IP Unit Blog 3: Reimagining Anti-racism in Education

Posted on 6th July 2025 by Kuljeet Sibia

Approaches to anti-racism in education vary widely, from interventions that centre discomfort and transformation to those that remain symbolic or contested. In reviewing the set resources, I am struck by the tension between meaningful anti-racist work and institutional tendencies to dilute, deflect or depoliticise it. Through the lens of my positionality, as one of two tutors of colour in a year group of 13 professionals, I reflect here on how these approaches deepen my understanding of racism in higher education and how we might begin to address it more meaningfully.

Akaal Sadiq’s TEDx talk (2023) offers a sharp critique of performative Diversity, Equity and Inclusion (DEI) work. Speaking as a former insider in corporate DEI, Sadiq calls out diversity as branding: short-lived, unmeasured, and more about optics than structural change. His argument that organisations often “overpromise and underdeliver” resonates with Ahmed’s (2012) concept of “non-performative” diversity, where policies signal inclusion without resulting in action. In my context, I have seen equity statements drafted while marking criteria and staff demographics remain unchanged.

Bradbury (2020) explores how education policy, framed as neutral, can entrench racism through colour-blind approaches. The analysis of bilingual assessment policy in England shows how racially minoritised learners are positioned through a deficit lens. This reflects Critical Race Theory’s premise that racism is embedded rather than exceptional (Ladson-Billings and Tate, 1995). In design education, where dominant standards reflect Eurocentric norms, students are often assessed against unspoken criteria rooted in whiteness. Bradbury urges us to look beyond inclusion rhetoric and examine how power operates in curriculum and assessment design.

Garrett’s (2024) study of racialised PhD students further expands this analysis. Racial microaggressions, the burden of proving legitimacy, and underrepresentation at senior levels make many feel they don’t belong or can’t progress. Garrett’s work challenges the myth of meritocracy and reminds us that access alone is insufficient. Anti-racist practice must engage with representation, retention, and recognition. This is echoed in The Broken Pipeline report, which highlights how “fixed notions of ‘academic excellence’” and structural bias in supervisory models disproportionately disadvantage Black students (Williams et al., 2019, p. 4). Despite increasing undergraduate participation, Black students remain severely underrepresented in funded doctoral programmes; only 1.2% of UKRI-funded studentships were awarded to Black or Black Mixed students between 2016–2019. These figures expose how systemic inequalities persist beyond access, requiring proactive, structural interventions across the pipeline to academic careers.

Channel 4 (2020), Physical representation of privilege and racism with young school children. 

The School That Tried to End Racism (Channel 4, 2020) offers a school-level intervention using racial affinity groups and structured exercises to make whiteness visible and discuss privilege. One strength of the programme is its use of physicality, which created embodied, visual representations of inequality and privilege. This helped pupils, especially white students, recognise racism as systemic rather than individual. What was particularly powerful, and saddening, was Michai and Farah’s realisation of how their ‘starting point’ in life differed from their peers, with Michai highlighting the emotional toll of racial inequality as he described feelings of loneliness and exclusion. 

The programme shows that educational spaces can address race early, fostering discomfort and reflection as part of learning. Yet its limitations potentially lie in its temporality and lack of follow-through. While it raised awareness, the wider resources in this blog remind us that deeper structural change, such as curriculum reform or ongoing staff training, is essential. This reflects a broader risk: that one-off interventions may ease guilt without shifting institutional power. In higher education, it warns against relying solely on workshops instead of embedding anti-racism into pedagogy and policy.

The positionality of contributors shapes how their perspectives are constructed and received. Sadiq (2023), as a racialised practitioner within DEI, exposes how institutional promises fall short. Garrett (2024) and Bradbury (2020), grounded in Critical Race Theory, centre racialised learners’ voices and illustrate how racism operates as systemic conditions rather than isolated events. The Channel 4 educators use affective, experiential pedagogy to surface difficult truths. 

By contrast, Revealed: The Charity Turning UK Universities Woke (Orr, 2022) critiques race equity initiatives in higher education, featuring voices such as Arif Ahmed and Dr Vincent Harinam, both men of colour, who argue that such work fosters division and undermines academic freedom. Their positionality complicates the narrative, as their perspectives are used to lend credibility to a broader backlash against anti-racism, framed and presented by a white male journalist, Orr. As Ahmed (2012) observes, institutions often legitimise dissenting voices of colour when they align with dominant ideologies, while marginalising those that call for structural change. In the video, Harinam cites formal complaints of racism to support his argument, without engaging with the complexities of lived experience or the systemic gaps in how data is reported and interpreted.

Orr, (2022), Dr Vincent Harinam disagrees that the University of Cambridge is “systemically racist”.

