Claire Undy

Supporting students to be ‘themselves’

Fine Art students work in an almost entirely self-directed way and are encouraged from the outset of their studies to establish unique areas of interest to explore using any media they choose. Many students enjoy this freedom of creative expression, but for others it can present a challenging requirement to perform their own individuality, when this is something that they are more comfortable suppressing.

Bourdieu’s widely adopted notion of ‘cultural capital’ describes the knowledge and understanding of cultural material that students acquire through a privileged upbringing, that becomes employed as ‘capital’ later in life, and traded for access to institutions and social circles. Neil and Reid describe how ‘’deficit’ of cultural capital affects how students see themselves, how they are seen by others, including peers and academic staff. They can easily come to feel isolated, out of place, as not really belonging.’ (2011) 

Within an art school environment, cultural capital is at play almost immediately as students identify themselves amongst their peer group. Fashion, style of art-making and prior knowledge of art history or approaches can be direct indicators of social position, and students often feel the need to either embrace the social identity their upbringing has provided them with, or ‘rebrand’ for a new audience. For those from working class or ethnic minority backgrounds, this can be particularly challenging as ‘key aspects of performative identity, such as their language, mannerisms and style are both culturally appropriated and depicted as less cultured and generally deficient.’ (Holland-Gilbert, 2019)

It is common to ‘perform’ an identity in order behave appropriately or succeed in different environments, and this is particularly likely amongst students who perceive themselves to be in ‘deficit’. In ‘Using Things’, Ahmed (2019) describes the human toll of this constant adaptation – ‘It can be wearing to inhabit a world that is not built for you’. As a Fine Art tutor, I know that students are more successful when they can be encouraged to use their own ‘authentic’ voice, however this can create conflict within those who have been endeavoring to meet expectations by performing an alternative version of themselves.

Gilbert-Holland offers a potential solution in her description of the Open Book Project. This is a ‘free education programme for adults from marginalized backgrounds’, which in some cases functions as a path to Higher Education. Through dismantling the hierarchy of learning, integration with student groups and teaching that seeks to build confidence and skillsets, the Open Book project emphasizes that a ‘precariat habitus’ or non-‘traditional’ background can be compatible with and valuable to academic study.

‘As a result, rather than resort to mimicry of the cultural capital of traditional students, or compartmentalize various aspects of their identity… they were emboldened to assert their marginalized identity, in opposition to that of traditional students, seemingly regardless of how they were perceived’. (Holland-Gilbert, 2019)

In my experience it has taken uncommon self-assurance for a student to understand and celebrate the value of their own individual identity within their art practice, especially if that identity comes with a perceived lack of cultural capital. I have taken some encouragement from the work of Holland-Gilbert and the Open Book project that I may have some agency within my own teaching, and the environment that I facilitate to support students to feel able to ‘be themselves’ in this way.

References

Ahmed, S. (2019) What’s the Use? : On the Uses of Use. Durham: Duke University Press.

Holland-Gilbert, J. (2019) Precariat insurgency: A means to improve structures
of inclusivity in higher education. In Hatton, K (ed), Inclusion and Intersectionality in Visual Arts Education. London: Institute of Education Press (IOE Press).

Neil, K. and Reid, E. (2011) Accessing and Decoding Communities of Cultural Capital. In Bhagat, D. and O’Neill, P. (eds) Inclusive Practices, Inclusive Pedagogies: Learning from Widening Participatoin Research in Art and Design Higher Education. Hemel Hempstead: CHEAD.

The challenges in retention of ‘non-traditional’ students

‘There is still a large disparity around the intake and retention of students from non-traditional backgrounds, particularly within prestigious institutions… while more disadvantaged young people are in higher education than ever before, the discrepancies between institutions and the numbers of those students leaving before completing their studies continues to grow.’ (Holland-Gilbert, 2019)

In this instance, Holland-Gilbert is using the term ‘non-traditional’ to refer to students of minority ethnic backgrounds, those from lower-economic backgrounds or those that are the first in their family to study at Higher Education level. In my professional role I am particularly interested in how I can contribute positively to the experience of so-called ‘non-traditional’ students to support their retention through to the completion of their studies. Working closely with first-year BA students, and formerly at Foundation level, I have witnessed many of the difficulties students face at this point in their studies, and the long-term impact a positive start to Higher Education can have.

Bamber & Jones write about the importance of establishing a sense of inclusion and being clear about expectations in order to mitigate differences in prior knowledge around appropriate modes of behaviour or work. 

‘Entry into HE- especially important for first generation students, who may find it difficult to decode what is expected at university. You can make expectations very explicit from the start of their course’. (Bamber & Jones, 2015)

Fine Art has a very particular mode of operation, with numerous implicit expectations around appropriate studio practice that are often never fully explained to students. I have observed that home students from private education often have an intuitive understanding of what is expected of them, gleaned from the cultural capital of their upbringing. International students, or those from less-privileged or ‘non-traditional’ backgrounds may find this transition much more difficult. Once a student perceives themselves as an outsider within a cohort, I have found them to be difficult to engage and at risk of dropping-out altogether. 

