Tag: Reflective writing

Reflective Writing 2: Positionality

Workshop 1

Reading lists:

  1. Read this article: Bayeck, R.Y. (2022) Positionality: The Interplay of Space, Context and Identity. Journal of Qualitative Methods.
  2. Schiffer, A. (2020), Issues of Power and Representation: Adapting Positionality and Reflexivity in Community-Based Design.
  3. YouTube. (2021) ‘What is positionality?’ [online] Available at: https://youtu.be/HfBf-je6-sw?si=mMyUi_N7C6aEyzQj

Summary:

In Positionality: The Interplay of Space, Context and Identity, Bayeck (2022) explores how a researcher’s identity is not fixed but constantly shifting depending on where they are and who they are with. Drawing from her own cross-cultural fieldwork, she describes how her status as an insider or outsider changed based on gender, nationality, and the spaces she occupied. Bayeck introduces the idea of being an “in-out-sider” to capture the complexity of holding multiple, fluid positions simultaneously.

Similarly, in Issues of Power and Representation, Schiffer (2020) reflects on her participatory design work in The Gambia and how her identity as a white European woman shaped her relationships with local collaborators. She emphasises that reflexivity is not just personal reflection, but an ethical, ongoing practice that challenges power dynamics and shifts the designer’s role from “problem-solver” to “facilitator.” Both authors argue that positionality and reflexivity are essential in producing ethical, empathetic, and situated research, especially when working across cultural boundaries.

Reflective writing:

After watching the video What is Positionality? (YouTube, 2021), I started to think more deeply about what makes me who I am, and how that influences the way I view the world and carry out research. I used to think reflection just meant thinking about how I feel or what I believe, but this concept pushed me to think critically about the deeper layers, how my identity, upbringing, cultural values, even the spaces I move through all shape the way I approach topics. Bayeck (2022) describes this beautifully by saying that positionality is shaped by “the interplay of space, context, and identity,” and that researchers often carry multiple identities which shift depending on where they are and who they’re with—sometimes even becoming an “in-out-sider” all at once​Bayeck 2022 Positionali…. That really made me pause. I’ve never thought about how these different roles I hold: lecturer, technician, Chinese woman, immigrant, married, collide and influence how I work with students or select research topics. Similarly, Schiffer (2020) reflects on her fieldwork in The Gambia and how building trust and critically examining her position as a white woman helped her navigate power dynamics and avoid being a “design saviour”​Schiffer 2020 Positiona…. I found her honesty really moving. She writes about embracing vulnerability and letting go of control to become a facilitator rather than a leader—something I think about more and more when working with students from different backgrounds. Both articles encouraged me to step out of my comfort zone and see reflexivity not as a box-ticking exercise, but a continuous, emotional, and even uncomfortable journey that can make my practice more ethical and empathetic.

Reference:

Bayeck, R.Y. (2022) ‘Positionality: The interplay of space, context and identity’, International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 21, pp. 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1177/16094069221131321

Schiffer, A. (2020) ‘Issues of power and representation: Adapting positionality and reflexivity in community-based design’, International Journal of Art & Design Education, 39(3), pp. 418–429. https://doi.org/10.1111/jade.12291

My Process of Understanding the Difference between Positionality and Reflexivity

When I first came across the concepts of positionality and reflexivity, I found them a little confusing. They often appear together, but they actually focus on slightly different (though connected) aspects of how we see the world, and how we act within it. Here’s how I’ve come to understand the difference:

Positionality is about who you are—your background, your cultural and social identity, your upbringing, education, language, gender, race, and everything else that shapes your worldview. It refers to the “position” you occupy in society and in relation to others. For example, I’m standing at a window in a tall building. Positionality is the floor I’m on and the direction your window faces; it determines what you can and can’t see.

It’s not just a label, though. It’s about how that position affects what you notice, what you value, and how you interact with others. For example, I recognise my own positionality as a Chinese woman working in UK higher education, raised in a family that highly values discipline and time management. These parts of my identity shape how I relate to students, colleagues, and the way I teach and research.

Reflexivity goes one step deeper. It’s about being aware of your positionality, and then constantly reflecting on how that shapes your actions, decisions, relationships, and the knowledge you produce. It’s not something you do once and forget. It’s an ongoing process of asking myself questions like:

  • How does who I am influence how I see others?
  • Am I unintentionally missing something because of my own cultural assumptions?
  • Am I placing unfair expectations on others based on my background or values?

