iholmesPGCert_2025

Month: November 2025

Categories
ARP

5. Methods #3: A reflexive view of (from higher ground) of both above and below the water line. 

As a researcher I need to engage in reflexivity ‘to account for how subjectivity’ is ‘fundamentally intertwined’ with my process (Olmos-Vegaa et al., 2023). A qualitative approach provides an ‘opportunity to excavate’ the evolution of ‘previous frames of reference’ (Nguyen et al., 2023). Moreover ‘ethical reflexivity involves considering the social and political implications of research,’ being mindful of the experience of the participants (von Unger, 2021) – and other stakeholders. Tensions and contradictory demands create challenges, but as von Unger (2021) notes a way forward might be found through dialogue with peers,’ but also through ‘dialogue with actors in the field.’  

Crouch and Pearce (2015, p. 59) posit that since ‘social processes cannot be directly discovered’ the purpose of research is to attempt to ‘understand those processes through the ‘use an interpretivist lens.’ However, assuming that the ‘world is characterized by inequalities’ the role of the researcher is to ‘explore and attempt to expose’ those inequalities through use of a critical lens (Ibid), and the development of ‘participatory action research’ to provoke change (Ibid, p. 63). I am positioned more central in the process – acknowledging that my epistemology is ‘culture – value and history specific’ and therefore I must be explicit about my ideologically relative to the design of my intervention and where this position has taken me (Ibid, p. 62).  

I am drawn towards a critical realism, with its connection to discourse analysis as its distinction between ‘between the causal power of structures and the causal power of agency’ (Newman, 2020, p. 2). Reflecting on the roots of my research question (see Holmes, 2025a) – racism and the issue of digitally mediated translation – I recognize I am attempting to explore the connection between a deeper structural reality and the empirical space above the water – whilst acknowledging that a considerable ontological amount of the iceberg will remain unseen and unknown – see fig. 1. 

 

Figure 1. Adapted from Introducing critical realism. (Wiltshire, 2021)

This image is something I adapted whilst helping students to understand Saunders, Lewis and Thornhill’s (2023) Research Onion – see figure 2. 

Figure 2.The Research Onion. [diagram] (Saunders, Lewis and Thornhill, 2023, p.131)​

This also helped me to reflect on how my positionality is situated – and how my previous research fits into this paradigm, exploring how frames in the foreground serve forces in the background emphasizing the importance of ideas, which ‘impact the chain of events’ in the evolution of policies (Holmes, 2025b, p. 14). 

My current project aims to discover how the mediation of languages might foster a greater sense of inclusion and empathy between students in the learning space and overcome some of the risks presented by a world where communication is increasingly mediated by machines. In my view, these two elements are not mutually exclusive in respect of the tension between systemic power and human agency.  

When I think of the roots of the project, I am also cognizant of the routes of multiculturism – as articulated by Stuart Hall (Paul, 2005), and how, through exploring critical dialogues, we might work towards creating a more equitable, sustainable (UAL, 2023), inclusive and less divided space at UAL in the future. 

(481 words)

References 

Crouch, C., and Pearce, J. (2012) Doing research in design. Bloomsbury 

Holmes, I. (2025a) IP Unit_ Reflective Report. Available at: https://pgcertianholmes2025.myblog.arts.ac.uk/2025/07/15/intervention-reflective-report_-fostering-inclusivity-in-the-international-multi-lingual-multi-cultural-university-space/ (Accessed 12 December 2025)

Holmes, I.D. (2025b) ‘Framing COVID-19: ‘How UK government and media narrated the “crisis,”’ Politics and Policy, Vol. 53 (3) https://doi.org/10.1111/polp.70040 

Newman, J. (2020) ‘Critical realism, critical discourse analysis, and the morphogenetic approach.’ Journal of Critical Realism, 19 (5) pp. 433- 455. 

Nguyen, D.J.,Mathuews, K., Herron, A. Troyer, R.,  Graman, Z., Goode, W.A., Shultz, A., Tackett, K. and Moss, M. (2019) ‘Learning to become a scholar-practitioner through research experiences,’ Journal of Student Affairs, Research and Practice, Vol 56 (4) pp. 365-378, DOI: 10.1080/19496591.2019.1611591 

Olmos-Vegaa , F.M., Stalmeijerb, R.E. Varpioc, L. and Kahlked, R. (2023) ‘A practical guide to reflexivity in qualitative research.’ AMEE Guide No. 149. Vol. 45, (3) pp. 241–251   

Paul, A. (2005) Stuart Hall: “Culture is always a translation.” Available at: https://www.caribbean-beat.com/issue-71/culture-always-translation (Accessed on 17.03.2025)   

Saunders, M.N.K., Thornhill, P., and Lewis, A. (2023) Research methods for business students: Ninth ed. Pearson   

von Unger, H (2021) ‘Ethical reflexivity as research practice,’ Historical Social Research / Historische Sozialforschung, Vol. 46, (2)- Special Issue: ‘Reflexivity between science and society,’ pp. 186-204 

