023)
UAL (2023) Equality, Diversity and Inclusion. Available at: https://www.arts.ac.uk/about-ual/equality-and-diversity (Accessed: 12 July 2023)
Crenshaw, K. (1989) ‘Demarginalizing the Intersection of Race and Sex: A Black Feminist Critique of Antidiscrimination Doctrine, Feminist Theory and Antiracist Politics’, University of Chicago Legal Forum, 1989(1), pp.139-167.
Hahn Tapper, A. (2013) ‘A Pedagogy of Social Justice Education: Social Identity Theory, Intersectionality, and Empowerment’, Conflict Resolution Quarterly, 20(4), pp.411-445.
Jones, R. and Calafell, B. (2012), ‘Contesting neoliberalism through critical pedagogy, intersectional reflexivity, and personal narrative: Queer tales of academia’, Journal of Homosexuality, 59(7), pp.957-981.
Friere, P. (1970) Pedagogy of the Oppressed. UK: Penguin Random House.
Finnegan, T. and Richards, A. (2016) Retention and attainment in the disciplines: Art and Design. York: Higher Education Academy.