Inclusivity Artefact: Conversation Dice

Inclusivity Artefact: Conversation Dice 

‘Well I don’t think there is much hope for it, to tell you the truth, as long as people are using that peculiar language’  — James Baldwin (I Am Not Your Negro, 2017) 

Introduction: Racial Bias in Language

Primarily teaching history and theory in art and design I’m very interested in the power of language in both written and conversational forms. In her writing and lectures Dr. Robin DiAngelo (2018) splits racism and racial bias into two categories that work to enforce each other. Firstly there are the more apparent individual acts of prejudice, and secondly how these coalesce into group prejudice which create and become enforced by institutional power over time — something more covert because its bigger than individuals and specific culprits. 

For my artefact project I would like to introduce a third category; language as an underlying power system that underlines these more apparent systems of bias. By this I’m not referring to overtly racist language, but everyday conversation and expression that may seem innocent on the surface but is actually a construct of racially biased power systems. Beckford and Walliss (2006) suggest that we shape language, and language collectively shapes us in such a subtle way that we may not be aware of it. This can be seen most evidently in the manipulation of the language in the ‘Slave Bible’ which I came across when reading about Merissa Hamilton’s brilliant project on the text (Which you can find here: https://merissahamilton.myblog.arts.ac.uk/2020/02/28/inclusive-teaching-and-learning-in-he-faith/?crid=13048#comment-23).

Therefore, my teaching artefact will be a type of multi sided dice called a ‘Conversation Dice’, which on one face will have a statement, a commonplace sentence, and on the opposing face will state what that sentence actually means — the racially biased flip side of everyday language. Taking place as a discussion workshop or seminar this will raise awareness of how when we say one thing, this actually means something else that is part of a collective and controlling system of meaning rather than individual expression, and that might be why we are not aware of its true meaning. For example, one side of the multi sided dice could be inscribed with something seemingly objective such as ‘I can’t be racist, my best friend is a person of colour.’ (DiAngelo, 2017) And then the opposing side will reveal how this is  part of a shared system of linguistics that enable people to ignore race issues.  

Context: Connecting Space and Conversation

Although I teach across a variety of courses, including Interior Design and Spatial Design (both at BA and MA level) the element that links them all together in space. I have found during my time teaching that when students think they should be studying architecture, or a related discipline, they often become uncomfortable when faced with a situation that doesn’t immediately appear as spatial. In response to this, even though my artefact is to stimulate conversation, empathy and understanding, it will still have spatial connotations. The students will start the artefact workshop by first constructing their own multi sided dice from a polyhedron net that they will cut and stick together. All students will start by making their own space, even though at a small scale—a space that is the same for everyone. 

Continuing this theme of connecting space to conversation it’s also important, as it is in all creative disciplines, to make a connection between the head (the space of thought) and the hand (the realm of action), so as to maintain a connection to physical production. As Ruskin, fearing their separation in the wake of industrialisation, speculated, these two roles should always be mixed, writing that ‘It is only by labour that thought can be made healthy, and only by thought that labour can be made happy.’ (The Stones of Venice, 1853) The artefact would keep developing this link by firstly being made by the students, but also throughout the workshop because they would pass the dice between themselves, between different hands, between head and hand. This act of throwing the dice could make people conscious of the space between people and how it can be bridged—showing through physical action and space what the participants are attempting psychologically. 

While the Conversation Dice would enable individual people to be heard and feel ‘valued’ (Friere, 1970) in an often alienating environment, it would also have benefits as a collective activity that incorporates elements of play. Gadamer (Vilhaurer, 2010) delineates that when play is a group activity it produces something which occurs between players (just like the direction of the thrown Conversation Dice) rather than by individuals—it only has representation through a collective of players. While the understanding might be initially individual, the group play element blurs the line between different players and opinions in positive way. Gadamer (Vilhaurer, 2010) concludes that the ‘primacy of play over the consciousness of the player’ could help to eliminate personal and even institutional bias, through the way that play creates a freedom of thought. It would help protect against Sabri’s (2015) observation that if a students ideas are at odds with the tutor’s aesthetic they often leave their own ideas and follow the guidance of the tutor.  

Theory: Inclusive Discussion and Feeling at Home  

In ‘Retention and Attainment in the Disciplines: Art and Design’ Finnigan and Richards (2016) highlight the following regarding BAME students leaving art and design courses without a qualification:   

‘Art and Design is one of the disciplines with the highest percentages of students leaving with no award (6%) with a disproportionate difference between White students (6%) and Black student groups (Black British Caribbean 9%, Black or Black British African 13%, other Black backgrounds 10%).’  (Richards, A. and Finnigan, T. 2016, p. 5)

Later in the text, and in response to this problem, they call for a questioning of the presumption that art and design subjects address identity in a beneficial way. Instead it is suggested that within the academy there are not always spaces for all students to ‘explore their own identity’ (Richards, A. and Finnigan, T. 2016, p. 8). As highlighted above the Conversation Dice workshop will create a literal space for students to explore their lived experiences mediated through language with their peers and will aid students from diverse backgrounds to ‘feel at home’ (Turner, 2020) and persist on courses and succeed at high levels (Richards, A. and Finnigan, T. 2016, p. 8).        

