How can I enable a sense of connectedness among creative students through digital storytelling?
The aim of my research project was to investigate the power that digital storytelling has in supporting connectedness among creative students. My study touches on the power of community and belonging in engaging students in academic activities. This is based on the idea that connectedness among students may support their learning, and that feeling connected is an essential component of the student experience (Hehir et al., 2021).
As part of this, I am exploring connectedness as a collective experience with a creative output, and have defined engagement as the collaborative engagement of students with an online learning activity. The results of this study will inform the design of future digital learning activities for students engaged in online learning.
As part of the early planning stages of my action research project, I went through several iterations of different types of research questions. In fact, more than one question accurately captured my interest in digital storytelling. However, I wanted to make sure the research question was practical, achievable, and in line with our set project boundaries. While I remain incredibly interested in the idea of play as a disruptor with academic activities, and it would have been interesting to incorporate this element into my final research question, it would have expanded the scope of the project too much. It is without a doubt that my final storytelling activity will include a flavour of this, but I decided not to make it a focus of my investigation.
In addition, I wrote my research question in a way that it focused on my actions and my ability to make a positive change as a practitioner, rather than an evaluation of an entire field of study, hence the “How can I” part of the question. This means that my question is more reflective of my own practice, and the research project empowers me to implement changes directly within my own practice.
I also decided to focus on the idea of connectedness, rather than engagement or community, thinking about connection between individuals that could mean small-scale or large-scale connections amongst individuals.
And finally, I wanted to capture the idea of the creative student at the core of the activity, hence their explicit mention within the question.
McNiff and Whitehead (2002, p.7) raise a number of critical questions about conducting action research, which I found helpful in reviewing my research question, including: ‘What is my concern? Why am I concerned? What do I think I can do about it? What will I do?’ These reflective questions and my responses shaped the ultimate direction of my project as well as my overarching research question.
Open discussions with peers and tutors in the early part of the project also helped me review and reflect on some of my early questions. Seeing if questions made sense when being read out or seeing how others responded to some of my ideas was a helpful way of reviewing these.
You can find out about how my early project planning helped me settle on a research question on my blog post about my rationale.
Hehir, E., Zeller, M., Luckhurst, J. and Chandler, T. (2021). Developing student connectedness under remote learning using digital resources: A systematic review. Education and Information Technologies, [online] 26(5), pp.6531–6548. doi:https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639021105771.
McNiff, J. and Whitehead, J. (2002). Action research: Principles and Practice. 2nd ed. London: RoutledgeFalmer.
Although I experimented with different options to present back to my peers, I settled on a chronological presentation of my work using a 7-point storytelling format (Wells, 2010). This structure allows me to best illustrate my research journey, while also being reflective of the theme of storytelling. I also wanted to keep my presentation accessible and given that this includes a number of visuals I wanted to keep the underlying format clean and without any major distractions.
I added an interactive element to my presentation by enabling by allowing listeners or readers to scan a QR code (slide 28) and explore some of the storytelling elements and stories in more detail online.
The presentation includes an appendix (slides 30 – 50) for anyone interested in exploring some of the full questionnaire data and more detailed findings.
As my action research project developed, several changes took place. At the beginning the project scope seemed fairly vast, and a lot of my initial work focused on narrowing the scope of the project to ensure that I would be able to deliver it within the boundaries of the course. Some of the exercises I undertook were useful and narrowed the project in a helpful way. At the same time, this opened opportunities for me to explore adjoining areas of research, for example I explored the idea of collective consciousness (Bache, 2008) and I explored a variety of research methods including embodied data analysis (Kara, 2022); although I ultimately discounted the latter due to the digital nature of my project.
Through some of the discussions I was able to have with peers, as well as some of the feedback I received, I made useful changes to the project. For example, I changed the central exercise from student partners writing complete stories to them being able to continue existing stories and being able to contribute smaller story elements to other students’ story elements; create a more collective approach and making the exercise itself more dynamic as well as more collective in nature. Some of the feedback around gathering and sharing storytelling elements and techniques, also led me to develop the Padlet activity to give students a more comprehensive insight into storytelling, supporting them better for the core activity on Miro, which asked them to develop a story more or less independently.
I believe the strength of my storytelling project was the design of the learning activity at its centre and me having developed it using storytelling insights and elements of play specifically with a creative cohort of students in mind. I think that the application of design thinking during the development of the exercise helped me develop something much more agile and much more interesting than taking any existing or previously used exercise and applying it to a new group of students.
My initial work in this area was inspired by a project by Sheffield Hallam University, where listening rooms (Sheffield Hallam University, 2003) had been set up to listen in on conversations between students, giving the university a better understanding of students’ experiences and allowing students, usually two at a time, to have discursive conversations with each other. (The Sheffield Hallam University project had been inspired by BBC Radio 4’s The Listening Project (BBC Radio 4, 2023)).
Thinking about the idea of listening rooms, I began to wonder what a project like this could look like online, i.e. without physical listening rooms or boxes on campus. I started to sketch out ideas of what this might look like in a virtual space, how information could be captured, and so on.
