Artefacts - Skype Call 20/04

As this was a module 3 focused Skype call we spoke about  a few things that were concerning us as we near the deadline date. The two main things were the artefact and the oral presentation. As I finished my artefact breakdown essay this morning and have now officially completed my artefact; I thought I would mainly focus on that and the write about the oral presentation when I get to it later in the week. 

Through the discussion we identified that an artefact is a way to communicate something in a creative manner. This will vary per person and doesn't have constraints. Helen mentioned the thought process behind having us create an artefact was to be able to communicate our thoughts, feelings and experiences in something different to the written word. As part of the module 3 process is writing an inquiry-based essay, an artefact is a great way to communicate our findings to people in a way that wouldn't require them to read pages of theory. In other words - its a different way to express our position. 

This can be expressed through dance or creating physical objects - like what I have done. I have found this journey to be very like putting together pieces of a puzzle. Therefore the artefact I have created is a jigsaw puzzle with various images to represent my professional practice and BAPP journey. 

Last year Adesola shared a video of Peggy Oki who creates curtains of origami whales to represent her fight for awareness. She uses it as an opportunity to educate people on the dangers these dolphins and whales face from commercial whaling whilst creating a physical token that represents a living animal. Each origami whale represents a real whale that has been killed from whalers. It shows the power a simple artefact can have. 

I've attached a link to a video explaining the way she has used these whale curtains as an artefact for her journey. I hope this helps! 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B5hy9OhIrSA

Critical Reflection and Ethics - Skype Call 30/03

Critical reflection is a major part of the BAPP course. My understanding is that critical reflection is the process of making meaning of a situation. It is considering how events and experiences lead to personal growth. The handbook suggests that it creates connections between the course and our experience. Adesola brought up the point that Ethics is a sub-set of critical thinking. I think this is an important point because I think critical reflection asks you to step back and look at the wider picture.

We discussed that you can view ethics both internally and externally during the call. Internally is viewing what you as a person can do in your practice to ensure you are acting ethically. For example as a researcher you can almost 'check the boxes' that the way in which you conduct your research and handle the data will be ethical. Or as a teacher, ensuring that you abide by the code of conduct set out in your contract and acting appropriately with your students. Externally is viewing what has been done to you or what is relevant within the wider community. For example we spoke about comments or actions that we had to endure whilst training that once we decided to become teachers, vowed we would never do to our students because we recognised how it felt and the possible damage it did to us. Another example was things said about or to us in auditions that is not necessarily appropriate and that if we were in a position of power, we would never say to other people. This can also be issues that relate to the wider community that we acknowledge, but may not necessarily be able to 'fix'.

I think it is worth mentioning that Ethical Considerations and Ethical Procedures run parallel to each other. Ethical Considerations are issues that we will have to understand and acknowledge, but may not be able to change or solve. Ethical Procedure are steps that we put into place to ensure that we are acting appropriately and ethically.

We spoke about 'assumptions' and our position of privilege. Assumptions, as mentioned in Module 1, are the way in which we view the world  based on what we have been taught and our own previous experiences. We recognised that the act of stepping back, looking past our own assumptions and viewing the bigger picture is part of critical thinking and will bring up ethical issues. I think part of this critical thinking is to accept our position of privilege, as mentioned in Module 2, that allows us to think critically and that some of the ethical issues we may encounter are real life issues for others.

We related all this back to our areas of learning. I have been trying out the exercise of tracking my learning through the Modules. To compare where I was in Module 1 compared to where I am in Module 3. I think this could be an interesting exercise for everyone on the course to do. Especially because we often talk about what we don't know. It could be useful to step back and to see how much we have learned through the process of stumbling through the process of not knowing. 

I urge you all to try this exercise of seeing what you have learned through this process. A few of mine are:

1. How to conduct research interviews
2. How to step back and identify further ethical issues - reflection on action
3. The usefulness of conducting a Literature Research
4. How to write academic papers

What are a few things you have learned?

