WEBVTT

00:00:01.459 --> 00:00:03.940
Hello and welcome to the third episode of our

00:00:03.940 --> 00:00:06.059
new methods mini -series at the Leeds Institute

00:00:06.059 --> 00:00:09.259
for Teaching Excellence. I'm Robert Averies and

00:00:09.259 --> 00:00:11.080
I'm joined by three colleagues at the University

00:00:11.080 --> 00:00:14.380
of Leeds to discuss experiences of using today's

00:00:14.380 --> 00:00:17.339
method, listening rooms and research and scholarship.

00:00:17.780 --> 00:00:28.559
We hope you enjoy this episode. Okay, let's start

00:00:28.559 --> 00:00:32.570
with some... introductions then and in keeping

00:00:32.570 --> 00:00:36.409
with our methods -based intros from previous

00:00:36.409 --> 00:00:38.990
episodes in this episode we're asking what is

00:00:38.990 --> 00:00:43.130
your favourite method of transport? Hi everyone

00:00:43.130 --> 00:00:46.350
my name is Claire Taylor. I am a Disability Contact

00:00:46.350 --> 00:00:49.789
Liaison Officer in Disability Services and my

00:00:49.789 --> 00:00:53.009
favourite method of transport is the London Tube

00:00:53.009 --> 00:00:55.869
because I just think it's relatively affordable.

00:00:56.890 --> 00:00:59.590
It gets you across a massive city really efficiently,

00:00:59.850 --> 00:01:02.950
usually. I love the smell of it. I love the sound

00:01:02.950 --> 00:01:07.109
of it. I think it's quite clean and feels quite

00:01:07.109 --> 00:01:09.989
safe. The only thing I would say... The only

00:01:09.989 --> 00:01:12.030
downside I can think of is the accessibility

00:01:12.030 --> 00:01:15.069
in terms of lift access and things like that.

00:01:15.170 --> 00:01:17.150
People using wheelchairs or mobility problems

00:01:17.150 --> 00:01:19.450
or pushchairs. So that's something it could improve

00:01:19.450 --> 00:01:21.790
on. But other than that, an outstanding method

00:01:21.790 --> 00:01:23.650
of transport, in my opinion. I wasn't expecting

00:01:23.650 --> 00:01:26.390
such a comprehensive answer. You've clearly given

00:01:26.390 --> 00:01:30.480
this some thought. Hi, my name's Stacey Mottishaw.

00:01:30.500 --> 00:01:32.280
I'm an associate professor in the management

00:01:32.280 --> 00:01:34.140
and organisations department at the university.

00:01:34.560 --> 00:01:37.700
And my favourite method of transport, and I'm

00:01:37.700 --> 00:01:40.920
so basic, I actually just really like driving.

00:01:41.540 --> 00:01:44.340
So I only passed my test a few years ago. So

00:01:44.340 --> 00:01:46.459
I'm still kind of very much in that novel sort

00:01:46.459 --> 00:01:48.579
of phase of being able to get in the car and

00:01:48.579 --> 00:01:50.260
go to wherever I want to go. And I love that.

00:01:51.180 --> 00:01:53.079
I know that's probably not super sustainable,

00:01:53.260 --> 00:01:55.019
but, you know, I try to be mindful about it.