One aspect that was missing for me, however, was how such a project could more directly benefit students. It is obvious that there are huge benefits for me, as an academic, gaining a better understanding of my students through something like a listening project and then in turn being able to better support my students. Other academics, support services and some students might be interested in an analysis of relevant project findings, too.
Nevertheless, it bothered me that there was no immediate feedback or contribution to students from the activity itself. And a virtual listening rooms project also raised a question around why students would share their personal stories with the university without much in return. What would their incentive be, and would the project ultimately exclude some students over others?
Lastly, I thought that the idea of ‘someone’ listening in on a conversation clashed with my wish to create a safe and caring environment for my students. As Condorelli (2009, p.188) states, “As people involved in the making of culture, how do we want to go there and what with?” I wanted to ensure to create an environment and a community, but in a space that felt safe. I began to think about other ways to capture students’ stories.
I also decided that a brief for students to share a piece of themselves should be much more open, and that students shouldn’t need to answer a question that was too specific. I wanted to create an activity that places students at the center of it, gives them agency to decide, something that would connect students through the collective nature of the activity. I also wanted to see if by empowering my students I could remove at least some of my own biased influence, as an academic, from the activity. As more and more students would feed into the activity, and it became more of a collective experience would my own influence over their experience reduce? I began to wonder if this could then create more space for students to express their own identities and express themselves more freely, and the content creation aspect of the activity would be become more and more based on co-design, self-creation and a self-run, sustainable activity.
Lastly, I liked the idea of having an activity that would allow students to use different formats and that the activity could include more than two students at a time, something inherently more collective than two students having a private conversion with each other.
Screenshot of a mind map I used to refine some of my initial thinking and ideas, on Miro
One of the most interesting and possibly more positive elements of the storytelling project also became one of the biggest blockers, namely the asynchronous nature of the activity. There was a clear challenge of having to compete with student partners’ other responsibilities, such as other academic activities, and I had to put in additional efforts to follow up with students, collectively and individually, reflect on my communications, and stretch the boundaries of the project. For example, I extended my deadlines for students to contribute to the project by an entire month, giving me less time to analyse their data, but allowing for a larger number of contributors.
I’m very pleased with the difference the project has made so far in getting my department to reconsider the way students are able to contribute to their teaching and learning, incorporating storytelling at the core of some of our activities.
I’m excited to consider how this project can be embedded as a foundational exercise within the student partners group moving forward, e.g. as new student partners join us, and how this project might be used with other aspects of online education. It has been brilliant to look at how I can nurture a community of students and develop opportunities of connectedness among them.
I monitored and noted feedback received throughout the project, either implementing changes directly, or logging this for later use, for example within my research mind map, and a list of ideas and references to return to at another time.
I tried to be consequent and stick to my original plan, giving each stage of the project sufficient time, but also not allowing too much scope creep. I probably spent more time on running the actual activities, simply due to the fact that I tweaked activities and expanded on them, which required more time. I would have liked to explore other methodologies and areas of research further but was also conscious of sticking to my overall plan and needing to decide on one specific route through the project.
I was very inspired by the collective nature of the activity, which I hope to explore more in the future. I think that I gained new skills in terms of activity design, surveying students, and analysing data. The way that I drew raw data out of the activity and feedback, and then used thematic and narrative analysis tools to work through the raw data was new and exciting to me. I would also like to explore narrative analysis further.
Final project considerations
The learning activity I ultimately developed was a rich, three-hour long exercise that sat outside students’ curriculum. The flexibility to complete the exercise as and when students wanted, provided them with a more accessible way to engage with the activity as if it had been scheduled to take place live, also reducing some of the overall intensity of the work involved.
It is also worth noting that student partners’ participation in this project was entirely voluntary, prioritising students’ needs outside their roles of student partners. Their contributions could also be made anonymously. Both of these elements highlight my own values around the importance of embedding ethics of care into our work with students, looking to support students in a caring way, rather than students being in any way, even unintentionally, harmed. All contributing student partners were compensated for their time via Arts Temps.
Bibliography
Bache, C.M. (2008). The Living Classroom: Teaching and Collective Consciousness. Albany, USA: SUNY Press.
BBC Radio 4 (2023). BBC Radio 4 – The Listening Project. [online] The listening project: It’s surprising what you hear when you listen. Available at: https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b01cqx3b [Accessed 14 Dec. 2023].
Condorelli, C. and De Baere, B. (2009). Support for Culture. In: Support Structures. Berlin: Sternberg Press, pp.187–201.
Kara, H. (2022). Embodied Data Analysis. YouTube. Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k79AWH59JpQ [Accessed 4 Dec. 2023].
Sheffield Hallam University (2003). Listening Rooms at Sheffield Hallam University. [online] Listening Rooms. Available at: https://blogs.shu.ac.uk/listeningrooms/ [Accessed 14 Dec. 2023].
As Student Experience Lead at UAL Online, I continuously look at ways of improving the student experience, and a focus of my work is creating opportunities for student voice to support creative education online. For example, in 2023 I designed and launched UAL Online’s team of student partners, who support the co-design of online education at UAL and who have directly supported this action research project.