This aspect of the Conversation Dice would focus it as an example of critical pedagogy (Richards, A. and Finnigan, T. 2016, p. 8) that sees education as transformational and linked to social justice. The idea of being ‘valued’ and at ‘home’ in this way is a key idea in Pedagogy of The Oppressed (1970) in which Friere shows how education can support ‘students to recognise that they are valuable contributors to society’ (Friere, 1970), again hopefully leading students to continue on art and design courses in an environment they are meaningfully part of.

The Artefact: Development and Passing the Ball

The development of the artefact began after watching a lecture by Dr. Robin DiAngelo (2017) on deconstructing white privilege. One of the key images in the presentation is that of a dock or pier extending over a body of water. The top visible side, she explains, represents all the seemingly ‘superficial things that we say’ such as ‘racism is a thing of the past’ and ‘my parents weren’t racist’, all the things we say to rationalise that we are not racist. Conversely, the dark underside of the dock or pier represents what those statements actually mean. Therefore I wanted my artefact to tackle this issue and make both sides of language visible, however, I knew it wasn’t a simple task of talking about them (as DiAngelo states this is extremely difficult) but has to be done through ‘active’ rather than ‘passive’ space. But I knew it was important to approach because I remembered a quote from the end of our race session in the inclusivity in learning series where an interviewee stated: ‘If people of colour could comment on the behaviour of white people, it would be revolutionary.’ (DiAngelo, 2017) 

The Room of Silence (2016) was also formative in the Conversation Dice Artefact’s development and touches on a similar problem. During my teaching experience, and while studying, I’ve experienced a silent room during crits and presentations when both students and staff simple don’t know what to say or how to react to certain types of work, that might include themes of race and sexuality. It’s important to highlight here, that this inaction is just the same as action which was discussed in the DiAngelo (2017) presentation. However, it has often struck me that these ‘difficult’ conversations could potentially be the most important, so once again I wondered, what can activate these silences?     

A possible solution to these problems came from someone mentioning the ‘Silent Ball’ or ‘Speaking Ball’ game in one of the study sessions and I thought that this could be applied to a discussion scenario or workshop to uncover the hidden meaning of language. Speak Ball is where a ball is passed around a group of people, and the only individual with permission to speak is the person holding the ball. Usually only the group leaders have the right to speak with or without the ball, but the Conversation Dice workshop there won’t be any leader after the initial introduction. 

As well as activating silence through play and allowing people a space to talk about racial bias in language, Speak Ball has also been proven to help psychological problems (Wilde, 1996). As a result, in tandem with tackling current problems the method employed in the workshop could also help to treat past traumas and anxieties. 

The Artefact in Practice

The Conversation Dice Workshop is a combination of a making exercise (constructing the dice), a physical activity of passing and rolling the dice (the dice will be rolled once someone has it and then they can examine and discuss the opposite side—as described above), and finally a discussion. The aim of the workshop is to explore the hidden substrata and meanings of commonly used language and phrases to ‘confront and reshape the conflicts’ root causes’ (Redekop 2002; Fisher et al. 2007) and go ‘beyond the popular belief that getting rid of racism means simply getting rid of ignorance, or encouraging everyone to ‘get along’  through in-depth discussion. 

As the workshop is focused on a spatialised object that is passed around, it also utilises the positive attributes of Object Based Learning (OBL); a student-centred learning approach that uses objects to facilitate deep learning, a multi-sensory ‘thinking tool’ ideal for Spatial Design Students that promotes engagement and conversation around difficult topics. The central proposition of OBL is that working with objects mediates and strengthens learning (Romanek & Lynch, 2008). While teachers will participate in this workshop, the students will be left to construct meaning for themselves through their interactions with each other centred on the object (Hannan et al., 2013) to limit confrontation. This aligns with Hahn Tapper’s stipulation that a teacher needs to create experiences with, and not for, students, integrating their experiences and voices into the educational experience itself (Aaron, 2013). 

Object Based Learning is also useful to engage students who don’t respond well to written materials and can be used to reinforce material covered in other media (Middleton, 2017). For example in the disability session of this module we watched a video about the artist Christine Sun Kim, where she said: ‘I had ideas I wanted to express but I couldn’t, I felt like my voice was being suffocated.’ (Kim, 2016) In a similar fashion if students are uncomfortable speaking in the workshop they are free to decorate their dice with images or patterns as a method of communication that suits their needs. 

Evaluation: Staff Feedback  

Due to the Covid situation and my own teaching schedule I wasn’t able to trial the workshop with students, but I did receive some really beneficial feedback from my colleagues. I have included some extracts below: 

‘By saying the artefact should be “student focused” doesn’t mean just your students, but students as a whole.’ 

I think this is a really interesting comment and a successful trial of the artefact would require a big cross section of different students. I have tailored the workshop to Spatial Design students but I wonder how it would work with different courses. 

‘From these tests you might find there is a certain type of language that is more dominant.You should explore how this artefact will change dependent on the course and different types of language used ’ 

As well as being a tool to help students it could also act as an interesting piece of research into the language students use more generally and how best to communicate with them in other lessons. 