These positionalities matter in shaping arguments and in whose voices are legitimised. As one of two tutors of colour, I am continually aware of the representational and emotional labour of speaking about race in predominantly white academic spaces. As Ladson-Billings and Tate (1995) argue, whiteness is maintained as the invisible norm, and disrupting it, through curriculum, critique, or voice, often carries a cost. My positionality informs how I teach, but also how I am perceived, sometimes as a “diverse voice,” other times as a proxy for institutional change.

Together, these resources reinforce that anti-racism cannot be reduced to representation or awareness alone. It must be structural, sustained, and relational. As Bhambra, Gebrial and Nişancıoğlu (2018) contend, addressing racism requires not just diversifying who is included but rethinking how knowledge is structured, assessed, and valued. In my context, this means interrogating the frameworks that shape design education: who they serve, who they silence, and how they can be reimagined. As educators, we are not simply diversifying content but redesigning the pedagogical and institutional conditions in which racial justice becomes possible.

References

Ahmed, S. (2012) On Being Included: Racism and Diversity in Institutional Life. Durham, NC: Duke University Press (Accessed 6 July 2025).

Bhambra, G.K., Gebrial, D. and Nişancıoğlu, K. (eds) (2018) Decolonising the University. London: Pluto Press (Accessed 6 July 2025).

Bradbury, A., 2020. A critical race theory framework for education policy analysis: The case of bilingual learners and assessment policy in England. Race Ethnicity and Education, 23(2), pp.241-260.

Channel 4. (2020) The School That Tried to End Racism. [Online}. Youtube. 30 June. Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1I3wJ7pJUjg (Accessed 13 June 2025).

Garrett, R. (2024). Racism shapes careers: career trajectories and imagined futures of racialised minority PhDs in UK higher education. Globalisation, Societies and Education, pp.1–15.

Ladson-Billings, G. and Tate, W.F. (1995) ‘Toward a Critical Race Theory of Education’, Teachers College Record, 97(1), pp. 47–68. 

Orr, J. (2022) Revealed: The charity turning UK universities woke. The Telegraph [Online]. Youtube. 5 August. Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FRM6vOPTjuU (Accessed 13 June 2025).

Sadiq, A. (2023) Diversity, Equity & Inclusion. Learning how to get it right. TEDx [Online}. Youtube. 2 March. Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HR4wz1b54hw (Accessed 13 June 2025).

Williams, P., Bath, S., Arday, J. and Lewis, C. (2019) The Broken Pipeline: Barriers to Black PhD Students Accessing Research Council Funding. London: Leading Routes. Available at: https://leadingroutes.org/publications (Accessed 8 June 2025).

Posted in Uncategorised | Tagged , , , | 6 Comments

IP Unit Blog 2: Faith, Visibility and Intersectionality in Learning Environments

Posted on 6th July 2025 by Kuljeet Sibia

Kimberlé Crenshaw’s theory of intersectionality reminds us that identity cannot be understood through a single lens. People live at the intersections of multiple systems: race, gender, faith, class, and these intersections shape not only how they are seen by others, but also how they experience the world (Crenshaw, 1991). Religion, particularly when visible, is one such axis that can amplify both belonging and exclusion within educational settings.

In Is Religion Good or Bad?, Kwame Anthony Appiah challenges binary understandings of religion as wholly good or bad. He invites us to consider how religion, like culture, is socially constructed and embedded in personal, familial and historical contexts (Appiah, 2014). However, in public discourse and, by extension, in our classrooms, religion is often reduced to caricature. These flattening’s become especially dangerous when faith intersects with other identity factors, such as race and gender, reinforcing damaging stereotypes and undermining the complexity of lived experience.

Appiah, K.A. (2014), Referring to a Soul Washer’s Disc from the Asante community as a symbol of faith.

Haifaa Jawad explores how visibly Muslim women navigate the layered challenges of faith, gender and public visibility, in Islam, Women and Sport. The wearing of the hijab not only expresses belief but makes religious identity hyper-visible, often inviting scrutiny, surveillance or exclusion. Jawad argues that the barriers these women face are not due to their faith per se, but rather the systems and spaces that fail to accommodate difference (Jawad, 2022). This insight is transferable to educational spaces where visibly religious students, such as Black and Brown Muslim women, may be subject to misrecognition or stereotyping that undermines their agency and belonging.