Therefore, part of the environment within which my research takes place is a specific online learning context that is aligned to the UAL Online Learning Framework (see below). It highlights six guiding values for the design, build and delivery of online learning and student experience, and forefronts flexibility, access and inclusion. It is important to recognise that I designed my research to align with this framework.
In addition, the UAL Online model structures online learning into three distinct categories: guided (45%), independent (40%), and live (15%). The focus of guided learning within this model made it interesting for me to spotlight it within my own research, shining a light on structured, self-paced learning that students are required to complete; although my wider work touches on all three categories.
I am also interested in some of the opportunities provided by guided learning to scale an offer of online learning, such as providing access to a larger and more diverse global cohort of students; compared with some residential offers that rely on predominant live delivery of creative education.
The project also brings together my own background in communications, the creative arts, and storytelling. I am particularly interested in how storytelling supports communities of creative students and enhances their experience. Copeland and de Moor (2018), for example, say that “digital stories carry the currency of authentic voice across networks when brokered effectively”. I am interested and how I can enable students to use their authentic voice and lived experiences within their studies.
In the previous PgCert unit, I looked at developing opportunities for students to explore their personal identities within classroom activities. In a way, my action research project is a continuation of this work but also goes further. Whereas the previous activity (or artefact) that I had designed enabled students to better understand their identities, the activity that I developed as part of the action research project enables students to express themselves much more freely, engage with their learning in a much more creative and more personal way, which supports the idea that their personal identities truly sit at the heart of what they do.
McNiff and Whitehead (2010, p.59) state that “What action research stands for is the realisation of human needs towards autonomy, loving relationships and productive work; the urge towards freedom, creativity and self-recreation.” As I previously wrote, through empowering storytelling activities in the classroom, I can empower different voices and hand over the reins to our students in a more meaningful way.
This isn’t to say that my own positionality doesn’t have a direct impact on how activities are run and supported. As Maisha Islam (2023) rightly says, “positionality influences every decision when you conduct research.” Nevertheless, through giving students agency to direct their own learning, we can open up learning activities to be more inclusive and socially just.
Bibliography
Copeland, S. and de Moor, A. (2018). Community Digital Storytelling for Collective Intelligence: towards a Storytelling Cycle of Trust. AI & SOCIETY, [online] 33(1), pp.101–111. doi:https://doi.org/10.1007/s0014601707441.
Maisha Islam: Rethinking academic research culture and decolonial approaches to student-staff partnerships, (2023). [Podcast] Spotify: Pedagogies for Social Justice, Student Partnership. 23 Sep. Available at: https://open.spotify.com/show/1BhrbuKdFOIBmlzGYAZyui?si=0402efe096f14a1e [Accessed 16 Nov. 2023].
McNiff, J. and Whitehead, J. (2010). You and Your Action Research Project. 3rd ed. London: Routledge.
The planning elements of my action research project included:
A high-level project plan including distinct phases and milestones set against timelines, e.g. our academic timetable. I also highlighted elements such as course workshops and tutorials, knowing that these might impact the actual work. I was then able to compare my plans against my students’ timetable, sense-checking if the project would be feasible given my student partners’ other commitments. This high-level plan also allowed me to carve out time to read, write, and produce materials. I used Miro for this.
Miro screenshot of my action research project plan 1/5Miro screenshot of my action research project plan in detail 2/5Miro screenshot of my action research project plan in detail 3/5Miro screenshot of my action research project plan in detail 4/5Miro screenshot of my action research project plan in detail 5/5
A detailed list of tasks that I would return to, and add to, on a weekly basis. This included specific actions, required documents, questions to resolve, things I wanted to read and write, etc. I used Trello for this.
Screenshots of tasks being managed in Trello, set up by me for action research project
Written notes, thoughts, and ideas that I captured through OneNote, Quick Notes, a written journal. These helped me gather and reflect on my thoughts on a more spontaneous basis.
Image of my personal notebook, capturing initial ideas about action research project
A calendar of events and meetings also helped me stay on track of important conversations with peers, course-related events, and student-facing sessions.
Screenshot of Outlook calendar insight, highlighting meeting with student partners
My digital storytelling action research project is based on a central storytelling activity that tests student partners’ sense of connectedness to each other. I selected specific research methodologies for a number of reasons.
Theme: I wanted to match my methodologies to my overarching theme of storytelling and narration. A qualitative enquiry focused on text analysis seemed to be a good match for me align my methodology with my initial research question.
Context: Working in a context of online education with a focus on guided learning, I wanted to make sure my research methodology could be designed and delivered in the same way, i.e. research findings were gathered through asynchronous means online.
Practicality: I made use of methodologies that I was able to apply within the restricted timeframes of the action research project.
My research project activities include a number of learning tasks, to which I have assigned specific research methodologies as outlined below.
Reviewing relevant project information, providing consent and reviewing activity instructions
As an initial tasks, participants were asked to review project information and provide their consent. Data gathered in this phase was excluded from any analysis.
Exploring and contributing to a Padlet containing storytelling elements
I conducted a thematic analysis of Padlet submissions by extracting over 170 key words and then categorising these. For example, I was able to relate several contributions to the idea of spaces and architecture, and many with a sense of darkness or lightness. I also ran an internal session with staff to gather additional insights and seeing how my own analysis compared to those of my peers.
