Yasi Tehrani

Phenomenological research is a qualitative approach that seeks to understand and describe lived experiences from the perspective of those who live them (Husserl, 1970). Unlike other methodologies that may prioritise measurable outcomes or theoretical constructs, phenomenology focuses on subjective experience, exploring how individuals make sense of the world around them (Groenewold, 2004).

In the context of my research, a phenomenological approach allows me to examine how students experience psychological safety in online arts education, particularly as it relates to their willingness to share creative work.

As a research strategy, it allows me to focus on “learn[ing] from the experiences of others […] broadening our understanding of the complex phenomena involved in learning” (Neubauer, Witkop and Varpio, 2019), specifically as these phenomena are experienced by students.

Edmondson (1999) defines psychological safety as “freedom from fear, embarrassment, or humiliation in groups.” In the context of arts education, this concept becomes increasingly nuanced. As Samuel Beckett (1975) reminds us, “To admit that to be an artist is to fail, as no other dare fail, that failure is his world.” This perspective highlights the profound vulnerability inherent in developing one’s creative practice, where the act of making and sharing inevitably involves the risk of failure, critique, and misunderstanding. Psychological safety, therefore, is not merely about cultivating a “nice” or supportive environment in which to share, learn, and fail; it demands a critical examination of the power dynamics, values, and institutional structures that influence students’ willingness to share their work and fully engage in the learning process.

According to Schein and Bennis (1965) psychological safety can also be something that reduces “a person’s anxiety about being basically accepted and worthwhile”. If we couple this with the belief that in art and design education, ‘the work’ is  ‘synonymous with the person[hood] of the student and an integral part of their professional identity’ (Orr and Shreeve, 2017), then this means that when we ask students to share their work, we’re asking them to offer up for critique a part of themselves. For black and ethnic minority, LGBTQIA+, mature, and first-generation university students who are often excluded from normative student culture, this ask can be particularly challenging . Such feelings of exclusions from the ‘norm’ can lead to feelings of fear and isolation, impacting their motivation, experience and retention (Tinto, 1993), a scenario exemplified by former LCF student, Romero Bryan:

I wanted to explore my culture, in terms of reggae music and the dancehall scene, being I am originally Jamaican, with links to Cuba also. Unfortunately, it was frowned upon by the tutors. I guess they were scared they couldn’t relate to my experiences… It was very much a Western approach to the subject areas you were allowed to explore. Anything outside of that was a no-go zone.

Romero Bryan, Shades of Noir, 2020

Romero’s experience highlights how the lack of psychological safety can limit the ability of students from diverse backgrounds to fully engage in and express their creative identities. He experienced the learning environment as one in which certain perspectives were implicitly excluded, restricting his creative exploration and reinforcing feelings of alienation as his identity and experiences fell outside the norm.

While psychological safety has been studied across various contexts in education, a significant gap exists in understanding its role within arts education, particularly in online environments. My research direction has been influenced by existing studies that explore psychological safety as a phenomenon, albeit in different disciplinary fields such as medicine or business studies. This gap presented an opportunity to examine psychological safety specifically within the online creative arts education space.

References

Beckett, S. (1965) Proust: And three dialogues with Georges Duthuit. London: Calder.

Groenewald, T. (2004) ‘A phenomenological research design illustrated’, International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 3(1), pp. 42–55. doi: https://doi.org/10.1177/160940690400300104.

Neubauer, B., Witkop, C. and Varpio, L. (2019) ‘How phenomenology can help us learn from the experiences of others’, Perspectives on Medical Education, 8(2), pp. 90–97. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40037-019-0509-2.

Orr, S. and Shreeve, A., 2017. Art and design pedagogy in higher education: Knowledge, values and ambiguity in the creative curriculum. Routledge.

Schein, E.H. and Bennis, W.G. (1965) Personal and organizational change through group methods. New York: Wiley.

Teherani, A., Martimianakis, T., Stenfors-Hayes, T., Wadhwa, A. and Varpio, L. (2015) ‘Choosing a qualitative research approach’, Journal of Graduate Medical Education, 7(4), pp. 669–670. doi:10.4300/JGME-D-15-00414.1.