Reflexivity is about being open to discomfort, willing to question my biases, and adjusting my approach when needed. It’s not always easy. For example, I’m still standing on the same tall building, and realising that my view is limited, then deciding to move, explore other windows, and listen to what others can see from their floors.

For me, this became really clear when I realised that I used to feel frustrated when some students didn’t turn up to tutorials or didn’t ask for help. I couldn’t relate—because from my own upbringing, time management and self-discipline were core values. But then I started reflecting: not everyone grows up in a context where those things are taught or valued in the same way. That reflection, that shift, is reflexivity. It’s how I started to think about changing how I support my students, and how I approach my teaching more compassionately.

My Positionality vs. My Reflexivity

AspectMy PositionalityMy Reflexivity
Cultural BackgroundI was raised in a Chinese family that values discipline, organisation, and independence.I now realise that these values shape how I perceive “responsibility” and “success”—and that not everyone has had the same structure or support.
Gender & EthnicityI am a Chinese woman living and working in the UK. My identity is often shaped by stereotypes about being quiet, obedient, or passive.I reflect on how these assumptions affect how others treat me, and how I sometimes hold back my voice, even when I should speak up.
Educational ExperienceI lived independently since I was 16 and learned to manage my studies early.I used to expect students to do the same. Now I understand that time management is often taught, not innate, and I can offer more guidance and check ins to make sure students have a safe space to speak out their needs.
Professional RoleI work as a lecturer and technician in a Western institution where I’m often both a cultural insider and outsider.I reflect on how this “in-between” space gives me unique insight—but also comes with emotional labour, especially when trying to support international students.
Biases and AssumptionsI assumed that asking for help or being organised is “normal” and expected.I now challenge that assumption by asking: What barriers might stop someone from speaking up? How can I create safer, more accessible spaces?

My Positionality Statement


I’m a Chinese woman working and living in the UK, and I’ve come to realise that my background plays a much bigger role in how I teach, communicate, and research than I used to think.

I grew up in a middle-class family; my dad works as a leader in a government agency, and my mum works in the finance bureau. Since I was a teenager, I’ve been expected to be independent, organised, and responsible. I travelled and started living by myself at age 16 in the UK, and from that point on, I learned how to manage my studies, my life, and ask for help when I needed it.

For a long time, I thought that was just “normal.” But now I see that these values—time management, being proactive, speaking up—are actually part of my positionality. Not everyone has the same start in life, and not everyone has been encouraged or taught to do things the way I was. Through learning more about positionality and reflexivity, I’m starting to reflect more deeply on how my personal experiences shape my expectations, especially toward students.

I’ve noticed that when students don’t show up or don’t ask for help, I used to get frustrated. I couldn’t understand why they wouldn’t just speak up if they were struggling. But now I ask myself: what’s stopping them? Maybe they come from a background where asking for support feels scary, or maybe they’ve never had anyone check in on them. I realise now that what feels easy for me isn’t necessarily easy for everyone else—and that’s a big shift in how I approach teaching and support. This is especially true when it comes to international students. I’ve been one myself, so I totally get it in some ways—the confusion, the pressure, the feeling of being overwhelmed or unsure whether your questions are even valid. I see how hard it can be to adjust to a new academic culture, express yourself in a second language, or even know where and how to get help. I want to study more about different approaches, both culturally and pedagogically, so I can better understand their struggles and offer more effective, compassionate support.

Being a Chinese woman in a Western university setting also puts me in an interesting space. Sometimes I feel seen, sometimes invisible. There are stereotypes about Chinese or Asian women being passive, quiet, or overly obedient, and I do think these assumptions affect how others treat me, even in subtle ways. At the same time, I have certain privileges: I’m educated, I have work experience, and I’ve learned to adapt across cultures. So I’m trying to use that awareness to create safer and more supportive spaces for my students, especially those who might not feel they belong.

What I’ve learned is that poositionality isn’t fixed. It changes depending on where I am, who I’m with, and how I’m being perceived. And reflexivity means I don’t just think about who I am, I also reflect on how that shapes my actions, and how I might need to shift or rethink things. It’s uncomfortable sometimes, but it’s helping me grow, not just as a teacher or researcher, but as a person.