00:01:55.239 --> 00:01:57.500
Hi, everyone. My name is Lauren Model. I'm an

00:01:57.500 --> 00:02:00.780
academic development consultant in ODMPL. And

00:02:00.780 --> 00:02:04.040
my favourite mode of transport is going to be

00:02:04.040 --> 00:02:07.239
the horse. I go a bit historical, which is what

00:02:07.239 --> 00:02:11.919
I studied during my degrees. I think it is a

00:02:11.919 --> 00:02:14.300
bit sustainable. And then you basically have

00:02:14.300 --> 00:02:17.479
a giant pet at the end of it all. So can't go

00:02:17.479 --> 00:02:19.240
wrong there. That's really annoying because I

00:02:19.240 --> 00:02:22.159
prepared some. witty responses to train, bus

00:02:22.159 --> 00:02:25.860
and plane. I just didn't foresee the horse. So

00:02:25.860 --> 00:02:30.379
it caught me out, Lauren. Let's kick things off

00:02:30.379 --> 00:02:33.979
then with why we're all really here. Stacey,

00:02:34.060 --> 00:02:36.879
could you give listeners a sense of what this

00:02:36.879 --> 00:02:40.069
method is all about? Sure. So traditionally,

00:02:40.409 --> 00:02:43.689
a listening room is a one to one conversation

00:02:43.689 --> 00:02:47.509
between it was intended that it would be between

00:02:47.509 --> 00:02:51.250
friends. So the method was kind of put together

00:02:51.250 --> 00:02:54.129
by Emma Herron and Helen Parkin, who were both

00:02:54.129 --> 00:02:56.530
at Sheffield Hallam University at the time. And

00:02:56.530 --> 00:02:59.530
they wrote a paper back in 2019, talking about

00:02:59.530 --> 00:03:02.969
listening rooms as a kind of friendship as method

00:03:02.969 --> 00:03:06.860
sort of process. So you get. two people in a

00:03:06.860 --> 00:03:09.340
space it could be online it could be in person

00:03:09.340 --> 00:03:13.240
and they respond to a set of prompts and the

00:03:13.240 --> 00:03:16.219
main kind of thing with a listening room that

00:03:16.219 --> 00:03:18.080
makes it in my opinion that makes it different

00:03:18.080 --> 00:03:20.719
from maybe a focus group for example is the researcher

00:03:20.719 --> 00:03:23.580
isn't in the space so the two people having that

00:03:23.580 --> 00:03:26.340
conversation are having it without kind of the

00:03:26.340 --> 00:03:28.740
researcher being there to guide or kind of steer

00:03:28.740 --> 00:03:30.719
or facilitate the conversation in any way so

00:03:31.289 --> 00:03:33.270
those participants aren't genuinely just responding

00:03:33.270 --> 00:03:35.729
to the prompts that they've been given. And obviously

00:03:35.729 --> 00:03:38.750
there are benefits and downsides to that. But

00:03:38.750 --> 00:03:40.830
yeah, very traditionally, that is what the method

00:03:40.830 --> 00:03:43.849
would be. I've heard of iterations of it where

00:03:43.849 --> 00:03:46.310
there's more than one person, sorry, more than

00:03:46.310 --> 00:03:51.629
two people. Iterations where... Not usually actually

00:03:51.629 --> 00:03:53.909
where the researcher would be present, but sometimes

00:03:53.909 --> 00:03:55.569
the people don't necessarily know each other.

00:03:55.629 --> 00:03:57.789
They don't necessarily have to be friends, which

00:03:57.789 --> 00:03:59.729
sort of deviates perhaps a little bit from what

00:03:59.729 --> 00:04:01.210
the traditional sort of listening room might

00:04:01.210 --> 00:04:04.449
be. But yeah, fundamentally, that conversation

00:04:04.449 --> 00:04:07.449
without that researcher. Great. Thanks, Stacey.

00:04:07.650 --> 00:04:10.729
And I know that you've been involved in co -creating

00:04:10.729 --> 00:04:12.789
a listening rooms talk at the University of Leeds.

