Author: Fernanda Palmieri

Record of Observation 2

Peer to Peer

Observer: Fernanda Palmieri  > Observee: Eden Chahal

Part 01_Being Observed

What is the context of this session/artefact within the curriculum?

Students are enrolled in the Graduate Diploma in Interior Design, a one-year program designed for individuals from diverse academic and professional backgrounds who wish to transition into Interior Design. This results in a heterogeneous cohort with varying levels of experience.

The observed session will be the final one before their Unit 1 submission. It is expected to consist of a series of 1:1 tutorials, potentially conducted in small groups (depending on the course leader).

The year is divided into 2 Units, this is the end of Unit 1 which encompasses 3 projects.

How long have you been working with this group and in what capacity?

I have been working with this group since the beginning of the academic year. My role involves delivering technical sessions, specifically teaching Rhino 3D, and supporting tutors during studio sessions.

What are the intended or expected learning outcomes?

This session will provide final guidance and support, helping students refine their work before submission. This may include technical advice as well as design adjustments.

What are the anticipated outputs (anything students will make/do)?

Students will submit a portfolio showcasing the work they have developed since the start of the academic year.

Are there potential difficulties or specific areas of concern?

There are no specific concerns, apart from this being their final opportunity to receive feedback before submission.

How will students be informed of the observation/review?

They will be informed on the morning of the observation and will only participate if they feel comfortable.

What would you particularly like feedback on?

I would appreciate feedback on how I phrase explanations during tutorials and the clarity of my feedback. However, I am open to any insights Fernanda may find relevant.

Part 02_Observing

by Fernanda Palmieri

On Thursday the 30th of February, I joined Eden for her morning session at the Chelsea College of Arts teaching the Graduate Diploma Interior Design in her capacity of technician and media tutor. My observation started at 10am (start of the studio day) and ended at 11:30.

The session was structured in 2 different rooms. Room 1: students were working individually and had the opportunity to have 1:1 tutorial with Eden or the tutor in charge. Room 2: was set up for presentations and group discussions (feedback) with students and tutor sitting around a table and sharing the work on the wall using a projector.

Eden started in room 01 with a ‘hands-on’ 1:1 tutorial, specifically looking at ‘what’ the student was trying to produce in terms of drawings/graphic content and showing ‘how’ to do it. She run the student through the software, took the actions step by step, shared the digital skills needed to fulfil the specific task, and asked the student to apply the learning there and then, making sure they could do by themselves.

Then, she moved to room 2 and joined the group tutorials and presentations. There, I saw 3 student presentations/tutorials. Across all 3, Eden’s feedback was very focused on the different ‘media’ students were using to explore and communicate their research, ideas and design work. Eden was very precise and clear in her feedback pointing it out, for example:

  • Where a ‘collage’ was being used effectively to graphically communicate important elements of the design project. 
  • When ‘photography’ of the existing site became crucial to anchor a project into a specific context.
  • Where ‘mapping’ was not being used to its full potential, providing clear suggestions of how to improve/add to the map drawing to further explore the idea of an experiential journey.
  • Where and how ‘physical models’ were being used effectively to experiment, develop and communicate the spatial structures and ideas.
  • How ‘3D modelling’ was being under-explored as a tool when used to look/develop a structure from a distant top-down view, instead of used as a tool to explore internal spatial qualities such as views, inside/outside relationships, light and so on.
  • And, how ‘plans’ can communicate complexity, challenging the student to use graphic overlays and annotation to communicate ideas of time, light, movement and inhabitation in their plan drawings.

By focusing on the media and technical aspects of the work, Eden showed a great level of sensibility. Her approach was at the same time very constructive for the students, who are learning this new graphic language (design language), and respectful and complementary to the design tutor running the session, who focused their feedback on more conceptual and qualitative aspects of the design (design thinking).

Suggestion:

My one thought was that it could have been beneficial to share some references/precedents of drawings and techniques, either during the sessions or after (via email). By looking and studying ‘plan drawings’ that successfully communicate the idea of movement and time, for example, students can get inspired and understand how different graphic elements/devices were used, prompting them to explore something new. This would require extra work to build up, and constantly update, a portfolio/library of references (including student work from previous years), but something that might be worthy.

