Week 3: Designing for socially just learning experiences.

Dated: 1 May 2024

We can confidently say week 3 was a success, in large part though due to the great foundation laid the week before. It seemed the 2nd week guest presenters really painted a fuller picture of what Student Staff Partnership is in essence for the participants and, more importantly, the many different expressions it could take, depending on the context and goals of the parties involved in it. 

This, we were able to infer from the feedback received during the check-ins at the beginning of the session, where many participants expressed their gratitude for the case studies provided the week before as it really filled in a lot of the blanks which they had concerning SSP and created a bridge between the theory and practice somewhat. There of course remained some gaps in understanding/ application and questions which needed answering, but the foundation was at least laid and participants felt confident enough to start building upon it. 

Asanda Ngoasheng then took the participants through what the differences were between Equity and Equality and, what these differences meant in the pursuit of justice. This, again was very well received by the participants who felt that it provided a lot of insight on what it meant to truly create significant change when empowering students and in general the disempowered. This, in that participants and in particular many of the staff in the SSP’s were now able to identify why various of their attempts at creating equality were unsuccessful, & this because the issue of equity was not considered and, neither were the enablers which are essential for its successful attainment. 

Asanda’s session laid the groundwork for the reflection that was to follow, which asked of us all to reflect on our personal experiences of the collaboration and co-creation process in the course/ individual partner projects thus far, in relation to power and equity. This was a very important question to ask at this point, because from the feedback we were able to uncover that many of the SSP’s had been under strain because they were finding it hard to navigate the new dynamics of their SSP relationships. Particularly, concerning the power differentials that were at play, yet also being aware of the need to consciously cede or relinquish power, as well as, to take it up by those who were in a position where they lacked it. This exercise therefore created a safe space for all to verbalize some of the issues which they were otherwise unable to & this in itself was a very important part of the co-creation process. 

Thereafter, Esai Reddy introduced and ran through the Design Thinking process.  She opened with a definition of what design thinking was, and more importantly why it is a viable framework to employ in SSP’s and the co-creation process. In her outline of the Design Thinking process, she identified the ideals which made it such a useful tool to use, not only in terms of the benefits the SSP members may derive from it, but moreover those regarding the goals and, ends which the SSP aim to serve. This of course resonated well with the participants because it represented a very human-centered & inclusive approach, including all stakeholders and ensuring that all voices are heard, including those that may be marginalized but, will be affected by the decision-making.  

Furthermore, in unpacking the Co-Design process and, the aspect of designing together with the user instead of for them, another important element in the Design Thinking process was highlighted, the designer. 

Esai explained how the designer’s positionality affected and influenced design decisions & that because it is impossible for individuals to be void of bias & prejudice, it is wiser to address the problem by transforming the Design Thinking process itself. This, she said can be achieved by consciously confronting the unjust mindsets and tools employed in the process, in order to ensure that the underlying sources of inequity are remediated. 

To this end, Esai unpacked several Beliefs & Design Principles set out in the Equity X Design Framework, which are believed to facilitate and allow for transparent and open engagement. 

In closing, several identity-based socially ascribed expressions of power were also identified in order to demonstrate some of the ways in which power or the lack thereof is distributed, and furthermore, to showcase the myriad of ways in which those very factors not only limit those without it, but benefit those who find themselves on the correct end of the hierarchy. 

written by: Zwelibanzi Ngculu