00:04:13.180 --> 00:04:16.879
drawing upon the work at sheffield and um claire

00:04:16.879 --> 00:04:20.620
i know uh has used your your toolkit as part

00:04:20.620 --> 00:04:23.300
of her her research so looking forward to hearing

00:04:23.300 --> 00:04:27.699
more about that later fantastic so moving on

00:04:27.699 --> 00:04:29.699
then lauren could you tell us a bit about um

00:04:29.699 --> 00:04:32.480
what got you interested in using listening rooms

00:04:32.480 --> 00:04:35.639
and how you used it in your uh light fellowship

00:04:35.639 --> 00:04:38.439
yeah so it was actually speaking to another um

00:04:38.439 --> 00:04:40.800
colleague claudia rogers who was doing her own

00:04:40.800 --> 00:04:43.420
light fellowship and used this um this methodology

00:04:43.420 --> 00:04:46.259
as well um and in listening to her talk about

00:04:46.259 --> 00:04:47.519
it because i'd never heard about it before we

00:04:47.519 --> 00:04:50.480
had an initial conversation um and i was really

00:04:50.480 --> 00:04:53.000
excited about the really unique opportunity to

00:04:53.000 --> 00:04:56.600
hear um a student voice that we often don't get

00:04:56.600 --> 00:04:59.240
to hear without them maybe feeling like they

00:04:59.240 --> 00:05:02.639
have to filter for a researcher or for an academic

00:05:02.639 --> 00:05:06.699
in the room. And it also, for me, I'm a historian

00:05:06.699 --> 00:05:09.420
by training, so it really invoked kind of similar

00:05:09.420 --> 00:05:11.699
methodology to oral histories and the really,

00:05:11.759 --> 00:05:14.220
really rich information we get when two people

00:05:14.220 --> 00:05:17.240
from similar contexts are sharing similar experiences.

00:05:19.019 --> 00:05:22.199
So I then kindly, Stacey kindly spoke with me

00:05:22.199 --> 00:05:25.100
as well as I started on my journey to use listening

00:05:25.100 --> 00:05:28.279
rooms. And the more I learned about it, the more

00:05:28.279 --> 00:05:30.980
I think that kind of power dynamic element where

00:05:30.980 --> 00:05:33.160
it really breaks down that researcher participant

00:05:33.160 --> 00:05:36.560
power dynamic and lets your participants take

00:05:36.560 --> 00:05:39.079
the conversations in ways that they think are

00:05:39.079 --> 00:05:40.959
the most important rather than what you as the

00:05:40.959 --> 00:05:42.720
researcher might think is most important to your

00:05:42.720 --> 00:05:44.879
research. So it felt like a really authentic

00:05:44.879 --> 00:05:50.189
methodology. And so I used it in my project,

00:05:50.370 --> 00:05:53.810
which focused on students doing distance learning

00:05:53.810 --> 00:05:56.970
on master's programmes and so ran virtual listening

00:05:56.970 --> 00:06:00.180
rooms with pairs of. We tried to do it with pairs

00:06:00.180 --> 00:06:01.959
of course mates, ended up getting one pair of

00:06:01.959 --> 00:06:03.839
course mates, which is probably a conversation

00:06:03.839 --> 00:06:06.319
we can pick up about the challenges of listening

00:06:06.319 --> 00:06:08.779
rooms in a bit. But pairs of course mates rather

00:06:08.779 --> 00:06:13.379
than friends necessarily to explore their experiences

00:06:13.379 --> 00:06:16.319
of belonging or not belonging as they did their

00:06:16.319 --> 00:06:19.740
study through their course at Leeds. Fantastic.

00:06:19.839 --> 00:06:22.779
And could you tell us a bit more about how that

00:06:22.779 --> 00:06:26.259
worked in practice in your fellowship? Yeah,

00:06:26.300 --> 00:06:28.560
I think. Listing rooms do take a bit of logistics

00:06:28.560 --> 00:06:31.879
to organise, especially in my case where we have

00:06:31.879 --> 00:06:34.759
time zones and they're never actually on campus

00:06:34.759 --> 00:06:39.279
itself. But the student participants in my project

00:06:39.279 --> 00:06:42.040
completed a survey and then at the end of the

00:06:42.040 --> 00:06:44.160
survey they were invited to put their name forward

00:06:44.160 --> 00:06:47.620
to participate in a listing room. I had intentionally

00:06:47.620 --> 00:06:50.480
hoped that they would choose a friend to discuss

00:06:50.480 --> 00:06:54.160
with. No one chose a friend. So I ended up pairing

00:06:54.160 --> 00:06:56.660
them by... people that were studying on the same

00:06:56.660 --> 00:07:00.420
course, and then arranged a 75 -minute session

00:07:00.420 --> 00:07:03.819
with them. They had a few minutes of briefing

00:07:03.819 --> 00:07:05.439
so that they knew how the session would run,

00:07:05.540 --> 00:07:08.300
supported by one of the light research assistants,

00:07:08.540 --> 00:07:10.939
which, again, to further remove myself as the

00:07:10.939 --> 00:07:13.439
researcher from that context. They were then

00:07:13.439 --> 00:07:15.300
given kind of a sheet of prompts and some reminders

