Frame extracted by Hanger in Los Angeles (Nonny de la Peña)
Record of Observation or Review of Teaching Practice
Session/artefact to be observed/reviewed: Slides for the two-hour session on “Immersive Journalism” Unit Critical Perspectives/MA AudioVideo journalism
Size of student group: Six students
Observer: Karen Matthewman
Observee: Claudia Nuzzo
PART 1 (CLAUDIA)
Observee to complete in brief and send to observer prior to the observation or review:
What is the context of this session/artefact within the curriculum?
The MA Journalism programme has three different pathways: Arts and Lifestyle, Social Justice, and Audio Video Journalism. The Audio Video pathway aims to provide students with both practical and theoretical knowledge, equipping them to find work in the journalism industry with a focus on audiovisual production.
How long have you been working with this group and in what capacity?
I am a lecturer. I have taught this group of students for one year.
What are the intended or expected learning outcomes?
By the end of the session the students should be able to:
– Define immersive journalism and its historical development.
– Identify key technologies used in immersive storytelling.
– Distinguish between VR, AR, 360-degree video, and MR.
– Critically assess the benefits and challenges of immersive
journalism.
– Explore emerging technologies and future trends.
What are the anticipated outputs (anything students will make/do)?
Students need to write an essay for this unit to critically reflect on one or more of the topics explored during the course.
Are there potential difficulties or specific areas of concern?
The students are a very engaged mature group. The main concern is that it is challenging to fully understand these technologies without hands-on experience that is not covered in other Units. I ensured that students had access to a headset and a special screen during the session to view some of the videos I included in my prestation. However, the available time was very limited. Also, the Audio Video pathway is only three years old, and the Unit Critical Perspective was introduced only this year to incorporate more theory for audiovisual students and some improvements in the coming years might be required.
How will students be informed of the observation/review?
This will be a retrospective review based on the slides produced for this session.
I will inform the students in class and the course leader of this review.
What would you particularly like feedback on?
I would like feedback on the clarity of the content and structure of the session, but any other feedback is very much appreciated.
How will feedback be exchanged?
Via video call and e-mail
PART 2 (KAREN)
Observer to note down observations, suggestions and questions:
Claudia and I met online to discuss this interesting and innovative session which had both a presentation and a practical /experiential focus.
You started by explaining the context of the session to me. You stated that with your very specific area of expertise you were asked to do this session, and it needed all the materials developing for the first time this year in a very cutting-edge area of study/ practice.
This was the first time you had designed and delivered it so you knew it was not perfect, but had to produce something under significant time pressure and cover the learning outcomes. You were also very clear that students would not have a proper experience without trying the headsets to experience the contents of the lecture, so made sure the session also had a practical element. This proved logistically difficult with all the building constraints.
I found the slides to be visually appealing and informative. I wondered with the length of the session whether the presentation could be broken up with more interactive moments- e.g. using short quizzes through something like Mentimeter. I also suggested that some of the content might be presented in a blended/ flipped way prior to the session so that the session time with you and the cohort could be more interactive and less presentation-focused.
We also discussed the images you used, and you said that you wanted to find more appropriate images for the slides for the next time you deliver it, as time pressures meant you had to use stock resources, and you would prefer to tailor the visuals reflecting your own expertise in photography. I found the visuals good and clear, but I understand with your industry knowledge you might want to enhance them. Please also check for accessibility with all your slides as you work on them.
You said the timing was difficult. For the next session you would like to extend the Headset practice session a little. Despite it being a fairly long two sessions, the practical session felt rushed. This was exacerbated by a long trek through the building from the upper heights of the tower in LCC down to the studio for the last part. We talked about timetabling and how it really can negatively impact the student experience. We discussed whether, timetable permitting, it would be possible to have a space much nearer the studio for the presentation/ discussion section.
I wonder too if some of the instructions for the VR could be shown in an instruction video prior to the session so it is just a quick refresh needed when they go into the room in order to save a bit of time/ add expertise too. This would also help students with ISAs and other learning needs.
For a first time teaching this session, it seems like you really captured the students’ imagination and are going to be leading in a very new field of study. I liked your reflections on possible changes. I also liked your critical view of some of the ethical issues surrounding this kind of journalism. I would love to hear how the next iteration goes when you teach it again.
PART 3 (CLAUDIA)
Observee to reflect on the observer’s comments and describe how they will act on the feedback exchanged:
To enhance my session on immersive journalism based on Karen’s feedback, I plan to incorporate more interactive elements, such as short quizzes using Mentimeter. I have never used it before, but I think it would be a very useful tool to break up the presentation and improve student engagement. I could use Mentimeter to check students’ understanding of the different technologies used in visual journalism or to gather their opinions on ethical issues.
I will also provide some content in advance so that the live session can be more discussion-based and interactive.
In terms of visuals, I aim to replace stock images with photographs that I produce myself. I have already started creating some of them.
Regarding accessibility, I already ensure my slides are accessible. However, I will make sure the new visual content is also accessible by providing a description for each image.
To address timing challenges, I will speak to my manager about extending the VR headset practice session slightly and explore the possibility of securing a space closer to the studio to minimise disruptions.
The idea of creating a short instructional video for the VR setup to streamline the process and support students with different learning needs is a great one. However, it would be challenging to implement, as it would depend on the headsets available. Each brand may function slightly differently. In the future, if we standardise the equipment by purchasing a single brand, this could become a viable option.
I believe that incorporating Karen’s suggestions will help create a more dynamic and inclusive learning experience, and I look forward to seeing how these improvements enhance student engagement and understanding.