Intervention context

I am year 1 lead on BA UXD at LCC. We are lucky to have a dedicated studio, which also contains a selection of technical equipment with supporting technician. We call our space ‘the Atelier’, and share similar aspirations for it as Fattizzo and Vania (2021) (1):

“The objective was to “reinstate the importance of workshop teaching, as a meeting point between knowledge and know-how” and to transform workshops into “places of innovation and creativity.” … “a place of research, invention, and empathy expressed through 100 languages,” becomes “a meeting point for manual skills, crafts, creativity and technology”

Our course emphasises the importance of hands-on research and prototyping, which is fostered within a creative, collaborative space like our Atelier.

This space is available to all BAUXD students for self-directed learning during afternoons, yet very few students make use of it. Why is that? This is what I aim to research, and will consider what small interventions can be made that will increase student uptake of the space.

As an undergraduate back in 2007 – 2010, I was faced with a similar situation. We had a large, dedicated studio space, which I stubbornly refused to use until my third year, when sure enough, I finally attended, built creative community with my peers, and my work flourished as a result.

How much better my academic progress might have been if I had taken advantage of this space earlier. Informed by this personal undergraduate journey, I want to try and give my students a better experience than my own.

Intervention Plan

Firstly, I will undertake qualitative research workshops. I will speak to second years (who have already had a year’s access to the atelier), and incoming first years (to discover their initial perceptions of the space and its usability).

I will utilise methodologies which tie into our UX curriculum, so these workshops will both inform my own research, and show students our user research practice in action.

We will use tools like mind maps, post-its, surveys and open discussions to tease out students’ personal feelings about the Atelier, and what changes might make it a more accessible, hospitable, usable space.

We will also undertake some wider reflective exercises on students’ personal definitions of what constitutes a good workspace, and how they might apply their own individual interventions within both the Atelier and their home workspaces.

After the workshop, I will offer students the opportunity to communicate with me directly if they wish, in case there were any aspects of their experience that they did not feel comfortable disclosing previously. I am mindful of not forcing students to share any aspect of their identity or experience which they do not want to, particularly in a group context.

I will then analyse the findings from this research to draw up a list of actions we might take to increase the Atelier’s usage. I will situate these on a value/effort quadrant chart, and immediately pursue those which are easy and high value. I will put in place plans to enact at a later date those which are hard but high value, and those which are easy but low value will be enacted on a case by case basis, as and when appropriate.

Why does it matter that students use the Atelier?

Pedagogy

Orr and Shreeve (2017) (2) reflect on the studio as a signature pedagogy of art and design courses.

“A space may not seem like pedagogy, but in its widest sense the studio helps structure what can and does take place when students learn, and it has been a central part of organised learning in visual arts for more than a century. This space also echoes those found in professional working environments… There is usually no central focus for the lecturer to hold forth, but rather students create a social learning environment discussing amongst peers and enabling the tutor to explore progress and work and to hold group or individual tutorials.

They note that:

“Ideally the studio is an active, busy and social place where learning is visible and open to discussion through active participation” (2)

It is precisely this ‘busyness’ which I seek to foster, for both the pedagogical and social benefits it imbues.

Social benefits/care

During my MA I explored the importance of the ‘third places’ — a concept introduced by sociologist Ray Oldenburg in his book ‘The Great Good Place’. (A person’s ‘first place’ is their home. ‘Second places’ are workplaces or educational settings. ‘Third Places’ are public spaces where members of the community come together and connect — for example, libraries, hairdressers, pubs, community centres and so on.)

While our Atelier is a ‘second place’, I want to see whether the power of community culture fostered within third places is possible to organically build in our context.

“In the convivial atmosphere of third places, people get to know one another and to like one another and then to care for one another. When people care for one another, they take an interest in their welfare; and this is a vastly superior form of welfare than that obtained by governmental programs. It is based on mutual consent, genuine empathy, and real understanding of peoples’ situations. Nobody is a “case.” Third place regulars “do for one another,” as they would for blood relatives and old friends. They give things they no longer need; they loan items they still want; they do what they can to relieve hardship when it befalls “one of the gang.” When someone doesn’t “show” for a couple of days, somebody goes around to check on them.” (P20)

Empowerment

The potential this kind of atmosphere has for empowerment, particularly amongst marginalised groups, is huge. I would like students to feel more able to use the Atelier as a safe space for community and connection. Sibrian et al (2023) (4) discuss the potential power of spaces to facilitate liberation for students of colour:

“Spaces for collective racial healing within predominantly white institutions are meant to support the path to collective liberation for Black students, Indigenous students, and students of color. It is imperative that we intentionally create racial healing spaces that support the identities and experiences of students of color on a predominantly white institution.” (p1)

I want the Atelier to be a place where connections between students are allowed to grow and flourish, in a way which provides a powerful support network during their years of study.

“Identities such as race, class, gender, ethnicity, religion, and disability are important social aspects of learning, and play an important role as students begin to explore and understand their own positionality and how that positionality intersects with systems of oppression in academic spaces.” (p4)

Given the importance of the studio space for academic outcomes, social and identity growth, and general university quality of life, we need to work to make this space as accessible and welcoming as possible to all students.