00:07:15.300 --> 00:07:17.720
about how the listening room would run. Then

00:07:17.720 --> 00:07:20.160
they were left to their own devices. And at the

00:07:20.160 --> 00:07:22.879
end of that 60 minutes, the research assistant

00:07:22.879 --> 00:07:25.000
came back, kind of checked in, made sure everything...

00:07:25.000 --> 00:07:28.399
had gone okay um and did a bit of a debrief um

00:07:28.399 --> 00:07:31.360
and then they went on their way and I analyzed

00:07:31.360 --> 00:07:34.680
the transcript fantastic and how about yourself

00:07:34.680 --> 00:07:38.500
Claire yeah um well I carried out some research

00:07:38.500 --> 00:07:41.160
last year as part of a light fellowship involving

00:07:41.160 --> 00:07:44.120
disabled students and how their adjustments are

00:07:44.120 --> 00:07:45.620
implemented and how the information is shared

00:07:45.620 --> 00:07:47.899
and I knew that I wanted to do some I was doing

00:07:47.899 --> 00:07:50.100
I knew I was doing surveys I knew I wanted to

00:07:50.100 --> 00:07:53.199
do something like a focus group um but because

00:07:53.199 --> 00:07:56.660
of disabled students, what they're discussing

00:07:56.660 --> 00:07:59.300
might be quite sensitive and I just wasn't sure

00:07:59.300 --> 00:08:01.540
how comfortable students might feel in that kind

00:08:01.540 --> 00:08:04.839
of group environment. And it was, I think it

00:08:04.839 --> 00:08:06.600
was Emma in Light who suggested listening rooms

00:08:06.600 --> 00:08:09.660
and directed me to Stacey's Toolkit, which was

00:08:09.660 --> 00:08:12.160
just invaluable because I'd never heard of them.

00:08:12.240 --> 00:08:14.980
I'd heard of, I know that they're kind of loosely

00:08:14.980 --> 00:08:18.699
inspired by the Radio 4 Listening Project, which

00:08:18.699 --> 00:08:20.860
I had heard before actually, which I used to

00:08:20.860 --> 00:08:23.329
quite like listening to. So I knew the concept

00:08:23.329 --> 00:08:25.110
around it and I was just really fascinated by

00:08:25.110 --> 00:08:27.189
that and I just kind of thought this could work

00:08:27.189 --> 00:08:29.870
really well and being able to hold them virtually

00:08:29.870 --> 00:08:32.750
as well as in person also works really well for

00:08:32.750 --> 00:08:36.269
disabled students, giving them the option. But

00:08:36.269 --> 00:08:39.250
like Lauren, listening rooms, as Stacey mentioned,

00:08:39.470 --> 00:08:41.549
are traditionally between pairs of students who

00:08:41.549 --> 00:08:43.909
know each other and are kind of friends and they've

00:08:43.909 --> 00:08:46.889
got that background. With the disabled students,

00:08:47.149 --> 00:08:49.250
I kind of wanted to give them the option of choosing

00:08:49.250 --> 00:08:50.649
someone they didn't know or being paired with

00:08:50.649 --> 00:08:52.659
someone they didn't know. Because I didn't want

00:08:52.659 --> 00:08:54.580
people to miss out. And actually it said that

00:08:54.580 --> 00:08:56.399
in the toolkit that one of the kind of cons of

00:08:56.399 --> 00:08:58.019
listening rooms is that you might be excluding

00:08:58.019 --> 00:09:00.899
certain kind of groups of students who don't

00:09:00.899 --> 00:09:02.620
kind of necessarily know someone who could take

00:09:02.620 --> 00:09:04.259
part with them or want to take part with them.