Wiltshire, G. (2021) Introducing critical realism: Workshop four- analysis. Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nFpZYF0dF38 (Accessed 20 Nov 2025)

UAL (2023) Roots and Routes. Available at: https://millbankexhibition.myblog.arts.ac.uk/2023/07/19/roots-and-routes/ (Accessed on 17.03.25)   

Categories
ARP Reflective Posts

4. Rationale for Making Languages Visible

This rationale attempts to position my intervention within the curriculum (see example SOW- figure 1). The project foregrounds the plurality of languages as a resource for exploring the mediation of worldviews and culture (Ponorac, 2022); considering language from an intersectional (Crenshaw, 1991) perspective, and as an aspect of social justice in the Anglonormative university space (Odeneyi, 2022). Bourdieu’s (1991) ‘linguistic capital’ resonates with the experience of “non-native” (L2) speakers of English at UAL, and how academic and societal ‘markets’ privilege English over other languages. 

Figure 1. Example SOW (Language Development MA Fashion Design Management)

Example SOWDownload

Teaching and assessment in HE has traditionally focused on the cognitive rather than the affective (Shepherd, 2007). The Language Development scheme of work began with an analysis of learning outcomes and unit briefs through the lens of ‘cognitive domains’ (Bloom et al., 1956; Anderson and Krathwohl, 2001; Krathwohl, 2002) – see example scheme of work. However, the seminar skills lessons leaned more towards encouraging learners to participate in group ‘seminar’ interaction with a focus on affective domains (Krathwohl, Bloom and Masia,1964), practising systemic functional language (Matthiesen and Halliday, 1997),‘connecting features of language with the social actions with which they correlate’ (Ding and Bruce, 2017, p. 70 in Tibbetts and Chapman, 2023, p. 79), whilst emphasising the empathy and mutual inclusion that is required for dialogic learning to take place (Friere, 2005, p. 90). 

Translanguaging optimizes the potential for communication (Garcia, 2009, p.140), benefits both L1 and L2 speakers: a lack of worldview awareness where our mastery native tongue, ‘in turn masters us’ (Fantini, 1989, p. 2). Our mediation of the world, being exposed to other languages may expand this view and aid participation with other cultural groups (Ibid, pp.2-3). This mediation regards learners as social agents focus on meaning making and communicating beyond linguistic and cultural barriers; all mediation relying on collaborative processes (CE, 2022). Albaba (2025, p. 2) proposes the ‘concept of linguistic repertoire,’ which focuses not purely on students’ performance in English but views their existing language ‘as cognitive tools that can scaffold both content learning and language development.’ 

My intervention therefore attempts to bring the multilingualism in the classroom into focus through viewing this as a pedagogically resourceful and legitimate part of classroom practice which promotes ‘greater linguistic, epistemic and culturally (more) open inclusion’ (Odeneyi, 2022, p. 5). The ‘rhetorical power’ of ‘reimagining’ conversations in the HE space goes beyond teaching and learning (Ibid, p. 7), and this study aims to support both classroom practice, peer behaviours and even institutional change. 

Figure 2. Translanguaging Fashion

The intervention involves the procedure of activating schemata – contextualizing key terms: fashion, communication, sustainability, narrative – through students saying and writing the words in their L1 alongside the English forms (see example figure 2 above). The qualitative research aims to evaluate, from a student perspective, how this procedure could affect inclusivity, motivation and attendance for this non-compulsory class. However, it is a procedure which I feel could equally be explored in other teaching contexts across the university, forming the next iteration of the action research cycle (see figure 3).  

Figure 3. Action Research Cycle: Making Languages Visible at UAL

Figure 3. Action Research Cycle_ Making Languages Visible Download

(495 words)

References

Anderson, L. W., and Krathwohl, D. R. (2001) A Taxonomy for Learning, Teaching and Assessing: A Revision of Bloom’s Taxonomy of Educational Objectives: Complete Edition. New York: Longman. 

Bloom, B.S., Engelhart, M.D., Furst, E.J., Hill, W.H. and Krathwohl, D.R., (1956) ‘Taxonomy of educational objectives: The classification of educational goals.’ Handbook 1: Cognitive domain. pp. 1103-1133 New York: Longman. 

CE- Council of Europe (2025) ‘Common European Framework of Reference for Languages (CEFR): Mediation. ‘Available at https://www.coe.int/en/web/common-european-framework-reference-languages/mediation (Accessed on 25/05/25)  

Fantini, A.E. (1989) ‘Language and Worldview’ Journal of Bahá’í Studies Vol. 2-2: this paper was presented in Ottawa, October 7–10, 1988, at the Association’s Thirteenth Annual Conference, “Towards a Global Civilization.”   