Singh’s reflections in Challenging Race, Religion, and Stereotypes in the Classroom (Singh, 2016) offer an important perspective on how to navigate faith-based and racial differences in educational spaces. He argues that empathy and relationship-building are essential tools for addressing ignorance and bias, encouraging educators and students alike to look beyond stereotypes by understanding where others are coming from. Rather than avoiding difficult topics, Singh advocates for open discussion, underpinned by curiosity and respect. This aligns with hooks’ (1994) call for education as the practice of freedom, where classrooms become spaces to critically engage with difference, not suppress it. Singh’s emphasis on teaching students to analyse arguments, particularly those used to divide or marginalise, supports the shift from reactive accommodation to creating a learning environment where difference is expected, respected, and engaged with critically.

At UAL, data from the Religion and Belief at UAL report and the Student Experience Survey highlight persistent issues for Muslim students. These range from limited access to prayer spaces to inadequate recognition of fasting and religious holidays, to broader feelings of cultural or faith-based misrepresentation. These are not isolated concerns but systemic patterns that intersect with race, migration, and class, shaping student experiences in material and emotional ways (University of the Arts London, 2022).

Singh, S. (2016), Discussing teaching practices and his own positionality with physical representation of faith.

In my teaching, I’ve become more attuned to how institutional structures can unintentionally marginalise students of faith. During Ramadan, for example, I had several students who were fasting. While there is limited formal guidance within UAL, I approached the situation with care, acknowledging that fasting may affect energy levels and concentration, without making assumptions about who might be participating. I offered flexible tutorial slots and explicitly invited students to let me know if they needed support or adjustments. This reflects what Hockings (2010) describes as anticipatory inclusive practice, planning proactively to meet diverse student needs rather than reacting only when barriers arise.

Similarly, this year’s Easter break fell later than usual, meaning teaching resumed just before the Easter weekend. Some students, away from family during this significant Christian holiday, felt uncomfortable. I raised this with the course leader and proposed online tutorials for any student unable to be present in the studio, regardless of faith. Small acts like this are grounded in empathy and help challenge the idea that students must choose between faith and learning.

These experiences and my learning during this module have led me to be more proactive. I now open conversations with students by making it clear that I welcome discussions about faith-related needs, without requiring them to disclose unless they choose to. This shift, although simple, aims to reduce the burden on students to self-advocate in systems that often overlook religious practice. It aligns with Arao and Clemens’ (2013) framing of “brave spaces”, where students can share aspects of their identity when they wish to, supported by trust and openness rather than assumptions or pressure.

Reflecting on my positionality, I belong to a faith that has visible markers, but I choose not to express them outwardly. Yet, I have often experienced assumptions of my faith based on my race, assumptions about how religious I am or what I believe. These moments are uncomfortable, and I don’t always feel there is space to explain or challenge them. This awareness deepens my commitment to creating a classroom culture where students are not made to feel “othered” for how they express, or don’t express, their beliefs.

For the coming year, I am committing to including a clear, faith-inclusive statement in my introductory teaching materials. I will encourage students to approach me with any concerns around timetabling, religious obligations, or access needs, and will work collaboratively to make reasonable adjustments that do not place faith and study in opposition.

Faith does not exist in isolation. When it becomes visible, through dress, behaviour or institutional requirements, it interacts with race, gender, and social norms in powerful ways. Crenshaw’s (1991) framework reminds us that inclusion requires more than recognising difference; it requires us to examine the systems and assumptions that shape the classroom itself. Only then can we foster a learning environment that is equitable, inclusive, and truly humanising.

References

Appiah, K. A. (2014) Is religion good or bad? (This is a trick question). Youtube [Online]. 16 June. Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X2et2KO8gcY (Accessed 16 May 2025).

Arao, B. and Clemens, K. (2013) ‘From safe spaces to brave spaces: A new way to frame dialogue around diversity and social justice’, in Landreman, L. (ed.) The Art of Effective Facilitation: Reflections from Social Justice Educators. Sterling, VA: Stylus Publishing, pp. 135–150.

Crenshaw, K. (1991) ‘Mapping the margins: Intersectionality, identity politics, and violence against women of color’, Stanford Law Review, 43(6), pp. 1241–1299.

Hockings, C. (2010) Inclusive learning and teaching in higher education: a synthesis of research. York: Higher Education Academy. Available at: https://www.advance-he.ac.uk/knowledge-hub/inclusive-learning-and-teaching-higher-education (Accessed 5 July 2025).

Hooks, b. (1994) Teaching to Transgress: Education as the Practice of Freedom. New York: Routledge (Accessed 5 July 2025).

Jawad, H. (2022) Islam, Women and Sport: The Case of Visible Muslim Women. [Online]. Available at: https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/religionglobalsociety/2022/09/islam-women-and-sport-the-case-of-visible-muslim-women/ (Accessed 16 May 2025).