00:09:04.460 --> 00:09:06.059
And that was what I was kind of nervous about

00:09:06.059 --> 00:09:08.259
doing because I wasn't sure how that would pan

00:09:08.259 --> 00:09:10.019
out. Because again, disabled students talking

00:09:10.019 --> 00:09:13.019
to another disabled student that they don't know.

00:09:13.200 --> 00:09:15.340
They're discussing quite, I think, kind of quite

00:09:15.340 --> 00:09:17.000
open and vulnerable and discussing quite sensitive

00:09:17.000 --> 00:09:20.450
things. But it ended up kind of working really

00:09:20.450 --> 00:09:23.769
well. And it was just a really good opportunity

00:09:23.769 --> 00:09:27.129
to give the students that space to kind of talk

00:09:27.129 --> 00:09:30.669
to each other about it. So, yeah, same as Lauren,

00:09:30.830 --> 00:09:32.830
in the student surveys, I gave them the option

00:09:32.830 --> 00:09:34.750
of choosing if they want to take part in a listening

00:09:34.750 --> 00:09:36.909
room at the end of it. And I gave them the option

00:09:36.909 --> 00:09:38.730
of whether they would like to be matched with

00:09:38.730 --> 00:09:41.600
someone who they might not know. or they could

00:09:41.600 --> 00:09:43.500
bring another student who could be disabled or

00:09:43.500 --> 00:09:45.600
non -disabled. So I was really trying to broaden

00:09:45.600 --> 00:09:47.220
it out and open it out and just give as many

00:09:47.220 --> 00:09:49.100
people as possible the opportunity to take part.

00:09:49.679 --> 00:09:52.340
Brilliant. And we'll be able to go into this

00:09:52.340 --> 00:09:55.179
in much more detail shortly, but just briefly,

00:09:55.419 --> 00:09:57.919
Stacey, what was it that got you into listening

00:09:57.919 --> 00:10:00.220
rooms and being involved in the creation of this

00:10:00.220 --> 00:10:03.870
toolkit? It's a good question. And it's been

00:10:03.870 --> 00:10:05.230
quite a while now that I feel like I've been

00:10:05.230 --> 00:10:06.850
talking about listening rooms forever. And I

00:10:06.850 --> 00:10:09.110
apologise to anyone who's already heard me talk

00:10:09.110 --> 00:10:11.169
about this at length. They are listening to the

00:10:11.169 --> 00:10:13.830
podcast. I know. They've chosen. You've chosen

00:10:13.830 --> 00:10:17.690
to be here. So for me, I got into the project.

00:10:17.750 --> 00:10:21.210
I got into the kind of method. I'd recently taken

00:10:21.210 --> 00:10:25.029
over a role in my faculty as a director of taught

00:10:25.029 --> 00:10:27.500
student social mobility. And I was given a lot

00:10:27.500 --> 00:10:31.480
of kind of quantitative numerical data. It was

00:10:31.480 --> 00:10:33.779
quite patchy, but I was given a lot of data and

00:10:33.779 --> 00:10:36.860
I didn't really know the sort of why behind some

00:10:36.860 --> 00:10:39.580
of the data. So things like awarding gaps, differential

00:10:39.580 --> 00:10:41.840
outcomes for students from underrepresented backgrounds.

00:10:42.419 --> 00:10:45.460
And it became really apparent to me quite quickly

00:10:45.460 --> 00:10:48.659
in that role. And it was a new role that we needed

00:10:48.659 --> 00:10:52.879
to hear more from students directly. And around

00:10:52.879 --> 00:10:54.860
that time, just sort of by circumstance, one

00:10:54.860 --> 00:10:57.080
of my friends was writing up her master's dissertation.

00:10:57.679 --> 00:10:59.659
She worked at Sheffield Hallam, so she was familiar

00:10:59.659 --> 00:11:01.940
with the listening rooms method through that.

00:11:02.639 --> 00:11:06.500
And she'd used it in her dissertation project.