Reflective Writing 1: Intersectionality

Workshop 1

Key Concepts in Inclusive Practice

Reading list:

  1. Crenshaw, K. (1990) Mapping the Margins: Intersectionality, Identity Politics, and Violence against Women of Color. Stanford Law Review 43 (6)
  2. Lukkien, T., Chauhan, T. and Otaye‐Ebede, L. (2024). Addressing the diversity principle–practice gap in Western higher education institutions: A systematic review on intersectionality. British Educational Research Journal.

Summary:

Reading Kimberlé Crenshaw’s (1990) foundational article Mapping the Margins, I was introduced to the concept of intersectionality: a framework that explores how overlapping identities such as race and gender create unique forms of discrimination. Crenshaw focuses on how women of colour, particularly in the context of violence and institutional neglect, are often excluded from both feminist and antiracist discourses.

Similarly, Lukkien et al. (2024) examine how intersectionality plays out in Western higher education, identifying a significant gap between institutions’ stated commitments to diversity and their actual practices. They argue that many diversity policies fail to address the lived realities of individuals with intersecting identities, and offer practical recommendations for more inclusive, system-level change.

Both articles prompted me to reflect on my own position as a Chinese woman in the UK, and the ways intersectionality impacts not only my personal experiences but also my role in supporting students from diverse backgrounds.

Reflective writing:

Reflecting on Intersectionality and My Positionality as a Chinese Woman in the UK

Reading Kimberlé Crenshaw’s work on intersectionality made me reflect deeply on my own identity as a Chinese woman living and working in the UK. While I couldn’t immediately recall specific moments when stereotypes impacted me, I’m certain they have—whether subtly or overtly. As I think more carefully, I realize these experiences are often layered into daily life, making them harder to pinpoint, yet impossible to ignore.

There’s a pervasive stereotype that Asian, particularly Chinese women are submissive, quiet, and less likely to speak up for themselves. I’ve felt that people often assume we’re more agreeable, easier to ask favours from, or less likely to challenge authority. I’ve observed that when similar situations involve white women, others tend to show more caution or emotional sensitivity in their approach. This subtle difference reinforces a kind of social hierarchy, in which Chinese women are perceived to be “beneath” their white peers—not just culturally, but even interpersonally. As Crenshaw (1990, p. 1244) explains, women of colour are often “marginalized within both” feminist and antiracist discourses because of their intersectional identity. This really resonated with me.

These experiences are made more complex by how China is portrayed in Western media. I’ve lost count of the number of times someone’s asked me if I eat dog or cat, or assumed that I lived under 24/7 surveillance with no freedom of speech. It’s honestly exhausting. These aren’t innocent questions—they’re shaped by years of media framing China as this mysterious, oppressive, “othered” place. And when people discover I’m Chinese, it’s like all of that baggage gets projected onto me automatically. It reduces who I am to a political narrative. Crenshaw (1990, p. 1242) talks about how ignoring the differences within groups creates tension among them, this kind of generalisation is exactly that. It doesn’t leave space for my actual experience as an individual.

Thinking about my role as a technician and lecturer, I’ve started seeing how my own background—growing up in a family that valued organisation and independence has shaped the way I handle work. I started living alone at sixteen, so by the time I went to university, I already had experience managing my own schedule and reaching out for help when I needed it. But not all of my students have had the same experience. Some are first-generation university students. Others are juggling jobs, caring responsibilities, or mental health challenges. I used to find it frustrating when they wouldn’t turn up to tutorials or ask for support when falling behind. But now I’m starting to realise: I was seeing it through my lens, not theirs.

This shift in thinking links to what Lukkien et al. (2024, p. 5) describe as the “principle–practice gap” in universities. Institutions often say they value diversity and inclusion, but don’t always make space for people with intersectional identities in a meaningful way. And the problem isn’t just about surface-level representation it’s also about deeper power dynamics. As they put it, one of the reasons institutions struggle to apply intersectionality in practice is because “the heterogeneity of intersectional identities makes it impossible to meet everyone’s needs” (Lukkien et al., 2024, p. 18). But that doesn’t mean we give up—it means we need more thoughtful, flexible approaches.