Reki, J. (2023) Religious Identity and Epistemic Injustice: An Intersectional Account. Hypatia 38, pp779–800.

Singh, S. (2016) Challenging Race, Religion, and Stereotypes in the Classroom. [Video] Trinity University. Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0CAOKTo_DOk (Accessed 16 May 2025).

University of the Arts London (UAL) (2022) Religion and Belief at UAL: Staff and Student Guidance. Available at: https://www.arts.ac.uk (Accessed 5 July 2025).

Posted in Uncategorised | Tagged , , , | 4 Comments

IP Unit Intervention: Mapping Belonging – A Sensory and Spatial Reflection Workshop

Posted on 24th May 2025 by Kuljeet Sibia

Inclusive Practice Intervention Proposal

Reflecting on my learning from the Inclusive Practice unit, I’ve come to recognise the importance of intersectionality, and how lived experience conditions how we access, perceive and participate in everyday life. Respecting and understanding these perspectives, especially when they are different from our own, is essential to inclusive learning.

As a BA Architecture design tutor at CSM, I teach first-year students who are just beginning to form their architectural thinking. Many are not yet exposed to the complexity of lived experience, particularly concerning disability, neurodivergence, race, or class. Just as my awareness has grown through this module, I want to support students in building that same understanding early in their education. If we want to design inclusive spaces, we must begin by recognising how inclusion and exclusion are felt.

To do this, I propose a workshop titled ‘Mapping Belonging: A Sensory and Spatial Reflection’. The workshop draws on Arao and Clemens’ (2021) concept of brave spaces, encouraging students to move beyond politeness and comfort into critical and emotionally engaged dialogue. It also reflects Bozalek and Zembylas’ (2017) idea of pedagogies of discomfort, by inviting students to interrogate assumptions and encounter perspectives beyond their own.

Students will be asked to recall spaces where they have felt particularly included and excluded and reflect on what contributed to that, especially sensory elements such as sound, light, temperature, smell, crowding, or atmosphere. They will create a ‘map’ of that experience using drawing, diagramming, collage, or writing. This opens space for neurodiverse and multilingual expression, allowing students to process and communicate ideas in more accessible ways.

A reflective group discussion will follow, surfacing shared and contrasting themes and encouraging students to consider whose experiences may not be represented in the room. We will reflect on how certain design features might affect blind, deaf or physically disabled users, and where our assumptions about access may fall short. Spatial case studies may also be introduced to support collective analysis.

The aim is to develop empathy as a design tool, helping students think more critically about how space is experienced by others and how exclusion can be unconsciously designed in. This reflective, embodied approach links directly to spatial practice and can be delivered within existing studio time using minimal resources. It also models inclusive teaching by validating diverse ways of experiencing and interpreting space, laying the groundwork for more socially attuned, inclusive architectural thinking.

References

Arao, B. and Clemens, K. (2021) From safe spaces to brave spaces: A new way to frame dialogue around diversity and social justice. In: Landreman, L. (ed.) The Art of Effective Facilitation: Reflections from Social Justice Educators. 2nd ed. Sterling, VA: Stylus Publishing, pp. 135–150.

Bozalek, V. and Zembylas, M. (2017) ‘Discomfort as a pedagogical tool for transformative learning in higher education’, Teaching in Higher Education, 22(6), pp. 654–668.

Posted in Uncategorised | Tagged , | Leave a comment

IP Unit Blog 1: Unseen Layers – Intersectionality, Disability and Inclusive Learning

Posted on 5th May 2025 by Kuljeet Sibia

Kimberlé Crenshaw’s theory of intersectionality (1991) reveals that identity is not experienced in isolated parts. Race, gender, class, disability and more are entangled. The three video testimonies offer an important provocation: that it is often the interaction between these identities and the systems that fail to account for them that generates exclusion. As an educator, I am learning that understanding this is critical not only to support individual students but also to shift structures that exclude more broadly.

In Disability and Race, Ade Adepitan reflects on navigating life as a wheelchair user who is racially Black (ParalympicsGB, 2020). He highlights how the Paralympics gave disabled athletes visibility, not because their impairments changed, but because systems shifted to accommodate and platform them. His plea is that racial equity requires similar structural investment. What remains unspoken in his account is gender. As a man, what privileges might shape his experience of mobility, visibility or authority? Would a woman or gender-diverse disabled person face different barriers in safety, healthcare or representation? Or does the fact that he is both disabled and Black mean he has a deeper or more relatable understanding of other marginalised groups?

