During the final workshop for the TPP unit, Lindsay mentioned ‘Susan’, an example of a student who is autonomous, motivated and engages in ‘deep learning’. As the workshop continued and we took part in the ‘Critiquing the Crit’ role-play activity, I started to wonder what it might be like to put myself in Susan’s shoes. What would her experience be if she was a student at UAL? How would she cope? Would she be able to navigate through a creative arts course? Could she apply her deep learning approach to a ‘sticky’ journey of learning which rarely presents itself as linear?
Susan Orr’s work explores the ‘sticky curriculum’ which reflects the multifaceted and complex challenges creative arts students face as they navigate through their courses. There’s one quote from Orr where she compares the project brief to being fired out of a cannon (a rather graphic image!).
We might think of the project brief as human cannon at a circus that has been calibrated so that students, when loaded into the same cannon, get pushed out in different directions and different velocities. Crucially, the student is more than a passive body being propelled by a human cannon. Once released the student needs to learn to fly by themselves.
Susan Orr
Let’s imagine Susan (not Susan Orr) being fired out of a cannon. We know that she is excellently prepared and in control of her learning. How would she react to being fired out the cannon? Will she be able to fly? What mechanisms are in place to support her?
The table below shows the apparent tensions of some elements of creative arts pedagogy and good learning design:
| Creative arts pedagogies | Online learning good practice |
|---|---|
| Learning outcomes that are too specific hinder creative learning (Davies 2012) | Constructively aligned learning and teaching methods (Biggs 1996) |
| ‘Sticky’ curricula as a deliberate pedagogic strategy (Orr and Shreeve, 2018) | Structured learning design processes (i.e. UCL’s ABC) |
Constructive alignment as a framework can help to facilitate these tensions through ensuring the curriculum is cohesively designed with aligned learning outcomes, teaching methods, and assessment tasks. It supports students in making meaningful connections between their learning activities and the wider aim of why they are studying.
We should aim for a creative arts education that combines creative pedagogy alongside constructive alignment and best practice in online learning design. This will help to equip Susan and all students with the skills that they need to fly and navigate the uncertainties that are inherent in creative practice. Their flight paths, although not pre-planned, are always within a sphere of ongoing support, guidance and encouragement to explore, experiment, and express oneself freely.
The overlap between creative arts pedagogies and online learning good practice is what we should be aiming for. This sweet spot enables students like Susan to not only survive but thrive in the unique landscape of creative arts education. Combining the strengths of creative pedagogy with constructive alignment and best practices in online learning design can create a learning environment that supports all students in their unique flight paths.
(535 words)
References
Biggs, J. (1999) ‘What the Student Does: teaching for enhanced learning’, Higher Education Research & Development, 18(1), pp. 57–75. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1080/0729436990180105.
Orr, S. and Shreeve, A. (2019) Art and design pedagogy in higher education : knowledge, values and ambiguity in the creative curriculum. London: Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group.