Friere, P. (2005) Pedagogy of the Opressed: 30th Anniversary Edition, (Originally published 1970): New York: Continuem  

García, Ofelia (2009). ‘Education, multilingualism and translanguaging in the 21st century.’ In: Ajit Mohanty, Minati  Panda, Robert  Phillipson and Tove Skutnabb-Kangas (eds). Multilingual Education for Social Justice: Globalising the local. New Delhi: Orient Blackswan, pp. 128-145 

Krathwohl, D.R., Bloom, B.S., & Masia, B.B. (1964). Taxonomy of educationalobjectives: The classification of educational goals. Handbook II: Affective domain. NewYork: David McKay Co.
(PDF) Three Domains of Learning: Cognitive, Affective and Psychomotor. Available from: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/330811334_Three_Domains_of_Learning_Cognitive_Affective_and_Psychomotor [accessed Nov 03 2025].

Krathwohl, D.R. (2002) ‘A Revision of Bloom’s Taxonomy: An Overview’ Theory Into Practice,  Vol. 41, No. 4, pp. 212-218 Available at: https://www.jstor.org/stable/1477405 (Accessed 11 February, 2025) 

Matthiessen, C., & Halliday, M. (1997). Systemic functional grammar (1st ed.)   

Nunan, D. (1991) ‘Communicative Tasks and the Language Curriculum.’ TESOL Quarterly. 25 (2): 279–295.  Available at: doi:10.2307/3587464. JSTOR 3587464. (Accessed on 20 February 2025) 

Odenayi, V. (2022) ‘Reimagining Conversations’ Available at: https://www.arts.ac.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0032/359339/Reimagining-Conversations_FINAL.pdf (Accessed on 26.09.2025) 

Poehner, M.E., and Lantolf, J.P. (2024) Sociocultural Theory and Second Language: Developmental Education
Elements in Language Teaching. Cambridge: CUP. DOI: 10.1017/9781009189422

Shepherd, K. (2007) ‘Higher education for sustainability: seeking affective learning outcomes,’ International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education Vol. 9 No. 1, pp. 87-98 DOI 10.1108/1467637081084220

Categories
ARP

3. Methods #2: Guerilla Research

Having moved on from the swampy lowlands (Cook, 2009, p. 279), I now find myself in the research jungle, where I may encounter unexpected obstacles – but, thinking reflexively, perhaps opportunities to understand, not only the view of student participants in the study – but also the tensions that exist between the pedagogy and the institution itself – at least at course level.  

Indeed, I did feel somewhat feel ambushed when I received an instruction to effectively cease and desist with the intervention with one of my groups. The focus on ‘translanguaging’ – despite only being only a small part of the lesson – seemed to be putting students off from attending. Any activity focused on multicultural community building should take place outside the class time. This in contrast to the generally positive and supportive feedback I had otherwise received from both students and course leaders.   

This unexpected direction has motivated me to implement the data collection both pragmatically and strategically. In a previous workshop at LCC, critical friendship had highlighted that need to consider the language ability and comprehension of participants (as largely L2 users of English) of any questions in interviews or focus groups. The language appropriate for any survey would also need to be graded to the extent that all participants could access the necessary response – and be able to articulate this. For this reason, I have decided to advance a volley shot of surveys – this designed to reach the maximum range of participants and achieve data saturation (Creswell and Poth, 2016) – especially those who I may not see again in the Language Development classroom, being delivered via Moodle announcement to all the various course groups who had been included in the intervention. It’s worth noting that following this action I was also instructed not to communicate anything regarding the ARP to the students of particular groups via announcements – to paraphrase Tyler Durden from Fight Club (1999): the first rule of Action Research is – don’t talk about Action Research! 

The synchronous data collection would potentially involve a smaller number of participants and would also need to be organized as appropriate to the wishes of the student participants. Where this can form a meaningful learning experience as part of the lesson (an opportunity to apply the seminar skills that we have developed earlier in the scheme of work), and where participants are no longer willing, or able, to engage with this ‘teaching moment’ (O’Reilly, 2025), I will organize ad hoc outside the class time. This also attempts to respect the principles (at least) of ‘participatory action research’ (Lenette, 2024).   

I hope that the outcome of this research can provide meaningful insights for both learners and teachers. Ethically I cannot use a lot of the potentially useful data, as it was not offered in response to the agreed data collection. In the future iteration of the research, in addition to students, I will also be seeking to understand the attitudes and feelings of educators regarding the intervention.   

(500 words)

References:


Cook, T. (2009) ‘The purpose of mess in action research: building 
rigour though a messy turn,’ Educational Action Research, 17- (2)- 277-291, DOI: 
10.1080/09650790902914241 

Creswell, J.W. and Poth, C.N. (2016) Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches. Sage publications.

Fight Club (1999) Directed by D. Fincher. [Feature Film] 20th Century Fox

Lenette, C. (2024) PAR: Participatory action research. August 2024 (Available at: https://moodle.arts.ac.uk/pluginfile.php/2190224/mod_folder/content/0/Lenette%20%282024%29%20PAR%20%28Video%29.mp4?forcedownload=1 (Accessed 25 October 2025). 

O’Reilly J. (2025) Workshop 1: Action research project, 2025-26 PG Cert Academic Practice. London College of Communication, 26 September 2025