Redacted Padlet including participant submissions and engagement with different storytelling elementsMiro screenshot of a table of I created from keywords extracted from PadletMiro extract from my thematic analysis during which I categorised key words into different narrative groupings: I looked for at least four key words per categoryOverview of the thematic analysis activity that I ran with staff
Exploring and contributing to a collective map of individual student partner stories
I then conducted a narrative analysis by extracting student parter stories, adding them to a Miro, and then going through each of them, line by line, looking for clues of connectedness between different stories, such as how participants made use of narrative styles or character development.
I was particular interested in seeing if there were any narrative elements that highlighted participant’s freedom of expression and individuality. Reading about narrative network analysis, I decided to review the different stories by highlighting three distinct themes:
Constancy and change across time: such as routines, patterns, or the explicit development of an identity.
Sameness versus difference: such as contrasting or comparable elements, e.g. different characters’ moral values.
Agency: a strong sense of self as the actor or as the ‘undergoer’.
Bamberg (2012) highlights these three unique themes as particularly relevant in the development of identity through storytelling. I thought this approach was particularly relevant in my own analysis, given that I wanted to evaluate how storytelling might be able to create connectedness amongst a diverse group of students, but at the same time support their individuality and freedom of expression.
Redacted story map which I designed for students to explore each other’s stories and contribute their own, on MiroExtract of the narrative analysis I performed on each participant’s story, highlighting relevant narrative elements across three distinct themes
Similar to the thematic analysis exercise above, I then ran a short internal session with peers to see how my own analysis compared to that of other members of my team.
Extract from the Miro workshop I ran with staff to further analyse copies of participant’s stories
Complete an activity evaluation
Finally, I asked all participating student partners to complete a research questionnaire containing 15 liker-scale and open-ended questions. Due to the relatively small number of students participating in the project, and data not being representative for a larger population of students, my methodology focused on qualitative data analysis. Although I drew conclusions by contrasting and comparing sets of data between students, I focused on the open-ended questions answered by students.
Bibliography
Bamberg, M. (2012). Narrative Practice and Identity Navigation. In: J.A. Holstein and J.F. Gubrium, eds., Varieties of Narrative Analysis. [online] Thousand Oaks, California: SAGE Publications, Inc., pp.99–124. doi:https://doi.org/10.4135/9781506335117.
The preliminary feedback I received on my ethics form during a group tutorial was positive. Changes I made before submitting my final form included making my research question more reflective of my own agency as a practitioner. I also reviewed my preliminary set of questions and rephrased a number of questions to make the overall set more critical and less leading. For example, I rephrased one of the questions from how students might feel connected, to how they might feel disconnected during the exercise. By not presuming that student partners would feel connected and by flipping the question, this then gave me an opportunity to double-check students’ understanding of the question and their response. It also then allowed for students to give a more ‘negative’ response if they so wished. I reviewed the remaining questions with this in mind, making some further changes. I then added additional opportunities for student partners to expand on their responses to likert questions on page 2 of the questionnaire and made my request for open-ended responses at the end of the survey more explicit. In the instructions, I also highlighted to students to read questions carefully, as I did not want them to skim over questions and misunderstand them.
I have included here my signed off (via Moodle) Ethical Enquiry Form.
Following on from the formal and final feedback I received on my ethical enquiry form, I revisited the order of questions once more and reviewed some of the phrasing of my questions to eliminate any ambiguity and clarify specific questions.
For example, I was asked about the notion of an activity ‘making’ someone feel a specific way, which made me think about the agency of my participants in the process. I rephrased my final set of questions to reflect this.
I also had a closer look at the idea of ‘trigger warnings’, which are commonly used but can also evoke negative feelings for students. The feedback I received made me reconsider the use of an explicit ‘trigger warning’, review project risks, and decide to take a softer approach. The final draft of my project information took this into account by explicitly talking about the possibly of strong feelings and emotions arising in the project, however I did no longer label these messages with a specific ‘trigger warning’. I also included a more explicit project etiquette and forms of support, including support with studying online, within the project invitation and documentation.
I wanted to make sure that the research would take place in a supportive environment, even though the learning activities themselves were designed to creatively challenge student partners. Macfarlane (2003, p.59) writes that while we want to make students into critical thinkers, “it is important to establish a clear, stable and supportive environment in which this enquiry can take place”.
Bibliography
Macfarlane, B. (2003). Teaching with Integrity : The Ethics of Higher Education Practice. [online] London: Taylor & Francis Group. Available at: http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/ual/detail.action?docID=182731.
The following blog outlines the different documents and digital channels that participants had access to as part of the action research project. I organised documents chronologically, i.e. in the order that student parts received the information.
UAL Online Student Project Request Sheet
The UAL Online team has put in place a process whereby student partners receive a project request sheet that lets them determine if they would like to take part in a project. It includes a summary of the project, project aims, a draft schedule and commitments. It is important to note the voluntary nature of our student partner positions and the inherent choice that student partners have in participating in projects. The project request sheet was sent to all student partners in advance, to signal to them that the project would soon commence and that they would have the chance to participate. It also included information about the relevance of the project to students’ creative practices.