Crenshaw (1991) reminds us that intersectionality is not only about identity categories, but also about how systems respond to them. Christine Sun Kim, a deaf artist, offers another intersectional lens, shaped by gender, economic precarity and caregiving responsibilities. Living in Berlin, she accesses subsidised childcare, transport and workspaces. These structural supports enable her to navigate daily life as a deaf artist and mother, resources that were inaccessible in her country of birth, the United States (Art21, 2023). Her reflection echoes Crenshaw’s assertion that systems must be examined for the compounded exclusions they produce. When these supports are present, disability is not necessarily limiting. Instead, it is the absence of accessible infrastructure that disables.

At the intersection of gender and disability, Chay Brown, a disabled trans man, discusses how being white and relatively cis-passing affords him a degree of privilege compared to others within the LGBTQIA+ and disabled communities. He notes that the invisibility of his disability allows him to “pass” in ways others cannot. His story highlights how privilege operates not just between identities but within them, particularly when some aspects are hidden or socially legible in normative ways (ParaPride, 2023).

One recurring theme across all three testimonies is the complexity of visibility, how some aspects of identity are highly visible while others remain hidden or misunderstood. In Ade Adepitan’s account, disability becomes more “seen” through media representation such as the Paralympics, yet this visibility does not extend equally across all racial or gendered lines. Christine Sun Kim points to the invisibility of structural support, how its presence or absence determines whether disability becomes disabling. Meanwhile, Chay Brown’s experience draws attention to how passing privilege can shield some from overt discrimination, while simultaneously creating internal tensions around recognition and authenticity.

These differing perspectives converge in one critical question: who is legible within our systems, and who is not? This brings us to recent data from the University of the Arts London (UAL): students with physical, sensory or medical impairments, often considered more visible disabilities, have the largest attainment gaps, down by 10 percentage points over four years (UAL, 2023). In contrast, students with mental health, social or communication-based disabilities, although potentially less visible, show more stable outcomes. This complicates the assumption that visibility automatically leads to support. Who is seen and understood in our systems? Who is supported? And how does institutional recognition, or its absence, reinforce these gaps?

Importantly, the UAL data does not currently take into account the intersectional identities of disabled students, something I believe could offer deeper insights and generate new approaches to addressing inequities. Without this, we risk flattening the experiences of our students and misdiagnosing the structural causes of underachievement.

In my own practice, I have supported students with dyslexia, ADHD and anxiety, disabilities that often remain unacknowledged. I also prepared to teach a deaf student via BSL interpretation. While they ultimately did not join, the process revealed institutional gaps in guidance, staff confidence and the embeddedness of inclusive design. This felt less like a missed opportunity and more like a call to action. As Bamber and Jones (2015) suggest, inclusive learning is not only about adapting teaching for individual needs; it is also about changing the systems that determine who is included in the first place.

Brown and Leigh (2018) remind us that higher education remains shaped by ableist norms, from lecture formats to studio spaces. Reflecting on this, I have begun to question not only my delivery methods but also the values embedded in the spaces I help design. Understanding intersectionality has helped me shift from asking, “How can I accommodate this student?” to “What kind of system would already include them?” Inclusive education is not about fixing students. It is about rethinking structures. Understanding one student’s needs more deeply can expose design flaws that affect many. That is the work I remain committed to in my evolving practice.

References

Art21 (2023) Christine Sun Kim in “Friends & Strangers” – Season 11. YouTube. Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2NpRaEDlLsI

Bamber, J. and Jones, D. (2015) ‘Enabling inclusive learning’, in H. Pokorny and D. Warren (eds.) Enhancing Teaching Practice in Higher Education. London: Sage, pp. 161–176.

Brown, N. and Leigh, J. (2018) Ableism in academia: Theorising experiences of disabilities and chronic illnesses in higher education. UCL Press. https://doi.org/10.14324/111.9781787354970

Crenshaw, K. (1991) ‘Mapping the margins: Intersectionality, identity politics, and violence against women of colour’, Stanford Law Review, 43(6), pp. 1241–1299.

ParaPride (2023) Intersectionality in Focus: Empowering Voices during UK Disability History Month 2023. YouTube. Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_yID8_s5tjc

ParalympicsGB (2020) Disability and Race – featuring Ade Adepitan. YouTube. Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KAsxndpgagU

University of the Arts London (UAL) (2023) Disability Attainment Gap Briefing. [Internal document]. London: UAL. [Unpublished]

Posted in Uncategorised | Tagged , , , | 11 Comments

Peer’s Record of Observation

Posted on 12th March 2025 by Kuljeet Sibia

Please refer to the PDF embedded into this post.

Undertaking student reviews during observation
Observing new student work, in cross studio cries
Peers-Record-of-Observation-1
Posted in Uncategorised | Tagged , | Leave a comment

Record of Observing my Peer

Posted on 12th March 2025 by Kuljeet Sibia

Please refer to the PDF embedded into this post.

