Reflecting on Two Tools Used in My ARP
Using Playful Prompts to Introduce Mentimeter
To introduce Mentimeter, I began with a short sequence of playful, image-based slides, see image reference below. These were not content-heavy or assessed tasks, but open prompts designed to spark interpretation and curiosity. The digital activity served as more than an engagement tool — it worked as a facilitation strategy to build safe space, encourage participation, and establish a positive engagement for collaborative learning.
This approach proved an effective warm-up because it:
- Reduced the pressure to produce a “right” answer
- Allowed anonymous participation
- Encouraged humour, imagination, and personal interpretation
- Created space for different languages and cultural references
- Enabled quieter students to take part without speaking aloud
As responses appeared live, they created a shared visual space where ideas belonged to the group rather than individuals. The variety of answers — emotional, narrative, playful, and critical — demonstrated that diverse perspectives were valued from the outset.
One slide asked, “What themes come to mind?” alongside an evocative image. With no single correct response, students projected their own associations and experiences. Contributions ranged from “love” and “good vs bad” to “fairies,” “猎奇” (curiosity or the strange), and “女同” (a queer/lesbian reference). This mix of identity, humour, critique, and imagination helped shape an open, expressive learning environment. Engagement continued into the later survey activity, where over 90% of students participated.
Mentimeter therefore acted not only as a digital participation tool but as a method for fostering inclusivity and shared ownership of ideas. It supported collaboration by removing barriers to participation and setting a welcoming, exploratory tone.
Working Methods for Co-Creation with Graduates
The second tool I reflected on was the use of a live, shared document to support co-creation with recent graduates. We began with meeting and an open discussion of ideas, reviewing survey data and the graduates’ reflections. Then I opened a shared document as a framework that structured our planning process, helping formalise the timing and content for the day.
Both graduates contributed to the document, outlining their areas of responsibility and preparing lesson plans collaboratively and adding reflections that set the tone for the session. This process gave insight into their perspectives on what would engage current students and how to communicate the realities of creative development.
The graduates planned to present their work informally, allowing students to handle samples and ask questions. Their notes were detailed and reflective, highlighting the value of showing unfinished or imperfect work to demonstrate progression. They emphasised how “mistakes” are an integral part of creative growth and uncertainty is inherent to learning.
“We should talk through our thinking when making these samples and how they lead onto something more refined. It’s important to show that what might seem like a mistake is actually part of the process.”
The shared document became more than a lesson plan — it reflected a mindset of openness, reflection, and co-learning. By putting in place a structure that came with my experience of lesson planning but allowing freedom for dialogue between the graduates, it gave space to identify methods that resonated with their developing ideas and practices.