While it is encouraging to see an increase in the diversity of the student cohort I feel that we need to adapt our pedagogical approaches in order to make sure that the student experience is a positive one, and we don’t exacerbate external experiences of marginalization. I have tried to embed Bamber & Jones’ ideas around decoding expectations into my teaching, ignoring the risk of patronizing more experienced students by clearly setting out what is required, defining terms and explaining how spaces are to be used. This is a work in progress however, and it is often only when a student gets it wrong that I appreciate where I might have made an assumption about their prior knowledge.

Sagan (2011) writes about ‘the spatial metaphors through which we teach and learn may powerfully reproduce inequalities in society’, explaining how ‘non-traditional’ students’ engagement with learning spaces such as the studio may already be negatively influenced by their prior experiences of education. Re-writing these attitudes towards learning spaces is essential if we wish to create a place where all students can feel they belong and thrive.

References

Bamber, V & Jones, A 2015, Challenging students: enabling inclusive learning. in H Fry, S Ketteridge & S Marshall (eds), A Handbook for Teaching and Learning in Higher Education: Enhancing Academic Practice. 4th edn, Routledge , Abingdon, pp. 152-168.

Holland-Gilbert, J. (2019) Precariat insurgency: A means to improve structures
of inclusivity in higher education. In Hatton, K (ed), Inclusion and Intersectionality in Visual Arts Education. London: Institute of Education Press (IOE Press).

Sagan, O. (2011) Playgrounds, studios and hiding places: emotional exchange in creative learning spaces. In Bhagat, D. and O’Neill, P. (eds) Inclusive Practices, Inclusive Pedagogies: Learning from Widening Participatoin Research in Art and Design Higher Education. Hemel Hempstead: CHEAD.

The studio as a safe, brave or vulnerable space

As a first-year Fine Art tutor, the studio is a significant contributor to the learning environment I create for my students for several reasons. Creating an environment where students feel comfortable, with a sense of ownership over the space helps construct a sense of belonging. Bamber & Jones (2015) write about the positive impact a sense of belonging can have to the retention and engagement of students. 

Experimentation and taking risks is vital for success within Fine Art, however this requires students to make themselves vulnerable to the potential of ‘failure’. Establishing a working space where students feel able to do this without risk of negative judgement is vital but can be difficult to achieve. 

Collaborative co-learning takes place in a studio that models professional networks of practice and prepares students for studio practice beyond the university. Orr & Shreeve discuss the studio as a ‘signature pedagogy’ – something specific and essential to art and design education. ‘Ideally the studio is an active, busy and social place where learning is visible and open to discussion through active participation.’ (2017) 

I have learned that the first month of the first year is critical for the establishing of a positive studio atmosphere and in my work with new first-year students I have introduced a number of workshops early in the term that require students to fix images of their work and inspirations all over the walls. Initially this is somewhat forced, but it makes clear to the students that the space is theirs to use as they wish, and by the end of Unit 1 in early November the space becomes visually lively in a more organic way, as they begin to fill it with their own work on their own terms.

I have always modelled the studio as a ‘safe’ space, establishing ‘studio rules’ in conversation with the students on arrival so that there are clear expectations about what is appropriate within the room. Arao & Clemens (2013) question the passivity of the term ‘safe’ and instead propose the term ‘brave space’ in order to ‘emphasize the need for courage rather than the illusion of safety’ and encourage a more challenging engagement with problematic issues of social justice. 

Social justice is a significant requirement within the UAL curriculum so it is vital for us as staff to find ways to facilitate dialogue on these subjects in a way that allows students to feel both ‘safe’ and ‘brave’. Vulnerability is often required for such discussions, and many students feel inhibited by a fear of being ‘attacked’ or ‘judged’. I believe the studio, a space that exists somewhere between the public and the private, could be a valuable site to test contentious ideas, and for students to explore potentially difficult conversations. I am interested to find ways to incorporate moments of ‘permission’ that would facilitate these conversations at a micro-level within the studio, without impacting its atmosphere as an inclusive and positive space.

Orr & Shreeve discuss how various Studio Pedagogies such as the studio teach students about professional practice. Enabling students to responsibly construct a space that supports the functioning of their art practice and lively dialogue around social and political ideas is vital to support their practice beyond the university and into a sustainable professional career.

References

Arao. A. & Clemens, K. (2013) From Safe Spaces to Brave Spaces: A New Way to Frame Dialogue Around Diversity and Social Justice. In Landreman, L.M. The Art of Effective Facilitation: Reflections From Social Justice Educators. New York: Routledge.

Bamber, V & Jones, A 2015, Challenging students: enabling inclusive learning. in H Fry, S Ketteridge & S Marshall (eds), A Handbook for Teaching and Learning in Higher Education: Enhancing Academic Practice. 4th edn, Routledge , Abingdon, pp. 152-168.

Orr, S. & Shreeve, A. (2017), Teaching practices for creative practitioners. In Art and Design Pedagogy in Higher Education : Knowledge, Values and Ambiguity in the Creative Curriculum, Milton: Taylor & Francis Group.