Learning in vivo

Relationships between student and supervisor, within studio-based learning, have an effect on student learning

“With each ‘singular emotional episode’ the student learns about the supervisor and themselves” and with “repeated exposure these singular events can develop into ‘emotional stances’, which influence the student’s approach to learning”, say Belluigi (2016: 21) and adds that “such stances may be productive, reproductive or counter-productive depending on how power dynamics, affective concerns and discourses position and manage those involved”. She states (p. 22) that it “is important in education to recognise that teachers’ conceptions of their roles have an impact on student learning”, in that it may either undermine or support. Drawing from her art education research, she portrays constructions of the roles of supervisors and of students respectively, as well as resulting relationships.

Six constructions of the studio-supervisor (p. 23)	Four constructions of the student (p. 29)
The master (p. 23) Master–apprentice mimetic model, originated from the medieval guild workshop; apprentice making the master’s art; now obsolete and inappropriate for contemporary studio	The apprentice (p. 29) Hierarchical, ‘earning your stripes’, becoming a journeyman and then master; marked absence of student voice; in some cases a lack of concern for students’ aspirations
The atelier coach One-to-one ‘studio conversations’, arose from the 19th century Romantic French academy; constructive criticism of the student’s artwork as medium of learning; not sustainable under production and educational pressures	The emotional/intuitive artist-student Romantic artist genius and humanist notions of the artist as the ideal of fulfilled selfhood; believing morally superior and emotionally more sensitive than non-artists, and ‘pitted against a cold and corrupt society’
The reflective practitioner (p. 24) Observation and formative feedback; requires ‘sensitive, trusting and responsive teacher–student relationships; dependency because continually respond adapt to what emerges; reflection-both in and outside-action	The reflexive practitioner (p. 30) Reflexivity is essential to contemporary artmaking; fluidity between formal learning spaces and everyday life, theory and practice; fluidity between formal learning spaces and everyday life, theory and practice
The critical friend Students often intentionally use for alternative interpretations, and to situate themselves in community; model require caring, mutually engaging, partnership openness	The collaborator Postmodernist ‘co-constructivist’ concept ‘artist as collaborator’; interconnected with various different ‘knowledges’, experiences and communities; critical adult learning
The liminal servant (p. 25) Relating to the threshold (or point) beyond; both cognitive and social scaffolding; enthusiastic engagement and openness; empathy; and shared learning management
The analyst (and patient) Similar phenomena with therapy, within trust environment and sense of security, for student to explore widely and freely without constraints; play, awareness, mirroring, and transference; growth-promoting symbiosis

How the inherent differences of the respective roles and models are understood from within the constructions, is of significance and should not be overlooked.

Belluigi, D.Z. (2016). Constructions of Roles in Studio Teaching and Learning. The International Journal of Art & Design Education, 35(1), 21-35. Electronically available at https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jade.12042

Case-based learning instructional model

In an article published under Creative Commons Attribution License terms, Şen-Akbulut and Hill (2020) present a four phase instructional model for case-based pedagogy, for specifically teacher education, which could probably be generalised. The four sequential phases, left to right, are preceded by introductory activities. The model portrays three levels, namely (a) the design principles, at the top, below the introductory activities, informing each phase; (b) the instructor/lecturer’s role in the middle; and (c) the role of the students at the bottom.

Five design principles are deemed essential to constructivist pedagogy, say Şen-Akbulut and Hill (2020):

1. Learning should be embed in both authentic and relevant contexts, because for learning to enable more efficient functioning the relevance should be evident. From a social constructivist perspective, learning should be authentic, because individuals need to construct knowledge personally, as well as mediate that knowledge socially. In the case-based learning context the complexity and uncertainty of reality should be portrayed.
2. Learning should, from a constructivist perspective, be embed in social experience, in order to facilitate development of socially relevant skills. Individual construct understanding from social experiences, either validating knowledge structures, or contradicting them. The learning context should therefore encourage collaboration between all individuals involved. All students should prepare, share different perspectives; contribute to suggesting solutions; and reflect on the final proposed solution.
3. Social constructivism emphasises alternative views and encourages testing of ideas against multiple perspectives. There is no special ‘truth’, instead there could be a multitude of perceptual understandings which could transpire being more suitable. Learning should provide opportunities to engage in activities, enabling evaluation of alternative solutions as a means to evolving knowledge. Case materials should (a) allow curation of information from different sources and examining of issues from a variety of perspectives; as well as (b) allow for multiple correct responses and decision-making opportunities.
4. Underlying constructivism is the notion of providing opportunities for reflection. Students should be capable of explaining why and how they solved a problem in a certain way. The learning context should provide for time to think and evaluate the adequacy of required knowledge.
5. In order to challenge and support thinking cognitive conflict is necessary. The lecturer’s role is to guide students to an awareness of own meanings by challenging, supporting, and guiding; however not to lead to any specific conclusion.