Before providing their consent, student partners received a detailed project information document that outlined the action research project in further detail. This included information on how any project data, such as participant contributions, would be processes and shared. The document also outlined a number of limited potential risks and disadvantages. Through feedback received from team members, I also included a section of advantages of participating that highlighted the importance of their engagement. As the learning activity that I designed included a number of learning objectives, I also included these here.
Finally, I included ethical implications and support available for students throughout the project. You can read more about my ethical considerations in my blog on Ethical Enquiry.
Participant Consent Form
I captured participants consent in Jisc, as I wanted to use an UAL-approved platform to capture student data in a confidential and anonymous way. This also meant that student partners were able to provide their consent whenever suited them. I have included here screenshots of the final form as it appears in Jisc, including 12 short statements that I asked student partners to consent to. The form also linked back to the project information documentation as a reference.
Digital Storytelling Activity Instructions
Once student partners completed their consent form, they then received access to a set of detailed activity instructions and further information such as how to submit their contributions. I also included suggested activity timings to help them manage and complete different tasks in a supported but asynchronous way. As the activity includes several steps, I estimated that the activity would take students up to two and a half hours to complete. I decided to give students an extra half an hour to spend on any part of the activity that might take them longer to complete, or on any element that they chose to focus on. I thought it was important to limit the time student partners spent on the overall activity, creating a better environment for me to compare different contributions like for like.
It is important to highlight that student partners were able to participate in the activity without participating in the action research, i.e. participate without their data being accounted for in the research.
In student partner activity instructions, students were asked to contribute to a collective Padlet made up of a number of storytelling elements. I had included some examples as a guide and students were then able to continue adding to this, as well as comment on each others posts, like posts, and compare and contrast what others had posted. The Padlet allowed students to include relevant storytelling elements from their unique point of view, but also be inspired by others’ contributions. (The image below shows a screenshot of the Padlet and student contributions have been redacted.)
Story Map on Miro
Once student partners completed the activity on Padlet, they were able to access a ‘story map’ which I designed using Miro. The map included project instructions, a suggested timeline, and further resources one more time for easy access, and a large ‘map’ where students were able to read already published stories and spaces to publish their own. All student partners chose to publish their stories in writing, although everyone had the opportunity to publish something in a range of different media, i.e. audio, audio-visual, …
Project Evaluation Form on Jisc
Finally, I asked student partners to complete a project evaluation, which consistent of a questionnaire on Jisc. The survey asked students a range of likert-scale questions, as well as several follow-up questions to better understand why student partners had chosen specific values. The questionnaire included 14 specific questions, and one final question asking students to summarise their experience. I suggested to students to take up to 20 minutes to complete the survey and carefully consider their responses. I have included a number of screenshots from Jisc, including all evaluation questions below.
Research participants also received a number of communications via email and Teams, which I have highlighted in my final findings.
My final project documentation included gathering a total of 24 hours worth of student partner contributions. Due to the asynchronous nature of my research activity, I was able to collect data from some students while others were still in the process of working through their learning activities. This let me to delve into data analysis in a more or less organic progress during which reviewed some of my data, while already evaluation other strands of data, which Miles and Huberman (1994, p.10) would label as ‘three concurrent flows of activity: data collection, data reduction, and data display’ leading to the drawing / verifying of conclusions.
Figure 1.4: Components of Data Analysis: Interactive Model (Miles and Hubermann, 1994, p.12)
In reality, this process took on a more ‘messy’ form of research, which included a lot of doubt, reassessing, reevaluating, reducing data in a number of ways before coming to a final conclusion, all the way leaving the door open to return to some of the collected data. According to Cook (2009, p. 289) this messy area of research is a “vital element in transformational research” that can be facilitative, and I have tried to embrace this character of my analysis.
Throughout my project evaluation, I tried to tie final conclusions to my original research question, ‘How can I enable a sense of connectedness among creative students through digital storytelling?’. Nevertheless, I was able to gather additional findings to support my practice, which I thought important to note as well.
As I previously mentioned, I had collected and grouped data into distinct groups and undertook a thematic analysis and a narrative analysis on students’ activity contributions, as well as an evaluation of their feedback submitted via an online questionnaire. Secondary findings included student engagement, including student communications, as part of their usual engagement as part of their student partner roles.
Summary conclusions
Returning to my original research questions, I was able to make the following, overarching conclusions.
Connectedness and Individuality
Most, but not all students want to be connected to each other.
A narrative review of students’ stories showed that stories that diverged from the ‘established’ pattern, showed more creativity, diversity and individuality.
In contrast, stories that showed less creativity, diversity and individuality, showed a stronger connectedness to other stories within the group, I.e. the more connectedness students showed, the less individual were their responses.
I was successful, therefore, to enable a sense of connectedness among creative students through the digital storytelling activity, however where the activity was more successful, it did so at the cost of people’s individual stories, I.e. their personal identities.
Connectedness and Flexibility
Feedback made clear that the more flexible parts of the learning activity, including its asynchronous design, pushed students to work more independently and at times in isolation; this made it more difficult to establish a sense of connectedness.