Processing Processes - Module 3 Skype Call 24/03

We spoke about 'the process' of the modules during the Skype call the other evening and it really got me thinking. I have always thought of 'processes' to be very fixed, logical and clear. That to get from Point 1 to Point 2 I have to do A,B and C. However this BAPP journey has turned that on it's head for me.

This course isn't as simple as being handed a textbook, told to study it and then regurgitate it back in an exam. Most of it feels as though you are shooting in the dark just hoping you hit the target. It feels as though you are wading through fog, and just when you think it's starting to clear, another wave comes over you. 

This is why, I think, the handbook suggests we work in cycles or stages. You read the handbook, get a grasp on one point, and then when you come back around, you find something else. I have learned that there is no finite answer in this course. It's all about the journey and what you discover along the way. 

In some ways it reminds me of a blog I created whilst mapping my practice in Module 2 titled "Mapping to Build Understanding". I based this around a Ted Talk titles "Happy Maps" I came across where Daniele Quercia had created an app that offered people a scenic route to get to where they wanted to go. It would only add on a couple of extra minutes onto their journey and would take them down a route that would allow them to discover something new and not be stuck in traffic. This app has been used by people who have lived in the same city for years and taken the same routes to change their perspective and to discover something new about their home. It also showed that people would arrive at their destination with a feeling of calm and happiness to be able to have traveled a different path. 

Perhaps this is the way we should be viewing our Modules. Taking a more 'scenic' route to the destination and discovering something new along the way.

Below is the link to the Ted Talk "Happy Maps" by Daniele Quercia 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AJg9SXIcPiM&list=PLOGi5-fAu8bFXc7SmMcxsLph1Eis7mkvq

Should We Be Creating More 'Autism Friendly' Shows?

Whilst doing literature research into my inquiry topic of exploring the relationship between theatre and the social skills of children with Autism, I came across this incredibly interesting article of how some Broadway musicals have been adapted to suit an audience on the spectrum and their families.

These slight adaptations include lowering the frequency of the sound, slightly lifting the brightness of the lights and having someone 'brief' the audience before the show of any 'surprises' that may trigger the audience members. Fidget toys are encouraged for the audience as well as allowing them to make as much noise as they would like. Ushers trained in diverse audiences are available to help in any way throughout the show - even having a designated 'quiet' room where children feeling overwhelmed in any way can escape to if need be.This in no way changes the script as the aim is to maintain the integrity of the show. The audience will not feel that they are seeing anything 'less-than' what their neuro-typical peers have seen.

I think this is a wonderful idea and a fantastic opportunity for families to enjoy a theatre experience without fear of being judged or overwhelming the child with autism. I hope that it could become the norm for all theaters to offer something similar as often as possible to give more people access to the arts.

This has really got me to thinking. Should more shows and theaters be offering 'autism-friendly' performances? Is it feasible for them to do so? Do children with autism and their families want this to happen or is a trip to the theatre too overwhelming? How can I, as someone labeled 'neuro-typical' decide that this is the right thing to do when I have no lived-experience of having autism?

 I would love to pass the question off to you - do you think theaters should offer more 'autism-friendly' shows?

Here is the link to the article of you are interested in reading.

https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2015/04/making-theater-autism-friendly/388348/

Carrying Out Interviews

This week I will begin to carry out my one-on-one interviews for my inquiry. I must admit - I'm a little nervous. Thoughts keep swirling around my head that I need to ask the 'right' questions in order to get the best possible answers from my candidates. However, I know that this is not the point of these interviews. The main point is to LISTEN to what my candidates have to say and to their stories. As this is a qualitative study, there really is no such this as a 'right' or 'wrong' answer therefore there is no such this as the 'right' or 'wrong' question. Bearing all this in mind, I want do want to acknowledge my ethical duties at the interviewer. As my inquiry topic has to do with Identity and Disability politics, I need to ensure that my questions are respectful. From the research I have done on interviews here are the top things I am currently doing to ensure I conduct a successful interview:


1. Be prepared. Having done scrupulous research into the topic, as well as the candidate and their experiences. For each candidate I have prepared a list of different questions - some are generic questions and others are specifically tailored to their experiences.

