- Working Title of Project?
Staff Development Training on Facilitating Co-Created Brave Spaces in the JTM Programme
This action research project builds on findings from the P4: Design for human equity, social, and racial justice in JTM – Case Study. (see previous blog post: Context and Rationale: Data Analysis for ARP) where the thematic analysis of student interviews revealed that social and racial justice themes are only marginally present in coursework and rarely sustained or assessed. Students expressed a strong desire for authentic, participatory spaces where these issues can be explored safely.
This ARP will focus on developing a staff training aimed at building the capacity and skills needed to co-create “brave spaces” for sensitive, equity-focused dialogue, using methods such as story circles, identity mapping, and lived-experience provocations.
Data will be collected after the staff development workshop through a self-administered post-session questionnaire, forming the evaluation phase of the Action Research cycle. The questionnaire will combine quantitative Likert-scale items (measuring confidence, relevance, and usefulness) with qualitative open-ended questions (inviting reflection on learning, impact, and future needs).
Post-workshop questionnaires are widely recognised in educational research as effective tools for capturing immediate, reflective feedback (Gibbs & Coffey, 2004; Killion, 2015). They help identify shifts in awareness, confidence, and intention to apply new practices—key indicators of early impact in Action Research. Effective questionnaire design depends on clarity and relevance (Peterson, 2000), while piloting improves reliability and language accuracy (Smyth, 2016; Wolf, 2016). As noted in SAGE’s Encyclopaedia of Survey Research Methods, self-administered formats enhance anonymity and reduce response bias, making them particularly suitable for evaluating professional learning on sensitive themes such as equity and justice.
Findings from the questionnaires will inform refinements to the workshop design and delivery, with the aim of developing it into a scalable, college-wide staff development opportunity at CSM.
2. What sources will you read or reference?
- The UAL Climate, Social and Racial Justice Principles, especially Principle 4: Design for human equity, social and racial justice.
- bell hooks’ Teaching to Transgress and Paulo Freire’s Pedagogy of the Oppressed for critical pedagogy and dialogic learning.
- The Design Justice Network Principles, https://designjustice.org/read-the-principles
- Arao, B. & Clemens, K. (2013). From Safe Spaces to Brave Spaces: A New Way to Frame Dialogue Around Diversity and Social Justice. In L. Landreman (Ed.), The Art of Effective Facilitation: Reflections From Social Justice Educators (pp. 135–150). Stylus Publishing.
- Ogahara, H. and Gravagno, M. (2025) P4: Design for human equity, social, and racial justice in JTM – Case Study. Unpublished internal report. London: University of the Arts London (UAL).
- For evaluation methods:
- BERA (2024) Ethical guidelines for educational research (5th edn). London: BERA.
- Brookfield, S.D. (1995) Becoming a critically reflective teacher. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
- Peterson, R.A. (2000) Constructing effective questionnaires. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
- Smyth, J.D. (2016) Self-administered surveys and questionnaires. In: The SAGE encyclopedia of social science research methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
- University of the Arts London (n.d.) Evaluating staff development: Teaching, Learning and Employability Exchange guidance. London: UAL.
3. What Action(s) are you planning to take, and are they realistic in the time you have (Sep-Dec)?
September – October
- Refine and finalise project idea.
- Confirm alignment with college priorities through discussion with line manager.
- Conduct literature review and gather supporting research.
- Schedule staff development session with the JTM programme.
October – November
- Design and develop staff training workshop content.
- Engage in peer-to-peer collaboration and consultation to strengthen the approach.
December
- Deliver the staff development training session as part of the ARP.
- Collect and analyse participant feedback to inform next steps.
4. Who will be involved and in what way?
- JTM Academic Staff: participants in the staff development workshop, experimenting with methods to co-create brave spaces with students.
- Programme Lead, Anne Marr – Supports the development of the training and liaises with course leaders and staff.