What barriers might currently exist to access

Disability

I have been particularly concerned that there may be ways our studio space is inaccessible or unwelcoming to those disabilities. The UAL data dashboards show that 17% of enrolled students have one or more declared disabilities (and there may be more who do not declare), meaning in a class of 40, it’s likely that at least 6 or 7 students meet this criteria. This certainly fits with my knowledge of my own student group this last year.

Physical disability

In ‘What Can a Body Do’, Sara Hendren explores ‘the things we use and the spaces we inhabit’ through the lens of physical disability, reflecting on how our world might be better designed to accommodate these. She discusses the potential of co-design to solve problems:

“The process through which it was created is an instance of what’s called ‘co-design’: the ideas belong to the group, and the end product is the result of an interactive social process” (p.89)

Co-design is a common methodology within UX (alongside human centred design), and by bringing that thought process into this research process, I will be drawing on the communal expertise of our students and their own lived experiences.

Neurodiversity

There are many bodies of research exploring how to improve accessibility from a sensory perspective, I have found the CIPD’s Neurodiversity at Work Guide (6), and the BBC’s UX&D ‘Neurodiversity and buildings checklist’ (7) particularly insightful.

“Many aspects of the typical working environment can act as barriers that prevent neurodivergent employees – particularly those with acute sensory sensitivity – from performing at their best at work.” (CIPD p 35)

“In the same way that environments such as workspaces and public buildings are usually audited to consider physical accessibility, if sensory responses and preferences of Neurodiverse communities are better understood it will be possible to create shared environments that more closely meet everyone’s needs. (BBC UX&D)

The Podcast 99% invisible also explores neurodiversity and spaces from a variety of perspectives in their ‘Autism Pleasantville’ episode (8):

“Magda noticed how ingenious the students were, curating spaces to take care of themselves. She used these findings to inform her design decisions.”

Many neurodiverse students are already very aware of their own needs, and have developed personal methodologies to ‘curate’ spaces for themselves. I am keen to learn from all of our students to see whether any of their personal interventions may scale up. Because it is well worth noting that:

“…taking steps to be inclusive of neurodivergent people will often result in ‘universal accommodations’ – adjustments that benefit all employees, job-seekers, or customers.” (CIPD p8)

I saw this in practice earlier this year, when one student requested that the fluorescent lighting in our space be made less intense, and several other students later offered thanks for the change.

Socio-economic

For students on our course from underprivileged socio-economic backgrounds, the potential of a welcoming studio space is huge. The challenges faced by many in heating homes during the winter are well documented (Save the Student) (9), with many students living in substandard accommodation (Gov.uk) (10). Here, we can provide not just community and desk space, but also a place to exist in comfort which may not be affordable or otherwise possible at home.

Caitlin Shepherd explores this in her PhD research (11), which promises to support:

“scholars and artists examining how theories and practices of listening and care can facilitate candid conversations and action on pervasive intersectional class inequality. A structural problem endemic to the arts, and society at large” (p7)

She reflects on how:

“the conditions of labour within the creative and cultural industries have been exposed to be precarious, coming with significant hidden costs and validation gaps. Because of these barriers, the creative and cultural industries remain inaccessible to people without a surplus of creative, social, and economic capital.”

It is vitally important that we do our utmost to overcome these potential barriers to success in the creative industries, which can already be manifest within the creative university setting.

I am keen to discover any barriers to accessing the studio space which students might experience from a socioeconomic perspective, and though I recognise that many of these may be beyond the scope of this intervention to pursue immediately, I hope that my research can better inform aspects of course budgeting going forwards.

Feedback from peers and colleagues

In the early stages of planning my intervention, I shared my ideas with Georgina Voss (former UAL course leader) and Deb Chachra, (Professor of Engineering at Olin College, Massachussets) — we discussed ways in which they had attempted to make their own teaching spaces more accessible. Deb reflected on how fortunate she felt to work at Olin, where the campus (designed by Perry Dean Architects in 2002) was built as much as possible with environmental and accessibility considerations at its heart from the outset. I am indebted to Georgina for pointing me in the direction of Caitlin Shepherd’s fascinating work, and to both Deb and Georgina for reminding me about Sara Hendren’s excellent ‘What can a body do’.

I shared my intervention idea with colleagues on BA UXD, specifically our acting course leader Keir Williams, and my fellow lecturers Patrick Bull and Antonella Nonnis. We have shared in disappointment that the studio space is not more used, and have reflected on potential solutions. The research that I conduct with students will help directly inform whether our own ideas for interventions are valid, and whether there are other potential actions which had not occurred to us. Keir and Antonella have a history of research around autistic children, pedagogy and play, and I valued the thread of research which Keir sent me down around Montessori Schools and their different ways of thinking about teaching spaces.