One thing I’m reflecting on is how to better support students who might not feel comfortable speaking up. I’ve noticed many international students, especially from Asian backgrounds, are very quiet in class. It’s not because they have nothing to say, it’s often because they feel unsure, or the environment doesn’t feel accessible to them. As Lukkien et al. (2024, p. 19) recommend, universities need to think more about “supportive mentoring and allyship structures” that reflect the actual lived experiences of minoritised students. That could mean more check-ins, more encouragement, or just making it easier for them to say when something’s hard.

Crenshaw (1990, p. 1241) reminds us that “many of the experiences… are not subsumed within the traditional boundaries of race or gender discrimination.” That hits home for me. It’s not about choosing one identity over another—it’s about understanding how they work together. And it’s only when we recognise, relate to, and really see someone else’s struggle that we can find real solutions. That applies not just to institutions, but also to me, as someone who works with and supports students every day.

Reference:

Crenshaw, K. (1990) ‘Mapping the margins: Intersectionality, identity politics, and violence against women of color’, Stanford Law Review, 43(6), pp. 1241–1299.

Lukkien, T., Chauhan, T. and Otaye-Ebede, L. (2024) ‘Addressing the diversity principle–practice gap in Western higher education institutions: A systematic review on intersectionality’, British Educational Research Journal, [online] Available at: https://doi.org/10.1002/berj.4096 [Accessed 11 Apr. 2025].

Reflective Post 3:

Microteaching: Object Based Learning

The microteaching session was incredibly inspiring. With six of us in a group, each person brought their perspective and understanding of teaching practice, making it a rich and insightful experience. I learned so much from seeing how different approaches can engage students in creative learning. One of the microteaching sessions that stood out to me the most was Emilia’s jewellery making activity, which explored how to break the fear of perfectionism and encourage experimental design.

Emilia’s microteaching session focused on helping students overcome perfectionism in their creative work. She introduced an experimental blind drawing exercise, where students observe an object around them, and sketched without looking at the paper, followed by translating their drawings into wireframe jewellery designs. This hands-on approach encouraged students to embrace imperfection, shifting their focus from trying to create something “perfect” to exploring new forms and ideas. The phenomenon happens a lot in my sessions, students have the fear of starting a digital technical drawing.

The activity was highly engaging and worked as a great icebreaker, fostering creativity and allowing students to feel comfortable making mistakes. By incorporating different materials like wire and giving clear, open-ended instructions, Emilia created an environment that encouraged students to let go of self-doubt and experiment freely.

Her session made me reflect on the role of perfectionism in creative learning. Many students, especially in design fields, struggle with the pressure to produce polished, high-quality work from the start. This can lead to hesitation, self-doubt, and creative blocks.

Research suggests that perfectionism can actually limit creativity, as students become more focused on avoiding mistakes than taking creative risks (Nordin-Bates, 2020). Emilia’s approach demonstrated how playful, low-pressure exercises can help students reframe their mindset, viewing mistakes as part of the process rather than failures. This made me think about my own teaching, Am I unintentionally reinforcing perfectionist tendencies by focusing heavily on technical precision in digital work?

Currently, my teaching focuses on digital communication tools like Adobe Suite and CLO3D, which can feel technical and intimidating for beginners. Many students hesitate to experiment because they expect polished, professional results immediately. Inspired by Emilia’s session, I want to incorporate more analogue, hands-on activities in my first session to break the ice and make digital drawing feel more approachable.

For example, I could start with quick, freehand sketching exercises before transitioning into software, helping students loosen up and see digital tools as part of a broader creative process rather than a rigid skillset. By creating a more playful and exploratory learning environment, I hope to reduce students’ fear of imperfection and encourage a more open, creative mindset.

Reference:

Sanna M. Nordin-Bates (2019) ‘Striving for Perfection or for Creativity?’, Journal of Dance Education, 20(1), pp. 23–24. Available at: https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1080/15290824.2018.1546050.

Reflective Post 4:

Workshop 3A: Reading Activity: Assessment and Feedback

‘Could do Better?’: students’ critique of written feedback by Kate Brooks
Institution: University of the West of England, Bristol

Summary:

This article explores students’ experiences with summative written feedback in the Humanities, particularly at the University of the West of England. Brooks highlights a fundamental mismatch between students’ expectations and tutors’ perceptions of feedback. While students frequently express a desire for “more feedback,” research suggests they often struggle to use it effectively. The article critiques the current assessment and feedback structures and suggests that students need encouragement to engage more deeply in their learning journeys rather than simply receiving more feedback.

