Learning about facilitation

In a recent class for the performance as protest session, two students were having a heated discussion about the current war in Ukraine., sparked by artwork some other students had brought to the group tutorial. One student was coming from a perspective of being passionate about geopolitics and another being Ukrainian and arriving here again 4 months ago. The conversation came up as two other students had been making work that they wanted to support Ukrainians in some way, either by being a release of emotion for those effected, or to fundraise. It was clear that this was something the students all cared deeply about, but that they were unsure about how to respond as artists. They had produced a series of screen prints of Putin, which they began to deface with coloured markers.

The heated discussion between students began when one student asked the question of the work ‘Is it right to direct all the anger to one person – Putin?’. Broadly speaking, one student was arguing that US imperialism was to blame and the Western media was flawed, as they perceived it, in its representation of war in Ukraine, where other wars such as Palestinian did not receive the same coverage. The other student, who was Ukrainian, argued that, in the context of Ukrainian history, Russia has been an imperial, colonialist oppressor. While he agreed with the point about western media, he felt it was unfair that the anger about this was directed towards Ukrainians facing war, and becomes an argument similar to ‘All Lives Matter’ – all lives do matter, but currently the focus is on Ukraine. The discussion went on for about 10 mins, back and forth between these two students.

What I wanted to note here was what I learnt about facilitation & care from Ade, another teacher on the PGCert course, currently joining our PDP department via Shades of Noir. I had invited Ade to come to the group tutorial to offer his perspective & feedback to the students. My intention in inviting him was to balance out any perceived ‘authourity’ that my politics might have purely by virtue of me often being the only teacher in the room.

The heated discussion between two students had been going on for about 5-10 mins. I was concerned that this conversation was difficult. particularly for the Ukrainian student, however I wanted to give him time to respond to each point the other student made, so I didn’t know how to temper the conversation further than pointing out commonalities between their positions (of which there were actually many). At some point, when it wasn’t clear how the conversation would stop, Ade did this thing which I thought worked well where he interrupted the second student mid-flow saying ‘I’m sorry I’m just going to stop you right there, one second.’ And then he turned to the Ukrainian student and said ‘I just want to check in – are you ok?’

This was a very important moment of facilitation and learning for the students and myself – Ade pointed out that its important to notice when someone is speaking from lived experience and how difficult it can be when someone challenges this. He also went on to explain, using another example, when you apologise, try not to say ‘I’m sorry, but…’ – that can invalidate the apology. Instead end on the apology. I thought this technique was very successful – it diffused the situation and created a compassionate environment. Also it was credit to both students who were able to stay in the room and acknowledge where each were coming from, the second student apologised and both moved on to participate in other conversations.

Before experiencing this, I’m not sure if I would ever interrupt a student in full flow. This is not something I would do in everyday life – it’s not really my personality. My style is normally to listen and let someone say their piece, and then to say my own piece, or try to even out the conversation. However, Ade’s intervention, showed me how interruption can be still done with care, and perhaps should be done in situations where care needs to be urgently prioritised and foregrounded, over and above hearing a person out, as I think needed to be done in this particular moment. This worked in a way not to stop the debate, but rather to teach the students how to debate with care.

In the past, as a teacher and a student, I’ve often had to argue my point from my lived experience, without this kind of in-moment support from another person/ person in authourity e.g. a facilitator. People have sometimes checked in with me after a session, but I think in-the-moment intervention feels more valuable as it can shift the dynamic and potentially prevent trauma. It’s important for me that I now see examples of how difficult conversations can be had with care, so that I can also enact this in the future, and know what I would prefer in these situations, myself.