Connectedness and Collaboration
Where the storytelling activity created opportunities for collaboration, students were able to better connect with each other.
Connectedness and Engagement
Connectedness among students requires engagement.
Students require a purpose, incentive and a sense of urgency to engage.
Student engagement can be supported through communications and nudges.
Elements of play can contribute to student engagement.
Detailed findings: thematic analysis
Through a thematic analysis of data that student partners contributed to their learning activity in Padlet, I was able to confirm that several different contributions aligned to similar themes. I have included here some of the categories under which student contributions were formed.
Architecture
Catalysts
Critique of others
Darkness
Genre
Location
Motivations / goals
Missing / without
Outdoors
Personal characteristics
Position
Physical experience or description
Roles
Searching
Scary stories
Societal regulations
State of mind
Time
Seeing thematic connections across the activity, also meant that students started to connect to each other through the activity. Similar narrative strands then also appeared in student partners’ final story contributions in Miro.
Particularly where students began to collaborate, such as reviewing and liking each other’s contributions, further levels of connectedness were established.
I facilitated a staff session that looked at a redacted set of this data to confirm some of the themes listed here.
Detailed findings: narrative analysis
Reviewing student partners’ contributions in Miro, I was able to establish a number of findings, chiefly that stories showed many structural similarities with the initial example provided:
Due to the length and nature of the stories, all stories had a fast-paced narrative.
Several of the narratives had a focus on time-based events
Stories had set characters / roles that we were able to see again and again
Stories focused on plot changes, rather than explored different genres, characters, etc.
All stories were ‘hero journey stories’, talking about the main character’s quest and concerns.
They highlighted individuals and individual development, rather than a cast of characters or any wider societal development, things around the individual.
Stories replicated the idea of the ‘diamond in the rough’, a misunderstood, hidden talent, stereotypical artist, and a ‘nobody understands me’ sentiment.
The stories highlighted how much leeway students felt comfortable to take from the original story.
Detailed findings: activity evaluation feedback
Looking at the overall feedback, the overarching experiment of implementing a storytelling activity to support connectedness among students can be deemed successful, I.e. the experiment worked.
The majority of students thought the storytelling activity made them want to be part of a community of students.
The majority of students partners felt like the storytelling activity allowed them to contribute to a community of students.
The storytelling activity made the majority of student partners feel connected to some / any of the other students.
An asynchronous activity was able to connect students online.
The structure of activity worked and students particularly liked Padlet
I have included here some of the anonymised and redacted student partner feedback in support of my overall findings.
Project Evaluation Question No. 4: The storytelling activity made me feel connected to some / any of the other students.
“The story represents a journey, me and most of my peers are currently experiencing. Writing the experience down, and incorporating their experiences made me feel more connected with them and see overlaps.”
“The activity has made me feel connected as i could read the responses of other students both on miro and padlet and get an idea of how they were thinking of the same and i was aware that we were all working on the same task but approaching it in different ways ehich made me feel connected to a larger network of students.”
“By the time I did the task another person had already added their story to the Miro board. Despite never meeting that person in real life or speaking to them I know that their practice resolves around architecture and they are specifically interested in urban architecture just by reading their story on Miro. Since the task asks us to springboard off another story it is very likely that each person will at least read 2-3 other people’s story before writing their own and in this way get a rough idea about each other’s practices.”
“I feel like the ‘origin story’ reflects the feelings that many art students would experience at some point. It tapped into some insights which frequently occur, leading to the question of whether what you create has any value at all. The way to deal with these insights and doubts is different for everyone: humour, openness to others, searching for help and striving to improve or, on the extreme side, loneliness and withdrawal. So, I think, that storytelling is a safe and detached way to deal with those feelings.”
“The Padlet not only allows me to write and share my own thoughts but also enables me to browse the other students’ thoughts, which makes me feel connected to other students. Even though we didn’t talk face-to-face, we had a meeting of the minds.”
“Because it was interesting seeing how other people wrote and what they decided to write about. It made me feel like I knew them better.”
Project Evaluation Question No. 15: In 2-5 sentences, please describe your experience and feelings of participating in the storytelling activity.
“I felt that this was a fun, open and not intimidating task. It is an easy way to get to know other people’s practice and interests. This was not necessarily a challenge but I approached the task in a manner to tell an interesting/fun story that was loosely related to my practice. My core approach was to write a fun story and not give an accurate detailed written explanation of my practice. So if the key aspect of this task was to get to know other students, their personalities, and maybe learn a bit about their practice I feel that it works really well. But if the core reason for the task was to learn about other student’s practices I do not think that this was the most effective way. On a different note I felt that the Padlet was a helpful as a brief browse through it helps generate some initial ideas on what to write.”
“The [Padlet] and activity form, were very well structured and engaging. It made me wonder, and feel excited about learning something new. The resources used were organised and made me feel like I was discovering new and interesting pieces of information.”
“Engaging in the storytelling activity was a gratifying experience, fostering a sense of connection with fellow students. While the anonymity of responses occasionally left me uncertain whether they came from peers or staff, the consistent guidance and clear delineation of each process stage provided a reassuring structure. The playful nature of the project added an enjoyable dimension, contributing to an overall positive and collaborative atmosphere.”