Observing peer’s teaching in practice
Record-of-Observing-my-Peer
Posted in Uncategorised | Tagged , | Leave a comment

Tutor’s Record of Observation

Posted on 11th March 2025 by Kuljeet Sibia

Please refer to the PDF embedded into this post.

Undertaking student reviews during observation
Tutors-Record-of-ObservationDownload

Posted in Uncategorised | Tagged , | Leave a comment

Case Study 3: Assessing learning and exchanging feedback

Posted on 11th March 2025 by Kuljeet Sibia

Contextual Background

Teaching a first-year BA Architecture design studio presents challenges in ensuring students learn from both verbal and written feedback. Many students view feedback as final comments rather than tools for progression. This year, I wanted to focus on ensuring that feedback, from myself and through peer-to-peer, became a useful learning process for the students.

Evaluation
My approach thus far has been to encourage self-assessment by having students identify gaps in their work according to the brief criteria, then consider how the peer and tutor feedback they receive can be used to address those gaps. However, peer feedback often lacks constructive elements, with discussions focusing on positive comments alone rather than actionable suggestions. As a result, students have not always addressed feedback, and self-assessments are not consistently evidenced, undermining their potential. Peer-to-peer engagement also relies on me prompting individual comments rather than fostering inclusive, group-wide discussions.

Informal student pin-up to allow self-assessment,
peer and tutor feedback
Student gathering post-it-note peer feedback

Moving Forward
Reflecting on whether feedback through means of self-assessment was the best approach, I referred to Race’s (2001) argument that “students can learn a great deal about their own attempt at a task by assessing two or three other students’ attempts” (p. 7), emphasising the value of active engagement in assessment. This collaborative process fosters critical evaluation skills and self-awareness, enhancing the learning experience. Nicol and Macfarlane-Dick (2006) further suggest that engaging students in self-assessment, with clearly defined criteria, improves their ability to monitor and regulate their own learning. 

Furthermore, my intention to focus on peer feedback is to encourage a collaborative learning environment, promoting not only the development of critical thinking skills but also a deeper understanding of course content. Topping (2009) highlights that “peer feedback is a valuable tool for developing learners’ reflective and evaluative abilities, which in turn enhances their understanding and critical engagement with the subject matter” (p. 23). This aligns with the goal of fostering an environment where students actively engage with one another’s work through feedback, whilst developing both their analytical skills and subject knowledge.

Proposed Action: I aim to promote learning through self-assessment and peer feedback during informal pin-ups in studio sessions. Before presenting their work, students will formulate a couple of questions to help clarify areas of struggle and intended progress. In peer-to-peer feedback, students will use post it notes to offer concise responses to these questions and to the following two questions:

  1. What do you enjoy about the project?
  2. Is anything missing or unclear to better address the brief?

This approach ensures that each student receives both verbal feedback and written suggestions they can physically take away, reinforcing positive aspects and areas for improvement. It also encourages discussion and enables me to engage with their self-assessment, fostering deeper learning opportunities. According to Hattie and Timperley (2007), feedback is most effective when it provides clear information about how students can close the gap between their current and desired performance, which this method aims to achieve.

Students working together towards self- and peer-assessment

Reflection: After implementing the actions above, it became clear that students struggled with self-assessment and reflecting on their progress. I asked them to consider this in pairs and guided them through the process by asking probing questions about their physical work and encouraging them to assess their progress against the project brief and criteria. Initially, it took some time for them to engage, but as the session progressed, students became more involved and quicker in addressing written feedback. A few students also became more open to reading comments aloud. A challenge will be to see how I can involve this in formal reviews, when time is further constrained, students are under more stress and are naturally more reactive than responsive. 

Summary: Integrating self- and peer-assessment significantly increased student engagement. By actively participating in self-assessment and formulating questions, students took greater ownership of their learning. Though initially hesitant, they grew more confident and appreciated learning from both their peers and my feedback. This mirrors Race’s (2001, p. 14) argument that feedback on self-assessment challenges students’ thinking, helping them reassess their own progress. By the end of the session, students were eager to repeat the process, recognising its benefits beyond just achieving final grades. This approach aligns with Biggs and Tang’s (2011) assertion that “students learn best when they are actively engaged in the learning process, particularly when they take responsibility for their own learning” (p. 37). This highlights the importance of student ownership and reflection in long-term learning success.

References

Biggs, J. and Tang, C., 2011. Teaching for Quality Learning at University. 4th ed. Maidenhead: McGraw-Hill Education.

Hattie, J. and Timperley, H., 2007. The Power of Feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77(1), pp.81-112.