- Myself (Educational Developer) – Lead workshop facilitator and researcher, responsible for design and delivery.
- Senior Educational Developers (CSM) – Provides guidance and support in shaping the staff training.
- Climate Advocate, Hannah Ogahara – Contributes to the design and co-facilitation of the training.
5. What are the health and safety concerns, and how will you prepare for them?
- Voluntary participation: Engagement in reflective outputs (e.g., anonymous notes on post-its or digital platforms) will be entirely optional, respecting participants’ right to decline involvement without penalty (BERA, 2024).
- Confidentiality and anonymity: No contributions will be attributed to individuals by name. All data will be anonymised before being used in reports or analysis.
- Secure storage: Materials will be stored on UAL’s secure, password-protected systems, with access limited to the researcher. Hard-copy notes (if any) will be stored securely and destroyed after transcription.
- Informed consent: Clear, prior consent will be obtained for the use of anonymised excerpts in action research documentation. Participants will be informed of the purpose of the research, how their data will be used, and their right to withdraw at any stage (BERA, 2024).
- Minimising risk: Care will be taken to ensure that no data, even in anonymised form, can be traced back to individual participants or cause reputational or emotional harm.
- Compliance – All measures follow BERA’s 2024 Ethical Guidelines, the Data Protection Act 2018, and GDPR.
6. How will you take ethics into account in your project for participants and/ or yourself?
- The workshop will be framed as the start of a longer developmental process, not a one-off intervention. Staff will be supported to take early steps without expectation of mastery (BERA, Responsibilities to Participants).
- “Brave spaces” invite honesty but must protect participants from harm. Co-created agreements will ensure collective responsibility for care, with clear pathways to wellbeing support if needed (BERA, Responsibilities for Wellbeing).
- Case studies, provocations, and examples will draw on diverse voices to reflect the student body’s global majority, ensuring relevance and equity (BERA, Responsibilities to Participants).
- Attention will be given to the potential for the project to be emotionally demanding for the researcher or participants. This includes:
- Setting a sustainable working pace, with breaks to reduce exposure to sensitive or potentially upsetting topics.
- Role and boundary management, clarifying researcher responsibilities and limitations, and ensuring communication about when and where support is available.
- Debriefing and peer support, including reflective sessions to process experiences, share coping strategies, and identify early signs of stress or vicarious trauma.
- Access to specialist support, including counselling services, staff wellbeing resources, and the Emotionally Demanding Research Network to reinforce strategies for self-care, stress management, and emotional resilience (University of Sheffield, 2024).
- Findings will be shared honestly, with appropriate acknowledgement of Programme Director support (JTM Programme), while maintaining participants’ confidentiality (BERA, Responsibilities to Sponsors).
REFERENCES
British Educational Research Association (BERA) (2024) Ethical guidelines for educational research (5th edn). London: BERA. Available at: https://www.bera.ac.uk/publication/ethical-guidelines-for-educational-research-fifth-edition-2024 (Accessed: 30 September 2025).
Brookfield, S.D. (1995) Becoming a critically reflective teacher. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Lenette, C. (2022) Participatory Action Research: Ethics and Decolonization. New York: Oxford University Press.
McNiff, J. (2002) Action Research for Professional Development: Concise Advice for New Action Researchers (3rd edn). Dorset: Jean McNiff. Available at: https://kaye.ac.il/wp-content/uploads/2018/08/McNiff_Action_research11.pdf
Ogahara, H. and Gravagno, M. (2025) P4: Design for human equity, social, and racial justice in JTM – Case Study. Unpublished internal report. London: University of the Arts London (UAL).
Peterson, R.A. (2000) Constructing effective questionnaires. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Smyth, J.D. (2016) ‘Self-administered surveys and questionnaires’, in The SAGE encyclopedia of social science research methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
University of the Arts London (n.d.) Evaluating staff development: Teaching, Learning and Employability Exchange guidance. London: UAL.