Additional findings showed that the playfulness of the activity supported connectedness. Commenting on this, one student partner stated that “It was thoroughly engaging. I felt invited to contribute and bring my capabilities to the activity.” – Project Evaluation Question No. 8 and No. 9: The playfulness of the storytelling activity discouraged me from participating in the activity.
On access, none of the participants thought that it was difficult to take part in the activity and all student partners thought that the activity was fully accessible. Most student partners thought the activity felt inclusive to them.
Detailed findings: disconnectedness
Activity feedback also showed that there was some room for improvement specifically around activity design.
Project Evaluation Question No. 6: There were elements of the storytelling activity that made me feel disconnected from some / any of the other students.
Student partners thought that they could be more connected.
Some student partners did not want to contribute anonymously, “having the names of the student would make me feel more connected to them”.
Some students thought the activity could have been better as a ‘live’ activity: “I personally feel that this activity would have more impact if done at once by all students (maybe during a lecture) as opposed to doing it individually.”
Some students likened a lack of interaction with a lack in connectedness: “Almost none of us left each other comments and likes [on Padlet], and interaction was rather lacking.”
Project Evaluation Question No. 11: I felt unable to express myself freely as part of the storytelling activity.
Responses to students’ ability to freely express themselves were mixed, highlighting a possible need for further research.
One student also highlighted the presence of a language barrier. “The aspect I found challenging is the language of expressions. I felt conscious of how to write and whether what I intended to say would be understood in the same way as I wanted.” – Project Evaluation Question No. 15: In 2-5 sentences, please describe your experience and feelings of participating in the storytelling activity.
Detailed findings: communications
As I launched my research, I realised that I would be inadvertently gathering data that could be interesting to consider as part of my process and process evaluation. This is merely the type of data that I would usually consider as part of my usual engagement with students anyway, and the type of data that students are aware they supply when engaging in day-to-day activities. For example, when writing to students via email and Teams, I could see students engaging with my communications in different ways, e.g. through responses and likes.
Screenshot from Teams with one of my communications and students engaging with this, redacted.
I began to monitor these responses and then started to adapt my communications accordingly. For example, communications that were more informal and communications that expressed an urgency to complete tasks received better engagement from students. I also then began to keep a detailed log of all my students communications, allowing me to refer back to previous communications and compare what worked better.
The gathering of this additional information sat outside of the my formal project methodology, informed the way I conducted the research, led to some additional findings, and has enabled me to reflect on the way I will engage with student partners in the future.
Suggestions for further activity development
Provide students with additional story examples to which to respond, providing them with the opportunity to create a wider range of different stories and allowing for further freedom to express themselves and their identities; this may also resolve a strong power imbalance between academic and student. It may be worth considering having students co-design the initial story examples.
Further encourage students to make use of different types of media, creating additional diversity within the exercise, and elminating word limits.
Remove anonymity of the activity.
Create opportunities for students to contribute to the research synchronously, also creating a further sense of urgency and engagement among students.
Opportunities for further research
The project presents several avenues of further research.
Considering power dynamics between student partners and organiser that are present in the activity design, I.e. myself as the academic.
Analyse a different of student contributions over time, I.e. across different intakes of student partners, and compare how stories develop, how a community of students develops over time.
Further research the collective nature of the activity and outputs.
Next steps
Firstly, I am planning to present findings back to student partners involved in the project, on the basis of the co-design and partnership.
I am also planning to developed a revised activity as a standard activity for all student partners enrolling in the UAL Online student partner programme moving forward. Due to the timescales of the project and the alignment of the activity to the academic calendar and annual student intake, I am planning to take this work forward in the next term.
In addition, I am planning to highlight the project and project results to our online learning design community and collaborate with the learning design team to find opportunities to embed a revised activity within future online courses, potentially during student induction.
There will also be opportunities for me to embed some of my findings within my ongoing engagement with students. For example, I am planning to apply some of the communications techniques that were successful in the project as part of my day-to-day activities and projects with students and student partners.
Longterm, I am also keen to further research collective storytelling approaches, pedagogies and research techniques that may help me design and deliver additional research projects and write about these.
Bibliography
Cook, T. (2009). The purpose of mess in action research: Building rigour though a messy turn. Educational Action Research, 17(2), pp.277–291. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/09650790902914241.
Miles, M.B. and Huberman, A.M. (1994). Qualitative Data Analysis: An Expanded Sourcebook. 2nd ed. [online] Thousand Oaks: SAGE. Available at: https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=U4lU_-wJ5QEC&lpg [Accessed 20 Dec. 2023].
My bibliographical references span from some of the wider research I undertook across teaching and learning, to specific areas of interesting, including support and inclusion, as well as different approaches to action research. I have outlined some of these key publications and my research processes below.
Ahmed, S. (2017). Living a Feminist Life. Duke University Press.
Alvesson, M. (2012). Interpreting Interviews. [online] SAGE, pp.9–42. Available at: https://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781446268353 [Accessed 20 Oct. 2023].
Atwood, M. (2022). Burning Questions. United Kingdom: Chatto & Windus.
Bache, C.M. (2008). The Living Classroom: Teaching and Collective Consciousness. Albany, USA: SUNY Press.