Finally, discussion with my PGCert blog group peers has been particularly fruitful in terms of specifically planning the intervention. Both George and Becky reflected on the valuable pedagogical potential of bringing UX methodologies into this research, and how my workshops can serve the dual purpose of furthering my own research, and showing first and second year UX students what this kind of research looks like in practice. It also serves to expand our students understanding of UX beyond merely the digital, and into more spatial and service design domains, which truly view the notion of ‘experience’ in a holistic manner.

I am excited to undertake this research and resulting interventions at the beginning of the new academic year in September/October 2024, and hopefully support our Atelier to become a thriving creative and social space for more of our students, particularly for those with specific identities or intersecting identities which might currently affect their access.

Bibliography

1. Fattizzo, T. and Vania, P. (2021) ‘Montessori Creativity Space: Making a Space for Creativity’, in D. Scaradozzi et al. (eds) Makers at School, Educational Robotics and Innovative Learning Environments. Cham: Springer International Publishing, pp. 113–117. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-77040-2_15.
2. Orr, S. and Shreeve, A. (2017) Art and Design Pedagogy in Higher Education: Knowledge, Values and Ambiguity in the Creative Curriculum. 1st edition. London ; New York: Routledge. (P.88 – 90)
3. Oldenburg, R. (1999) The Great Good Place: Cafes, Coffee Shops, Bookstores, Bars, Hair Salons, and Other Hangouts at the Heart of a Community. 3rd edition. New York : Berkeley, Calif.: Da Capo Press.
4. Sibrian, A., Thomas, N., Moses, T., Mercer, L.E., (2023) Designing Collective Racial Healing Spaces https://dl.designresearchsociety.org/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1122&context=iasdr
5. Hendren, S. (2020) What can a body do — how we meet the built word. Riverhead books.
6. CIPD (2018) ‘Neurodiversity at Work Guide’. Available at: https://www.cipd.org/globalassets/media/knowledge/knowledge-hub/guides/neurodiversity-at-work_2018_tcm18-37852.pdf (Accessed: 29 June 2024).
7. Neurodiversity and Buildings Checklist – BBC (no date). Available at: https://bbc.github.io/uxd-cognitive/ (Accessed: 29 June 2024).
8. 99% Invisible (2024) ‘Autism Pleasantville’. Available at: https://99percentinvisible.org/episode/autism-pleasantville/ (Accessed: 29 June 2024).
9. National Student Accommodation Survey 2023 – Results (2023) Save the Student. Available at: https://www.savethestudent.org/accommodation/national-student-accommodation-survey-2023.html (Accessed: 29 June 2024).
10. Wheeler, H. (2019) ‘Rogue’ private landlords must stop exploiting students, GOV.UK. Available at: https://www.gov.uk/government/news/rogue-private-landlords-must-stop-exploiting-students (Accessed: 29 June 2024).
11. Shepherd, C. (2022) Caring to Listen: Developing listening practices to better understand experiences of socially engaged artists from working class backgrounds. Available at: https://files.cargocollective.com/c586553/CaringtoListen-FINAL-DEC-2023_compressed.pdf (Accessed: 29 June 2024).

Additional reading

BBC Cymru Wales Broadcast Centre (no date). Available at: https://www.bbc.co.uk/neurodiversity/cardiff/bbc.com/neurodiversity/cardiff/ (Accessed: 29 June 2024).

Charleston, E., Foale, K.,Joynt-Bowe, S., Gendered Intelligence, and The Greater Manchester Coalition of Disabled People (2023) The Trans Dimension Guide to Inclusive Events. Available at https://gfsc.studio/assets/pdf/Trans-Dimension-Guide-To-Inclusive-Events_1.0.pdf (Accessed: 23 April 2024)

Contractor, R., Janus, A. and Patel, Y. (2018) ‘Beyond design, detail, print: The Tech Futures Lab design-build studio’, Spark: UAL Creative Teaching and Learning Journal, 3(2), pp. 161–171.

Crowley, A. (no date) ‘What does it mean to be a disabled disability practitioner’?’, Shades Of Noir. Available at: https://shadesofnoir.org.uk/content/what-does-it-mean-to-be-a-disabled-disability-practitioner/ (Accessed: 9 July 2024).

M.Ed), J.B. (M A. (2023) The Artist’s Studio: The Atelier and Atelierista, BarrKinderplay. Available at: https://www.barrkinderplay.com/post/the-artist-s-studio-the-atelier-and-atelierista (Accessed: 23 May 2024)

Matos, A. (ed.) (2022) Who can afford to be critical?: An Inquiry Into What We Can’t Do Alone, as Designers, and Into What We Might Be Able to Do Together, as People. 1st edition. Eindhoven: Set Margins’ publications.

‘Queer Spaces: Behind The Scene’ (no date). Available at: https://www.queerspaces.uk (Accessed: 29 June 2024).

Salama, A. (2006) ‘Editorial: Committed Educators are Reshaping Studio Pedagogy’, Open House International, 31(3), pp. 4–9. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1108/OHI-03-2006-B0001.

1559 words not including titles, quotes, captions or bibliography.