2. Listen. Try to focus in. Don't be thinking of the next question while the candidate is still talking as you may miss vital information. Use the answers the candidates give as the jumping off point for further questions.

3. Follow-Up. By listening to what the candidate is saying, follow-up on any interesting points they may bring up that require further explanation.

4. Read the "intangibles". Take note of physical and verbal cues given by the candidate when telling their story. This brings through the very 'human' aspect to the conversation. If you can see they are nervous, unsure or uncomfortable it could be beneficial to steer the conversation in a different way or rephrase the question. Similarly, read when they are passionate and use to carry the conversation on further.

5. Don't step on their answer. Try not to interrupt - give the candidate the time they deserve to answer the question (I feel as though this ties in with listening). Also do not try to anticipate their answer, or steer them in a way that makes them want to change their point of view.

It is always important to make the candidate feel comfortable. This will ensure they give genuine answers.

These are just some general points I have come up with leading into my interviews. I will be doing another post after the interviews to share any other things I picked up whilst actively conducting the conversations.

I pass the question off to you - do you think there is anything missing off of my list for conducting interviews?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WDOQBPYEaNs

Identity Politics - Module 3 Skype Call 11/02/2020

During our Module 3 Skype call on Tuesday evening, we touched a range of topics from where we are at within starting Module 3 to the interview process.

It seems that both of our topics seem to cover Identity Politics in some way or form. My topic is exploring the relationship between theatre and the social skills of children with Autism Spectrum Disorder. Part of my feedback from module 2 was to explore more of the wider-community's ethical considerations. This has lead me to researching into Disability Politics. Through our chat on Tuesday, it evolved from Disability Politics to Identity Politics.

In a nutshell Identity Politics is the demand for recognition and respect of their dignity from minority groups. It is the acknowledgement that it is society, not the individual, that needs to change it's culture. (Francis Fukuyama, 2018)

I feel as though Identity Politics and Disability Politics go hand-in-hand, as both revolve around the fact that there is a dire need for societal change around they way disabled people are treated and viewed and that simply, they deserve recognition and respect for their differences. I think it comes down to the fact that they should be included instead of being tolerated. In the case of my inquiry, theatre shows should be evolved around accessibility, instead of adding it as an afterthought.

Although this is a short post, I would be interested to know how Identity Politics plays a role in your inquiry or practice, and any thoughts you can add.

Below is a link to a talk given by Professor and Author Francis Fukuyama on Identity Politcs. Although his talk is related to actual politics in the United Stated and Britain, the core of what he is saying still resonates. The first 15 minutes of the talk are purely focused on the meaning and definition of Identity Politics.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LxLHDHJV-_8&t=1111s

Stage 1 of the Inquiry Process

Inquiry Topic: Exploring the relationship between theatre and the social interactive skills of children with Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD). 

The first stage of the inquiry process is to review the planning undertaken from Module 2, taking into account any feedback and amendments suggested. 

I was encouraged to focus more on the wider ethical considerations of my inquiry topic. Questions I would like to research further in order to gain a deeper understanding of the 'greater community' include: 

• How we understand other people's experiences
• Disability politics and identifying if those considered 'disabled' want to be considered 'normal' 
• When did 'disability' become an identifier? When does ASD become an identifier? 
• The history of ASD 
• How ASD is viewed by different cultures

Throughout the inquiry process I hope to use literature, the Skype discussions and these blog posts to explore each of these questions to gain deeper understanding. 

To just scratch the surface on the research I intend to do surrounding these questions, I watched a video released by BuzzFeed titled, "Things People with Disabilities Wish You Knew". In the video they interview four women with varying disabilities, asking their opinions on issues they seem to encounter every day. Here is a link to the video if you are interested in watching: 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_b7k6pEnyQ4

While the whole video is interesting and presented in a light-hearted way, two quotes really stuck out for me and interested me to do further research, and they were: 

"It's more about normalising disability than celebrating it" (Pamela) 

And 

"It took me a while to be able to call myself a 'person with a disability'. I'm a person first." (Eman)

I would really be interested to hear any thoughts you have on any of the questions I intend to further research this module and what you think of the video!