Bamberg, M. (2012). Narrative Practice and Identity Navigation. In: J.A. Holstein and J.F. Gubrium, eds., Varieties of Narrative Analysis. [online] Thousand Oaks, California: SAGE Publications, Inc., pp.99–124. doi:https://doi.org/10.4135/9781506335117.
BBC Radio 4 (2023). BBC Radio 4 – The Listening Project. [online] The listening project: It’s surprising what you hear when you listen. Available at: https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b01cqx3b [Accessed 14 Dec. 2023].
Bradbury, H. (2015). The SAGE Handbook of Action Research. London: SAGE Publications Ltd. doi:https://doi.org/10.4135/9781473921290.
Braud, W. and Anderson, R. (1998). Transpersonal Research Methods for the Social Sciences : Honoring Human Experience. Thousand Oaks, California: Sage.
Condorelli, C. and De Baere, B. (2009). Support for Culture. In: Support Structures. Berlin: Sternberg Press, pp.187–201.
Cook, T. (2009). The purpose of mess in action research: Building rigour though a messy turn. Educational Action Research, 17(2), pp.277–291. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/09650790902914241.
Copeland, S. and de Moor, A. (2018). Community Digital Storytelling for Collective Intelligence: towards a Storytelling Cycle of Trust. AI & SOCIETY, [online] 33(1), pp.101–111. doi:https://doi.org/10.1007/s0014601707441.
Gray, C. and Malins, J. (2004). Interpreting the map: methods of evaluation and analysis. In: J. Malins, ed., Visualizing research: a guide to the research process in art and design. [online] Aldershot: Ashgate. Available at: https://arts.idm.oclc.org/login?url=http://www.vlebooks.com/vleweb/product/openreader?id=UALONDON&isbn=9780754680017&uid=^u Chapter 5.
Hehir, E., Zeller, M., Luckhurst, J. and Chandler, T. (2021). Developing student connectedness under remote learning using digital resources: A systematic review. Education and Information Technologies, [online] 26(5), pp.6531–6548. doi:https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639021105771.
Holstein, J. and Gubrium, J. (2012). Varieties of Narrative Analysis. Thousand Oaks, California: SAGE Publications, Inc. doi:https://doi.org/10.4135/9781506335117.
Kahu, E.R., Picton, C. and Nelson, K. (2019). Pathways to engagement: a longitudinal study of the first-year student experience in the educational interface. Higher Education, [online] 79. doi:https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-019-00429-w.
Kara, H. (2015a). Chapter 6: Analysing data. In: Creative Research Methods in the Social Sciences: A practical guide. Policy Press.
Kara, H. (2015b). Creative research methods in the social sciences: a practical guide. [online] Bristol: Policy Press. Available at: https://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/ual/detail.action?docID=6193498.
Kara, H. (2022). Embodied Data Analysis. YouTube. Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k79AWH59JpQ [Accessed 4 Dec. 2023].
Macfarlane, B. (2003). Teaching with Integrity : The Ethics of Higher Education Practice. [online] London: Taylor & Francis Group. Available at: http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/ual/detail.action?docID=182731.
Maisha Islam: Rethinking academic research culture and decolonial approaches to student-staff partnerships, (2023). [Podcast] Spotify: Pedagogies for Social Justice, Student Partnership. 23 Sep. Available at: https://open.spotify.com/show/1BhrbuKdFOIBmlzGYAZyui?si=0402efe096f14a1e [Accessed 16 Nov. 2023].
McNiff, J. and Whitehead, J. (2002). Action research: Principles and Practice. 2nd ed. London: Routledge.
McNiff, J. and Whitehead, J. (2010). You and Your Action Research Project. 3rd ed. London: Routledge.
Miles, M.B. and Huberman, A.M. (1994). Qualitative Data Analysis: An Expanded Sourcebook. 2nd ed. [online] Thousand Oaks: SAGE. Available at: https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=U4lU_-wJ5QEC&lpg [Accessed 20 Dec. 2023].
Selasi, T. (2014). Don’t ask where i’m from, ask where i’m a local. [online] Ted.com. Available at: https://www.ted.com/talks/taiye_selasi_don_t_ask_where_i_m_from_ask_where_i_m_a_local?language=en [Accessed 17 Nov. 2023].
Sheffield Hallam University (2003). Listening Rooms at Sheffield Hallam University. [online] Listening Rooms. Available at: https://blogs.shu.ac.uk/listeningrooms/ [Accessed 14 Dec. 2023].
Wells, D. (2010). The 7-Point Story Structure. [YouTube] Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mrP9604BEOM [Accessed 15 Jan. 2024].
Reference mapping
As I explored relevant readings and research, I started to develop a map of interesting references that highlighted how they related to each other. I found this an incredibly useful way of visually capturing complex ideas and information, while identifying possible gaps in my own research. My map highlights wider areas of interest, from social justice to ethics and different learning theories. It also captures interesting citations and authors I thought were noteworthy. I frequently referred back to this map and hope to continue building on this in the future.
Screenshot from my action research map on MiroExcerpt from my research map on MiroExcerpt from my research map on Miro