Nicol, D.J. and Macfarlane-Dick, D., 2006. Formative Assessment and Self-regulated Learning: A Model and Seven Principles of Good Feedback Practice. Studies in Higher Education, 31(2), pp.199-218.

Race, P., 2001. A Briefing on Self, Peer and Group Assessment. York: LTSN Generic Centre.

Topping, K.J., 2009. Peer Assessment. Theory into Practice, 48(1), pp.20-27.

Posted in Uncategorised | Tagged , | Leave a comment

Case Study 2: Planning and Teaching for Effective Learning

Posted on 11th March 2025 by Kuljeet Sibia

Contextual Background

I currently lead a BA Architecture design studio for first-year students, with weekly contact sessions. My teaching time is primarily dedicated to reviewing students’ project progress. However, with 13 students over five hours, balancing practical group learning with individual tutorials presents a challenge. While practical learning could introduce broader themes and foster group discussions, individual tutorials remain essential for addressing project-specific needs. Furthermore, I have observed that students are sometimes less engaged with the studio culture, often waiting for their turn to see me rather than utilising the time for discussion or iterative development. 

Evaluation

A key pedagogical challenge in this context is the limited time available to foster deep learning and hands-on practice while ensuring students receive individual support. Since being introduced to microteaching and experiencing its impact firsthand, I have been surprised by how effective micro sessions can be in facilitating knowledge acquisition. This has led me to consider how I can incorporate structured microteaching sessions to encourage deeper learning and more meaningful discussions.

While individual tutorials provide valuable project-specific feedback, they lack the collective engagement that could enhance peer learning. Research suggests that microlearning, defined as content delivered in small, focused sessions, supports both cognitive retention and student engagement (Major & Calandrino, 2013). McKee and Ntoukos (2020) further argue that microlearning increases student engagement by delivering content in small, digestible units that promote active participation and reflection. This aligns with my observations and highlights an opportunity to integrate microteaching more systematically into my teaching practice to strengthen both individual and group learning.

Moving Forwards

To better address time constraints and enhance the learning experience, I plan to implement microlearning techniques at the beginning of my studio sessions. These short, focused interventions will aim to introduce key concepts while promoting active engagement through structured discussions and practical exercises.

In addition, integrating reflective exercises following microlearning sessions will help students consolidate their learning and make connections between concepts. Nicol and Macfarlane-Dick (2006) argue that “self-reflection promotes metacognitive skills, enabling students to regulate their learning by identifying areas for improvement.” By embedding these reflective exercises within microteaching sessions, I aim to encourage students to take greater ownership of their learning, supporting the development of independent critical thinking skills that are essential for architectural practice.

Proposed Action: To integrate microlearning into my teaching practice, I will implement a structured 30-minute group activity at the start of my next design tutorial, focusing on site analysis. Before the session, I will email students a list of required tools to ensure they are prepared. During the session, I will guide students through an exploratory exercise, prompting them to analyse their site while individually sketching their interpretations. This will be interwoven with structured group discussions to encourage collective reflection and knowledge-sharing.

Following the exercise, students will first discuss their visual representations in pairs before engaging in a larger group discussion. This phased approach will encourage them to articulate their perspectives, identify key learnings, and critically reflect on how they will integrate these insights into their design development.

Students sharing analaysis to inform group discussion
Site analysis from microteaching session

Reflection: I was able to implement the planned activity within one of my tutorials, although I had to adapt to the format of the day and deliver it later rather than at the start. Despite initial confusion among the students, they gradually came together as a group to clarify expectations and discuss their contributions to the site analysis. A key takeaway from this approach was that students left with a tangible piece of work, and in the follow-up tutorial, I observed how the learnings from the session had informed their subsequent project development. This suggests that microlearning, particularly when coupled with reflective practice, has the potential to create a stronger link between theoretical knowledge and practical application.

Summary: I have been surprised by how effective micro sessions can be, challenging me to rethink how I condense practical learning into small, structured interventions while fostering conversation and collaboration. Ensuring that these sessions translate into meaningful individual progress has been particularly valuable. As we move through Unit 4, I am eager to introduce more micro sessions, gather student feedback, and critically assess what is or is not working to refine my approach further.

References

Major, C.H., & Calandrino, T. (2013). Beyond teaching methods: A framework for microlearning in higher education. Innovative Higher Education, 38(1), 19–31.

McKee, A., & Ntoukos, D. (2020). Microlearning and student engagement: A case study in architectural education. Journal of Pedagogical Research, 4(2), 45–60.

Nicol, D., & Macfarlane-Dick, D. (2006). Formative assessment and self-regulated learning: A model and seven principles of good feedback practice. Studies in Higher Education, 31(2), 199–218.