Understanding psychological safety as experienced by students. What it means and why it matters.

My Action Research Project (ARP) focuses on students’ perceptions of psychological safety in online learning environments. Edmondson (1999) defines psychological safety as “freedom from fear, embarrassment, or humiliation in groups”. In the art context, this sense of safety is vital for students to confidently share their creative work, engage in critique, and develop their ideas collaboratively (Orr and Shreeve, 2017).

Sharing creative work is at the heart of an arts education. It’s through sharing that students invite others into their process, allowing for dialogue, feedback, and growth [citation]. But sharing isn’t easy. It requires vulnerability, exposing ideas that may still feel raw, unfinished, or deeply personal. For this to happen, students need to feel safe what Edmondson described as the ‘freedom from fear embarrassment, or humiliation’ within a group setting.

UAL data from the Postgraduate Taught Survey (PTES 2023/2024) highlights that postgraduate taught (PGT) students on online master’s programmes feel disconnected.

Postgraduate students don’t feel part of a community at UAL. Why is this? It may be that opportunities for dialogue and the safe sharing of creative work haven’t been fully embedded into the online curriculum.

When students feel disconnected, they’re less likely to share. Fear of judgment or misunderstanding can hold them back, creating a cycle where isolation deepens, and opportunities for growth are missed. In an online environment, where the absence of physical connection can already amplify feelings of disconnection, this becomes even more critical. Without intentional design that fosters a sense of community and trust, the process of sharing, an essential part of the creative arts pedagogy, can be stifled entirely.

In an on-campus setting, this might not matter so much. As, belonging and community often emerge organically as students share physical spaces over time (White, 2022). But in online spaces, where students are scattered across cities, countries, continents and time zones, feelings of connection are harder to cultivate. It isn’t enough to hope that students will ‘figure it out’ on their own. The structure must support connection.

If the structure does not permit dialogue the structure must be changed.

Paulo Freire

If the structure doesn’t allow for dialogue for sharing, then the structure must changed. Grappling with this tension is central to my work, and practice, as a learning designer at UAL. When engaging in course learning design with tutors, I ask of myself and them:

1. How can we invite students to share their thoughts, opinions, and creative work without fear?
2. How can we co-design learning experiences that intentionally cultivate psychological safety?

It’s also important to recognise that not all students enter the online learning space on equal footing. Some students’ work and approaches are more readily legitimised, aligning with the ‘right kind’ of dispositions and cultural capital that the academy and the art world value (Orr and Shreeve, 2017). For others, their backgrounds, perspectives or approaches may fall outside of these “values”, leaving them more susceptible to the fear of being excluded or undervalued. When students sense that their contributions might not be not equally valued, they may hesitate to share their (real) work or fully participate in the learning process.

I suspect this might come down to a lack of psychological safety in the online environment, particularly for black and ethnic minority, LGBTQIA+, mature, and first-generation university students who are typically excluded from normative online student culture. This can lead to feelings of fear and isolation which impact student motivation, experience and retention (Tinto, 1993).

Recognising and addressing these dynamics is critical to fostering a truly inclusive arts education – where the fear of being oneself is removed as much as possible.
This is why understanding psychological safety and how students experience it is so important. I believe that it is key to delivering on the task of creating inclusive and transformative learning environments.

References

Edmondson, A. (1999). Psychological Safety and Learning Behavior in Work Teams. Administrative Science Quarterly, 44(2), pp.350–383. doi:https://doi.org/10.2307/2666999. (Accessed: 16 December 2024).

Freire, P. (2017) Pedagogy of the Oppressed. London, England: Penguin Books.

Orr, S. and Shreeve, A., 2017. Art and design pedagogy in higher education: Knowledge, values and ambiguity in the creative curriculum. Routledge.

Tinto, V. (1993) Leaving college: Rethinking the causes and cures of student attrition. Chicago (Ill.): University Of Chicago Press.

White, D. (2022) Belonging is inconvenient, David White: Digital and Education. Available at: https://daveowhite.com/inconvenient (Accessed: 16 October 2024).