Design principle (DP) 1 above applies to the first phase, namely the inquiry focus, with roles as indicated in the model. Both DP 2 & 3 apply to the second phase, which pertains to space and time for consideration. Three design principle, DP 3, 4 & 5, pertain to the third phase, active participation in learning; and DP 4 to the fourth phase, synthesize key ideas and practices. The model is derived from a University of Georgia 2017 doctoral dissertation.

Şen-Akbulut, M. & Hill, J.R. (2020). Case-based pedagogy for teacher education: an instructional model. Contemporary Education (Cont Ed) Technology, 12(2), ep287. Accessible from https://doi.org/10.30935/cedtech/8937

Supervision, mentoring & coaching - 'ex cathedra'?

Literature on supervision, coaching and mentoring - John Launer (2006: 268) observes - "seems to exist on islands that are not in communication with each other". Some islands identified by professions-such as counselling and psychotherapy-other islands through their theoretical bent-such as psychoanalysis, systhemic family therapy, neurolinguistic programming (NLP) and client-centred approaches-and within most islands appear to be a particular 'ex cathedral' terminological preference (from an infallable authority) with rarely any attempt to contextualise definitions, frameworks or theoretical positions. "Readers are often left to work out for themselves exactly what the author's set of assumptions and agendas might be, and why" Launer remarks.

Yet, it appears from a literature review undertaken by Launer, that authors seem to address the same notions in one form or another. He reasons that perhaps it is not surprising, because of operating from individual professional bunkers. He remarks that few scholars can master the entire literature of their own field/s of interest, let alone other. However, many he states "are guilty of what Freud called "the narcissism of small differences' "(p. 269).

Launer, J. 2006. Reflective practice and clinical supervison: making sense of supervision, mentoring and coaching, Work Based Learning in Primary Care, 2006(4), 268-270.

Afterthought and mirroring - reflexivity

Reflection and reflexivity (pp 46-47, 92-94)

— notes from Illeris, K. 2002. The three dimensions of learning. Malabar, Fla: Krieger

There are two dissimilar meanings are associated with the word ‘reflection’:

1.       Afterthought — reflecting on or giving additional though to something

2.       Mirroring — in line with the original optical meaning, an experience of something mirrored in the self. The significance thereof is in the focus and that the personal identity is used as yardstick. The term self-reflection is often used in this sense. The inclination or ability to this kind of reflection is also termed reflexivity, however, accurate vocabulary is lacking.

Afterthought and cognitive learning

The words afterthought and reflection contains an element of time lag, in that new impulses that arise from interaction often do not happen directly. Although immediate learning is possible, the time lag is a characteristic. Often a cognitive dissonance remains and when an opportune moment takes place, afterthought occurs. Jack Mezzirow equated this kind of reflection to the learning in one situation and applied in another. Karl Duncker indicated that afterthought often manifests as problem solving, stemming from the original interaction. There is accommodative learning that lags behind the trigger impulses and is elaborated on later. Mezzirow contributed critical-reflection, which contains an added element of assessment of the soundness of the presumptions.

Reflection-in-action, developed by Donald Schön, is not considered to form part of afterthought, as form of learning, because Schön advocated reflection-in-action as a process of immediate reaction to a problem.

Self-experience and reflexivity

Thomas Ziehe and Anthony Giddens postulate that reflexivity is not merely intellectual, but involves the experiential, the emotional, the self-comprehension and the identity formation. Giddens introduced the expressions reflexivity of the body (body awareness); institutional reflexivity (organisations constantly needing to legitimatise their existence and function) and reflexivity of modernity (a characteristic of the time). Ulrich Beck supported the latter with the term reflexivity of modernization, for individual and societal reflexivity as a necessity.

Reflexivity is not just principally about learning and thinking, but also linked to personality and personal qualities development. Development of the self is seen as mirroring the development of the individual in relationship to society.