Posted in Uncategorised | Tagged , | Leave a comment

Case Study 1: Knowing and responding to my students’ diverse needs

Posted on 11th March 2025 by Kuljeet Sibia

Contextual Background
I teach first-year BA Architecture students, guiding them through three design units in the academic year. My studio comprises students with diverse backgrounds, varying academic and personal needs, and experiences of education, including those coming from school, foundation degrees, or gap years. Many of my students also have neurodiverse needs, requiring a tailored approach to support their learning.

Evaluation
At the start of unit 2, we shuffled studios, and one of my new students shared that she was an ISA student with ADHD, describing herself as an extreme perfectionist with severe anxiety. She expressed difficulties in completing tasks as she would get caught up in details, preventing her from completing overall tasks and projects. In response, I began introducing strategies to support her, including breaking tasks into smaller, manageable steps, prompting her to move on from tasks, and encouraging her to consider the ‘bigger picture’. My approach has been effective, as she passed unit 2 with a complete portfolio and good standard of work. However, there are still challenges in balancing her perfectionism with her skill set, as her unit 2 submission and grade did not fully reflect her ability and has left her disheartened. This has prompted me to consider further adaptations to better meet her needs.

Group presentation: My student anxious to develop initial ideas
Working together to develop project during studio tutorials

Moving forwards

Reflecting on my own experiences as a student with perfectionist tendencies, I recognise the importance of a structured approach to tasks. Over time, I’ve developed strategies to manage my perfectionism and time more effectively, such as creating clear task structures and allowing myself to move on from areas I feel could be improved. This approach aligns with Bamber and Jones’ (2015) suggestion that structured planning, including task prioritisation and time-blocking, can support neurodiverse students by reducing overwhelm and creating a clear path for task completion. Building on this, I’ve explored additional methods to further support her progress.

Proposed actions: I plan to incorporate self-reflection exercises to help my student engage with their feedback. Nicol and Macfarlane-Dick (2006) highlight that self-reflection improves students’ ability to regulate their learning and track their progress. By prompting students to identify areas for improvement and set achievable goals based on feedback, I aim to promote ownership of their learning and reduce anxiety. 

Additionally, I will use feedback strategies that focus on process rather than evaluation. Rosenburg (2005) advocates for “observing without evaluating,” which encourages descriptive, non-judgmental feedback. This approach helps reduce anxiety, particularly for students with perfectionism, by focusing on progress rather than final outcomes. Rosenburg (2005, p. 110) explains, “Non-judgmental feedback enables learners to reflect on progress without fear of criticism,” thus fostering a supportive learning environment.

Reflection: I am in an open dialogue with my student and have explained that I am reviewing different ways of working with her, as part of my commitment to improving her learning experience and easing her anxiety. Based on our conversations, now that we are working through a new design unit, we have agreed to focus on completing tasks with clear deadlines. I have implemented smaller, low-stakes checkpoints to track progress and reduce anxiety around final assessments. These checkpoints are allowing me to provide timely observation feedback, ensuring she feels supported and her work is acknowledged, without the pressure of perfectionism. Furthermore, I have been testing similar strategies with other students who have comparable needs, as well as applying them more broadly across my studio practice.

From further consideration to support my student’s well-being and anxiety management, which I understand has ups and downs, I will integrate mindfulness and reflective practices. Bamber and Jones (2015, p. 107) note that “Mindfulness promotes self-awareness and emotional resilience,” key factors in inclusive learning. I believe this approach will complement my existing strategies, helping my student manage her stress while fostering academic growth.

Summary: Reflecting on this specific student’s experience has deepened my understanding of how structured approaches and tailored strategies can create a more supportive and inclusive learning environment. The experience has not only helped me develop more effective ways of supporting students with perfectionism and anxiety, but it has also reinforced my belief in the importance of flexibility and responsiveness in teaching. These insights are not just applicable to this student but will also guide my work with others who face similar challenges. As I continue to refine these strategies, I look forward to exploring how they can be implemented more widely across my teaching practice, ensuring that I can foster an environment where all students feel empowered to engage in their learning without the burden of unrealistic expectations

References 

Bamber, P. and Jones, D. (2015) Inclusive learning and teaching in higher education. 2nd ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Nicol, D.J. and Macfarlane-Dick, D. (2006) ‘Formative assessment and self-regulated learning: A model and seven principles of good feedback practice’, Studies in Higher Education, 31(2), pp. 199–218.

Rosenburg, M.B. (2005) Nonviolent Communication: A language of life. 2nd ed. Encinitas, CA: PuddleDancer Press.

Posted in Uncategorised | Tagged , | Leave a comment