00:11:06.559 --> 00:11:08.100
And I was talking to her about it and I thought,

00:11:08.120 --> 00:11:10.500
you know what, this could be really good by removing

00:11:10.500 --> 00:11:12.460
that power dynamic of having the researcher there,

00:11:12.639 --> 00:11:15.889
underrepresented students. who are bringing,

00:11:15.970 --> 00:11:18.769
you know, people that they know, friends, might

00:11:18.769 --> 00:11:20.690
feel more comfortable having kind of more open

00:11:20.690 --> 00:11:23.769
conversations. So it seemed like a really kind

00:11:23.769 --> 00:11:26.570
of good tool for me to get kind of what I needed,

00:11:26.710 --> 00:11:30.230
but also giving that platform for students for

00:11:30.230 --> 00:11:31.929
us to really understand what was important to

00:11:31.929 --> 00:11:35.730
them. Because we made lots of assumptions in

00:11:35.730 --> 00:11:37.549
that role, and I think we do in universities

00:11:37.549 --> 00:11:39.929
generally. We see a lot of data. We have access

00:11:39.929 --> 00:11:42.480
to a lot of data. And we look at it, but we make

00:11:42.480 --> 00:11:44.639
assumptions about why things are the way that

00:11:44.639 --> 00:11:46.659
they are. And I think it's really important that

00:11:46.659 --> 00:11:48.899
we actually go to the people who are concerned

00:11:48.899 --> 00:11:52.820
by that and ask them for more information. So

00:11:52.820 --> 00:11:55.179
for me, listening rooms was a really nice tool

00:11:55.179 --> 00:11:57.980
of doing that. We've touched on the toolkit already.

00:11:58.039 --> 00:12:00.519
So I started talking about listening rooms and

00:12:00.519 --> 00:12:02.659
I talked about my project. And I don't know,

00:12:02.720 --> 00:12:05.279
I suppose somewhat in a nice way, but it was

00:12:05.279 --> 00:12:07.360
a bit of a shame. But people were very interested

00:12:07.360 --> 00:12:09.389
in the method. I think some people were interested

00:12:09.389 --> 00:12:11.570
in the project as well, but a lot of people were

00:12:11.570 --> 00:12:12.970
really interested in the method, so I talked

00:12:12.970 --> 00:12:15.409
a lot more about that in presentations, etc.

00:12:16.149 --> 00:12:20.450
And I was asked by probably... 25 30 different

00:12:20.450 --> 00:12:22.090
people if I would talk to them about listening

00:12:22.090 --> 00:12:25.309
rooms and talk to them for their projects and

00:12:25.309 --> 00:12:27.830
so myself and some other colleagues decided that

00:12:27.830 --> 00:12:29.330
maybe it'd be useful to put some information

00:12:29.330 --> 00:12:31.750
together so that we've kind of got a good foundation

00:12:31.750 --> 00:12:34.450
to sort of signpost people to not to not have

00:12:34.450 --> 00:12:36.389
those conversations but just so that that information

00:12:36.389 --> 00:12:39.070
was consistent cohesive and that we could all

00:12:39.070 --> 00:12:41.570
contribute to it so that's where the toolkit

00:12:41.570 --> 00:12:44.919
sort of came from and that is predominantly designed

00:12:44.919 --> 00:12:46.899
for people at the University of Leeds because

00:12:46.899 --> 00:12:48.799
that's where we were kind of writing it from

00:12:48.799 --> 00:12:51.360
the projects that we were involved in had taken

00:12:51.360 --> 00:12:53.879
place here and we were writing about it in that

00:12:53.879 --> 00:12:55.820
kind of institutional context of what systems

00:12:55.820 --> 00:12:58.320
do we use what have we got access to etc etc.