Language versus Thinking

The observation was very insightful and underlined how much I miss working with a technician/media tutor. Five years ago, when I was teaching Stage 1 BA architecture at CSM, I experienced a similar structure while working in a close partnership with a media tutor. Being able to integrate media studies in a way that students acquired the skills (language) to applied to the pedagogical and critical tasks proposed, gave them the tools to take their first design steps with confidence. Unarguably crucial for Stage 1, I would say that the fully integrated binary ‘language and thinking’ or ‘media and design’ would be very valuable across all BA level stages, where students are building fluency in the wonderful language of design while becoming design thinkers at the same time.

Part 03_Reflection

by Eden

Fernanda’s suggestion to provide more references is indeed an area where I recognise a gap in my teaching approach. I have only recently become more aware of this, particularly through my closer engagement with studios and, even more so, in my temporary role as an Associate Lecturer. One possible reason I have overlooked this aspect until now is the ambiguity of my role. While I am contracted as a technician, I am also involved in studio support—an aspect I find both enriching and complementary. Providing feedback on student projects often requires having a broader set of references readily available to guide their research process effectively.

I have already started compiling references directly related to my technician role, such as those relevant to 3D printing and 3D scanning. The suggestion to build a library of references is particularly valuable, and I intend to implement this promptly. However, I anticipate a few challenges in doing so:

  • Time investment: Building a meaningful and well-structured reference library will take time, as will regularly revisiting it to keep it fresh in my mind. To address this, I may dedicate time after my sessions—possibly on a weekly basis—to engage in research and update my collection.
  • Providing references in the interim: While sending references to students after sessions would be beneficial, it is also time-consuming and does not strictly fall within my responsibilities, as I am not an academic. However, it could serve as a temporary measure while I develop a more structured reference system.
  • Managing references for diverse student groups: I work with a large number of students across six different courses, spanning multiple year groups. This diversity necessitates a clear classification methodology to ensure that references are relevant to each specific cohort. I have encountered this challenge before when preparing presentations on 3D printing; for instance, the most suitable examples for MA Design and Maker students may differ from those best suited to first-year BA Interior Design students.

Although these challenges require careful consideration, I recognise that improving my ability to provide relevant references will enhance the support I offer to students.

Record of Observation 3

Session/artefact to be observed/reviewed: Individual tutorials

Size of student group: 10-12 students (split with other tutors)

Observer: Victor Guillen        

Observee: Fernanda Palmieri

Part 01_Being Observed

  • What is the context of this session/artefact within the curriculum?

Vertical Design Studio 2 – BA Architecture (Stage 2 and 3 students).

This is the final tutorial session before summative submission of the individual design portfolios and reflective journals for Block 1 – final submissions on Thu 30th Jan.

  • How long have you been working with this group and in what capacity?

Since the beginning of the academic year (October 2024).

In the capacity of the design tutor – I co-lead the studio with my teaching partner Oscar Brito.

  • What are the intended or expected learning outcomes?
  1. Course started in October with site visits and student presentations on their first impressions of the site (personal take)
  2. Then we meet the external partners in a learning forum (live project), promoted discussions and exchanges (existing conditions/problems and conflicting desires for the area)
  3. Students then worked in groups to develop their research and a collective sensibility to the area and local communities.
  4. They used ‘situated actions’ as a tool of engagement and investigation (still working in groups) and devised urban strategies for the site.
  5. Each student then proposed a meanwhile intervention as a response to the group work and personal take/interest which informed their design brief for the final project.

By now, students should know:

WHAT they are designing – individual building brief

WHY they are designing it – research and strategy

FOR WHOM – communities they engaged with or identified

WHERE the project site is – plans, sections, elevations of the existing project site + good analysis talking about the conditions observed, opportunities and constraints.

  • Content of the session:

Students are now working on their design development:

HOW the architecture will respond/translate all the knowledge acquired.  

Structure of this session: 30 minutes tutorials to provide verbal feedback on their design development and design thesis (story of their projects) prior to the submission.

  • What are the anticipated outputs (anything students will make/do)?

Students are not expected to have a final building design at this stage. They are working on defining and communicating their design intentions. Students will bring their work in different formats: digital and physical, including sketches, annotation, models, and prints.