‘How would teaching online change this artefact? How would its form change? Could you post it to people, so they could write their own language on it, and use it to communicate with different people? ’ 

Despite not having the opportunity I had planned to mail out the Conversation Dice to students and pair them with someone to enter into mail correspondence. I think this could work well because it might act as a buffer that means students are less self-conscious about being face-to-face.

‘Recycling? Maybe the person could use it once, and then use it again as something else? Think of it in the context of heirlooms, or game such as spinning tops.’ 

This is very important consideration in terms of sustainability, but also, if the object is mutable—can become something else—it will reduce the stigma attached to that object if it has been the focus of a difficult conversation. And maybe the student could keep the object and use it in different situations throughout their life. 

Conclusion 

I have developed an object based learning experience to fertilise a discussion workshop looking at the racial bias of everyday language. The workshop will allow students to interrogate how physical and pervasive prejudice can be located in the often overlooked immateriality of language. Through this process they will be able to see life from other peoples’ perspectives and promote group cohesion with a sense of ‘home’ within the academy for everyone. In line with Freirean thought the workshop redefines the disciplinary enclosure of the academy, in order to confront and reshape the root causes of various types of conflict. It’s an educational model that recognises the disparities in societal opportunities, resources, and long-term outcomes among marginalised groups (Aaron, 2013). 

In its current state my artefact looks at the racial bias of language, but after reading Understanding of Social Justice Education (2013) I wonder if ‘social identities’ could be incorporated too, so that I have multiple ‘artefacts’ that are tailored to a particular group of students and counteract the ‘negative perceptions and stereotypes’ different students might have of each other, through a ‘common chore that necessitates their cooperation’ (Billig 1976; Maoz 2000a). 

Bibliography 

Aaron, J. (2013) Understanding of Social Justice Education. Conflict Resolution Quarterly, vol. 30, no. 4, Summer 2013

Beckford, A. and Walliss, J. (2006) Theorising Religion. London: Ashgate.

Billig, M. (1976) Social Psychology and Intergroup Relations. New York: Academic Press.

DiAngelo, R. (2018) White Fragility. London: Beacon Press.

DiAngelo, R. (2017) Deconstructing White Privilege with Dr. Robin DiAngelo. Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DwIx3KQer54 (Accessed: 22 June 2015).

Freire, P. (1970) Pedagogy of the Oppressed. London: Continuum.

Hannan L, Chatterjee H, Duhs R: Object Based Learning: A powerful pedagogy for higher education. Museums and Higher Education Working Together: Challenges and Opportunities. ed. / Anne Boddington; Jos Boys; Catherine Speight. Farnham: Ashgate Publishing, 2013; 159–168.

I Am Not Your Negro (2017) Directed by Raoul Peck. [Feature film]. Switzerland /France/Belgium /USA: Altitude.

Kim, S. (2016) Exploring The Sound Of Silence With Christine Sun Kim. Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6FI5Z_aw3Fc (Accessed: 22 June 2015).

Middleton, A. (2017) What is Object Based Learning? Available at: https://davethesmith.wordpress.com/2016/11/22/what-is-object-based-learning/ (Accessed: 22 June 2015).

Redekop, V. N. (2002) From Violence to Blessing: How an Understanding of Deep- Rooted Conflict Can Open Paths to Reconciliation. Ottawa, Canada: Novalis.

Richards, A. and Finnigan, T. (2016) Retention and attainment in the disciplines: Art and Design. London: AdvanceHE. Available at: https://www.advance-he.ac.uk/knowledge-hub/retention-and-attainment-disciplines-art-and-design (Downloaded 02 July 2020)

Romanek, D. and Lynch, B. (2008).Touch and the Value of Object Handling:

Final Conclusions for a New Sensory Museology. In Touch in Museums: Policy and Practice in Object Handling, edited by H. J. Chatterjee. Oxford and New York: Berg.

Ruskin, J. (1853) Stones of Venice. London: Da Capo Press.

Sabri, D. (2015) Students’ Practice and Identify Work at UAL: Year 2 Experiences. Year two report of a four- year longitudinal study. (Unpublished)

The Room of Silence (2016) Directed by Eloise Sherrid. [Feature film]. Worldwide: Vimeo.

Turner, M. (2020) Inclusivity Artefact Proposal: Racial Bias in Language. Available at: https://mturnerpgcert.myblog.arts.ac.uk/2020/05/08/inclusivity-artefact-proposal-and-feedback-discussion/ (Accessed: 22 June 2015).

Turner, M. (2020) Love and Belonging in the Educational Realm. Available at: https://mturnerpgcert.myblog.arts.ac.uk/2020/07/01/1st-july-love-and-belonging-in-the-educational-realm-session-notes/ (Accessed: 22 June 2015).

Vilhaurer, M. (2010) Understanding Art: The Play of Work and Spectator. London: Bloomsbury.

Wilde, J (1996) Treating Anger, Anxiety, And Depression In Children And Adolescents. United States: Taylor & Francis.