Mushrooms, made from recycled bottles by Veronica Richterova. Photo c. Michal Cilar 2005 https://www.veronikarichterova.com/en/my-works/pet-art-sculptures/#
At an in-person cohort session we were asked: ‘Sustainability: How do we reclaim the buzzword, and what can we do with it?’
This led to a wide ranging discussion about what sustainability means in the context of a university – especially one that claims it has “placed the need to live and teach more sustainably at the centre of our mission”. This prompted some criticism of making grandiose statements on UAL’s website, while failing to put basic measures like effective recycling and rubbish bins in its buildings, and running heating systems that can, at LCC at any rate, make rooms either boiling hot or freezing cold with no ability to turn radiators up or down. This can come across as “do what I say, not as I do” and demotivate students and staff alike to take the mission statement seriously. For example one colleague, a theatre technician, told us how the university decided a room used to store props on drama courses was to be put to another use. This meant that there was nowhere to store the props, so that they had to be bought for each production, then disposed of. The props room has remained empty, several years after the decision was made. What is sustainable about that, he wondered.
Cynicism aside, the discussion went in two directions: material and pedagogical.
The plastic bottles bit
Colleagues who teach at LCF talked about how they address criticisms of an industry for its wasteful and environmentally destructive practices.
There are different approaches, such as promoting use of environmentally friendly materials, or making students aware of organisations like the Ellen McArthur Foundation which promotes a circular economy “where waste is eliminated, resources are circulated, and nature is regenerated”. Another approach is to encourage students to “produce less but do it better”.
Fashion staff also spoke about how students may feel they can’t “be sustainable” in their own practice, it’s “too conceptual”. Another colleague, who teaches architecture, also a practice accused of waste and environmental destruction, suggested that instead of talking about sustainability, “some future concept that possibly involves new technology,” changing the noun to a verb, eg, asking ourselves: “What we are sustaining?”. As a journalist, this resonated with me – language and how we use it matters.
Or is it about pedagogy?
The other direction the discussion took was around pedagogical issues, especially the important question of to what extent we should or can help students to pursue sustainable careers/practice after they leave. UAL offers students a lot of support in this regard with offerings such as collaborative industry projects, DPS units, mentoring schemes and the Student Careers section of the UAL website, which all help prepare students for life after graduation.
However, in my experience of teaching practical skills in seminars and workshops in the Journalism & Publishing department at LCC, one important issue with a huge impact on future careers is somewhat swept under the carpet. Accurate written English and the ability to write in various journalistic styles and formats (eg news stories, reviews) are key for students wanting to get jobs in a highly competitive UK media jobs market (if they plan to work here) which is awash with journalism graduates. In many cases our students are graduating without the level of skills required by the industry. The reasons for this, from my understanding in discussions with colleagues in, eg revalidation meetings include: “We are not running a training course.” Or: “It’s not our job to teach them grammar and spelling”. Or: “The university doesn’t think these matter for the creative industries.”
If sustainability means supporting students in their future journalism careers, this needs addressing. As an AL I discuss this with colleagues a lot and it is possible to for me to build teaching these skills into Unit Guides and timetables, but on learning outcomes and assessment criteria set at university level, it’s hard to see how to make an impact.
Sustaining teachers
One colleague spoke about “academic maximalism” – teachers being asked to do more and more. Another talked about wanting to work more on their own artistic practice to “recharge batteries and feel like you are a better teacher”. An example of “academic maximalism” is the creeping hybridisation of online and in person teaching. This may be positive for online lectures for example, which can be given, recorded and listened to at home, but practical workshop sessions involving haptic experiences, interactive group activities or client-based projects, are more challenging and time consuming to organise and teach online. Not knowing if students are really “in the room” during online sessions is worrying – “like teaching through a keyhole without knowing what’s going on on the other side of the door,” as one colleague described it.
These points raise questions about sustaining an effective and fulfilled teaching staff for the university if workloads become overwhelming, as the ongoing strike action has illustrated. Who, indeed, is sustaining who?