Brook’s study identifies 3 dominant themes in students’ critiques of feedback:

  1. Content of the feedback
  2. The feedback exchange (How feedback is given)
  3. The role of one-to-one tutorial

Potential Solutions and Reflections


Brooks suggests that the current feedback system inadvertently encourages superficial engagement with learning. Some ways to address this include:

  1. Incorporating peer review: Inspired by Art and Design disciplines, where students critique each other’s work, fostering a sense of shared learning.
  2. Reframing feedback as an ongoing dialogue rather than a final judgment: Providing more opportunities for students to ask questions and clarify feedback.
  3. Encouraging students to take ownership of their learning: Rather than just “delivering” feedback, tutors should guide students in reflecting on their work.

Why I Chose This Article?

I wanted to understand how students respond to feedback, even though this study focuses on Humanities rather than Art and Design. I assumed there would be common themes across disciplines, particularly regarding students’ reflections on feedback.

I run 1-to-1 support sessions where students can book an hour to work on their specific issues or projects. Many students bring in their tutors’ feedback, expressing confusion about what it actually means.

One common frustration students share in my one-to-one sessions is the vagueness of feedback, they struggle to understand what is expected of them and how to improve their work. Brooks (2008) captures this frustration well: “Sometimes you get a vague handwritten comment like ‘expand on this’ – well, what does that mean? If I knew, I would have done! Identifying the problems isn’t the same as helping you solve them.” (p. 2). This highlights a key issue: feedback needs to be more than just identifying gaps—it should provide clear, actionable guidance that helps students develop their work.

Moving forward, I want to refine how I provide feedback in my own teaching, ensuring that it is structured, constructive, and helps students engage in meaningful reflection.

Regardless of how many issues they have in their work, the purpose of teaching and learning should be to inspire students, guide them in the right direction, and encourage problem-solving and critical thinking. However, to do this effectively, we need to show them how to approach improvement, rather than just pointing out what’s wrong.

What I Found Interesting?

Since this article was written in 2008, some of the concerns may no longer be relevant. For example, handwritten feedback is no longer an issue at UAL, as feedback is now entirely digital. Also, feedback isn’t given in front of everyone anymore—students view their grades and comments privately on the Portal.


However, what really interests me is the emotional impact of feedback. I strongly believe that building a positive connection with students plays a huge role in their learning experience. Feedback isn’t just about improving technical skills—it also shapes motivation, confidence, and engagement. I’d love to explore this further and understand how fostering positive tutor-student relationships can enhance learning outcomes.

Another key area I want to develop is peer review. Research suggests that peer-to-peer feedback helps students improve their learning experience,
reinforce their knowledge, and
Be more reflective and engaged in their work (Reference see Case study 2).
This is something I plan to implement in my own practice.

What Actions This Has Inspired?

I’m not part of the course assessment team, so I don’t have experience in giving summative feedback for assessments. However, I provide 1-to-1 support sessions for students in Adobe software, CLO3D, and portfolio reviews.
What I want to focus on now is how to refine my feedback approach within these sessions. Instead of just offering solutions, I want to help students engage with feedback in a more meaningful way, encouraging self-reflection and problem-solving skills.

Some things I’d like to explore further:

  • How to make 1-to-1 feedback more structured and actionable,
  • How to balance emotional support with constructive critique
  • How to integrate peer review into my teaching practice.

This article has helped me reflect on my current approach and identify areas where I can improve to better support my students. Below is the reading list that I would like to look into further:

Mitigating emotional barriers to feedback encounters and dialogue (in law schools) Authors: Fae Garland and Luke D. Graham
Summary: This article develops a typology categorizing how negative emotions can act as barriers to effective feedback dialogues. It offers strategies for educators to recognize and mitigate these emotional barriers, fostering a more constructive feedback environment. Link

Developing Students’ Ability to Construct Feedback”
Authors: Dr. David Nicol and colleagues at the University of Glasgow
Summary: This paper explores methods to enhance students’ skills in both giving and receiving feedback. It emphasizes the importance of self and peer assessment in fostering a deeper understanding of quality work and promoting self-regulated learning. Link

Reference:

Kate Brooks (2008) ‘“Could do Better?”: students’ critique of written feedback’, Art/Design/Media Subject Centre [PDF].