Session/artefact to be observed/reviewed: Workshop
Size of student group: 24
Observer: Guiseppe Renga
Observee: Can Yang
Note: This record is solely for exchanging developmental feedback between colleagues. Its reflective aspect informs PgCert and Fellowship assessment, but it is not an official evaluation of teaching and is not intended for other internal or legal applications such as probation or disciplinary action.
Part One (Can)
Observee to complete in brief and send to observer prior to the observation or review:
What is the context of this session/artefact within the curriculum?
This session is part of an ongoing exploration of visual documentation methods within the Typology course. It focuses on alternative ways of seeing, material processes, and the act of imprinting vision beyond digital tools. The workshop ties into critical design theory, referencing key texts such as Walter Benjamin’s The Task of the Translator and Maurice Merleau-Ponty’s Eye and Mind, to challenge conventional notions of perception and documentation.
How long have you been working with this group and in what capacity?
I have been working with this group since the start of the academic year in my capacity as an Associate Lecturer, leading workshops and seminars that encourage critical engagement with visual and typographic practices.
What are the intended or expected learning outcomes?
-Develop an understanding of how materiality and process shape visual documentation.
-Experiment with imprinting and documentation methods, challenging conventional ways of seeing.
-Explore the relationship between objects, texts, and perception through hands-on making and theoretical reflection.
What are the anticipated outputs (anything students will make/do)?
Mental Drawing – Drawing from memory.
Blind Drawing – Drawing without looking at the paper.
Cyanotype Print – Using light-sensitive paper to create imprints.
Printed Scan – Experimenting with scale and perspective through photocopying.
Your Choice – A final documentation piece that integrates or extends these methods.
Are there potential difficulties or specific areas of concern?
Students may have varying levels of familiarity with cyanotype printing and alternative documentation methods.
Some may struggle with the conceptual shift from traditional representation to material/process-based documentation.
Managing time effectively to allow for both experimentation and reflection.
How will students be informed of the observation/review?
Students will be informed on the date during the session starts. The observation will be framed as a reflective practice to improve teaching and learning experiences.
What would you particularly like feedback on?
How effectively the workshop structure supports students’ understanding and engagement.
Whether the balance between theory and practice is appropriate.
How students respond to and integrate the critical readings into their documentation processes.
The overall clarity and flow of the session.
How will feedback be exchanged?
Feedback will be shared via written reflection. Any insights or recommendations will be incorporated into future iterations of the workshop.
Part Two (Guiseppe)
Observer to note down observations, suggestions and questions:
Hi Can,
Thank you again for inviting me to observe your technical practice in exploring cyanotype printing and imprinting vision through different tools. As you have suggested, your workshop focused on documenting which doesn’t merely mean reproducing reality but about translating and transforming perception. The workshop was developed through a series of five visual documentation methods, focusing on material processes and alternative ways of seeing.
To begin with, I really enjoyed preparing this workshop, in which students received clear instructions about its structure, including the typology of tools they were going to use, the schedule, and the reading list.
The classroom was formed by circa 20 students all sitting in a circle based in an Open Space.
The space seemed quite challenging because of the lack of privacy and proper separation from other classrooms, and in delivering these workshops within this design how do you capture the attention of your students? Were you already prepared to work in a similar space? Besides that, all the students were listening, taking notes and pictures of the slides you were sharing on the screen which I found quite hard to read due to the size of the fonts and the background colour. Would you think I will be better at adopting colours and family fonts and sizes that are more readable (e.g. white colours and sans serif fonts) in particular by students affected by neurodiversity? Notwithstanding, the lack of a super clear presentation was obviated by detailed instructions and guidance printed on 2 A4 papers.
The flow of the first part based on the theory was impeccably enriched by great references within the field of Architecture, Pop Art of artists and practitioners from South Africa, France and so on and on. The description of the artists’ technique was meticulous with an abondance of example from different historical periods. Moreover, I found very inspiring a reference to John Bergers, Ways of Seeing book written in 1972.
The second part focused on cyanotype print and the use of light-sensitive paper to create a direct imprint. The process was explained scrupulously and the amount of tools was enough for all the students. With a huge amount of joy and excitement suddenly all the students were keen to lay on their paper the chemical emulsion and swiftly hide them wherever there was a bit of darkness available. I enjoyed the session and the fact that all the students were eager to imprint the objects and shapes of a certain personal value. Don’t you think that you could do something slightly different next time by maybe redesigning the layout of the space with a dark area big enough to host all the students ‘artefacts?
Moreover, I loved the fact the students were recycling a lot of paper containers like egg trays or paper cups which became proper treasures. Hence this led the workshop to generate the unpredictable and let the students explore the unknown. Finally, you have been able to incentivise all the students to have fun and work with multiple experiments which has positively affected the kinship and affinities among them.
Part Three (Can)
Reflecting on Guiseppe’s observations, here’s how I would address and adapt the points raised:
- Space and Attention: Since I cannot control the group size or the space setup, I would focus on adjusting my teaching methods to work within those limitations. I could experiment with alternating between group discussions and hands-on activities to keep students engaged in the open space. Additionally, using visual or auditory cues to refocus attention could help manage distractions in the environment.
- Font Legibility: I understand the feedback on font legibility, but I believe my handout already employs a clear visual communication approach with legible type and high contrast between headings and body text. From a design perspective, I don’t see it as a legibility issue, but I do acknowledge that the lighting, screen resolution, or the way the material was displayed may have affected its visibility. In the future, I would consider ensuring that handouts are distributed in advance and may also experiment with adjusting font sizes or color schemes when displaying material on screens to further improve readability in varied environments.
- Space Layout for Cyanotype Process: Given the space constraints, I would look into structuring the cyanotype activity in smaller group rotations, allowing for a more organized space for students to lay out their objects. I could also experiment with temporary partitions or designated areas for different activities to create a clearer workflow, while still working within the open space available.
- Incorporating Unpredictability and Recycling: I’m glad my colleague highlighted the students’ creative use of recycled materials. I plan to keep encouraging this experimental approach, as it not only adds an element of unpredictability but also aligns with the workshop’s focus on transformation and exploration.
Overall, I’m grateful for the feedback and would integrate these suggestions to improve the workshop, ensuring it remains accessible and engaging while maintaining the spirit of experimentation.