  • Are there potential difficulties or specific areas of concern?

Students were supposed to work independently before and after the Christmas break to push the development of their design project. If students didn’t produce work independently and are falling behind at this stage, a ‘catching up plan’ will have to be devised during this session.

  • How will students be informed of the observation/review?

I will issue a tutorial list on Thursday, students attending the time slots under observation will be informed and consulted in the morning, prior to the event.

  • How will feedback be exchanged?

I am happy to receive written feedback via email/form

Part 02_Observing

by Victor Guillen

Hi Fernanda   

Thank you for inviting me to observe your 1:1 tutorials with a focus on providing feedback on students’ individual design portfolios and reflective journals. You didn’t mention a particular area you’d like me to focus on, so I’ve commented on general aspects of the session.

Interaction and engagement with students

Your friendly, approachable and focused manner fostered a lot of interaction with students. You encouraged agency by letting them lead the tutorial while also prompting reflection and seeking clarification as needed (e.g. did you go there? how is your arch going to do that, how do you create that experience? Students had a clear idea of the structure of the tutorial, from the running order to aspects to be discussed. You listened attentively and signalled this through backchannelling (e.g. verbal and non-verbal clues like ‘I see’, ‘yeah’, uh-huh’, nodding, pointing to areas of the design students were talking about).

Task focus

You distinguish between advice and requirements (e.g. I’m not suggesting you do this, but remember that you need to demonstrate …), provide practical examples while also offering strategies to address the task (e.g. Because this is south-facing you could…// Think about how flexible the space need to be, perhaps draw a timeline of all the activities to help you visualise it.// Enough research for now, you need to work on the design, all the research will come to you when you work on the design// You need to work back to front, so…).

Feedback giving and use of language

You highlight what students have done well and why (e.g. this is great because…) while also reminding them of the task requirements and suggesting ways to improve their work (e.g. They’re beautiful drawings but they need to be more spatial, more architectural, the brief is about…// This is really good, now you need to…)

I also liked how you used metaphor, demonstrations and examples to help students visualise the process and the requirements (e.g. It’s like a spiral, you do this, then check, and do it again?// Demonstrating use of scale bar and asking questions like Do you know how big it is? How would people experience height in this space?

You effectively use a range of directive, interrogative and hedged language for different purposes (e.g. you do need to …// you’ve got to translate that into your design, it cannot stay in your head// Could you add something here, like a fireplace? Maybe you could..// I’d look at…// This is very interesting, but I don’t think it’s a good example of…, you would need to…”

A final thought

Your approach to 1:1 tutorials encourages autonomy and critical thinking, through clarifying requirements, constructive critique, practical advice and use of supportive language. Since a lot of useful information is generated, I wonder how you gauge the extent to which some of this has been understood/processed. It may be a good idea to ask students to take notes or to recap the key take away/action points from the tutorial at the end, so that you’ve got an opportunity to check/correct/consolidate understanding.

Part 3 _ Reflection

by Fernanda

Victor’s final thought/question is one that I constantly reflect upon when students come back the following week and I realised their new work or design decisions were not informed by our previous conversation. Stopping to recap and take notes of the takeaway/action points is indeed something I must do more consistently. Also, ask them to bring the notes and drawings from the previous session with a quick reflection to identify if and how the work is aligned or not aligned with the previous conversation/feedback. A lot happens in a week in terms of learning/exposure to other modules, tutors, lectures, … and it’s difficult even for the students themselves to pin down what is informing/influencing the work and how. I think this approach could help them develop this awareness and analytical thinking.

Welcome aboard

I am an architect and urban designer working between practice, design research and teaching, and this is my PgCert blog. I am a lecturer at University of East London and Central Saint Martins, where I co-run BA Architecture design studios. And I am a partner of Aboard, a collaborative design research partnership set up as a vehicle to produce and exchange knowledge and practice critical and collaborative design.

I am interested in the complexities and processes of transformation of urban environments and in exploring how design thinking can promote alternative ways of space production and help us move towards a more equitable and sustainable urban living.

My teaching approach is connected to my research. It includes live project situations, collaboration with external partners, and knowledge exchange processes. It is designed to support a context for effective teaching and learning by fostering a deep understanding of the social and cultural contexts students are working with.