00:12:58.879 --> 00:13:00.820
I'm conscious that some people listening to this

00:13:00.820 --> 00:13:03.480
podcast well hopefully will be maybe considering

00:13:03.480 --> 00:13:05.720
using qualitative methods such as listening rooms

00:13:05.720 --> 00:13:09.879
for the first time how would you describe the

00:13:09.879 --> 00:13:13.610
importance of removing or reducing that power

00:13:13.610 --> 00:13:15.649
dynamic? Why is it important and why is listening

00:13:15.649 --> 00:13:17.789
rooms, as we touched upon already, such a good

00:13:17.789 --> 00:13:21.610
method for that? Like Stacey said, it gives the

00:13:21.610 --> 00:13:24.049
participants a chance to surface what's important

00:13:24.049 --> 00:13:27.690
to them in a way that I think we could all make

00:13:27.690 --> 00:13:31.090
educated guesses. But I think for me and in my

00:13:31.090 --> 00:13:33.350
work, the really powerful stuff comes from the

00:13:33.350 --> 00:13:36.509
stuff you can't anticipate and the points and

00:13:36.509 --> 00:13:39.330
the things that your participants value that

00:13:39.330 --> 00:13:42.029
you haven't thought of. I think that's also where

00:13:42.029 --> 00:13:44.509
it's new and exciting, that research potentially,

00:13:44.750 --> 00:13:47.370
but really giving them the power to be in the

00:13:47.370 --> 00:13:50.730
driver's seat in a way that I think other methodologies

00:13:50.730 --> 00:13:54.049
provide an opportunity for, but maybe not in

00:13:54.049 --> 00:13:56.629
such a central way as listening rooms do. Were

00:13:56.629 --> 00:13:58.669
you surprised by anything that came up in the

00:13:58.669 --> 00:13:59.990
listening rooms? I knew you were going to ask

00:13:59.990 --> 00:14:02.230
me that, and before I started speaking, I was

00:14:02.230 --> 00:14:05.490
trying to think of something. I think one thing

00:14:05.490 --> 00:14:09.399
that surprised me was... especially thinking

00:14:09.399 --> 00:14:11.679
about the distance learning students I was talking

00:14:11.679 --> 00:14:15.879
to, they had a really profound sense of wanting

00:14:15.879 --> 00:14:19.179
to be connected to Leeds as an institution. It

00:14:19.179 --> 00:14:21.440
was almost as important to them as being connected

00:14:21.440 --> 00:14:24.159
to their peers. And they had suggestions for

00:14:24.159 --> 00:14:26.759
how they could feel connected to an institution

00:14:26.759 --> 00:14:30.870
that more likely than not, they'll never. You

00:14:30.870 --> 00:14:34.289
know, one of the participants was studying from

00:14:34.289 --> 00:14:36.009
somewhere that I think would be about a 12 hour

00:14:36.009 --> 00:14:39.289
flight away. And so, you know, hearing that was

00:14:39.289 --> 00:14:41.789
not something I had thought would be particularly

00:14:41.789 --> 00:14:44.269
important. And it turns out it actually was quite

00:14:44.269 --> 00:14:46.450
important to the students that participated.

00:14:47.370 --> 00:14:49.049
That's really fascinating. I definitely found

00:14:49.049 --> 00:14:51.990
I was I was really fascinated by what the students

00:14:51.990 --> 00:14:54.690
in the listening rooms I did talked about. So

00:14:54.690 --> 00:14:56.649
the topic prompts were so broad. It was literally

00:14:56.649 --> 00:14:59.139
one word for each one. And I don't know if that

00:14:59.139 --> 00:15:00.600
was too broad. I don't know if I would change

00:15:00.600 --> 00:15:02.220
that next time, but I think they probably have

00:15:02.220 --> 00:15:05.840
to be a little bit. And so they talked about

00:15:05.840 --> 00:15:08.879
a lot of stuff that wasn't related to my research,

00:15:08.899 --> 00:15:11.019
but was just really interesting as a member of

00:15:11.019 --> 00:15:13.580
staff in disability services, talking about things

00:15:13.580 --> 00:15:16.960
like funding and particularly the students who

00:15:16.960 --> 00:15:19.080
were disabled students who'd brought a non -disabled

00:15:19.080 --> 00:15:21.860
friend and their friend was kind of, their eyes

00:15:21.860 --> 00:15:23.879
were open to... what this their friend had like

00:15:23.879 --> 00:15:26.100
gone through they had no idea like well I didn't

00:15:26.100 --> 00:15:27.919
know you had to do that what really you do that

00:15:27.919 --> 00:15:30.080
and these were really close really close friends

00:15:30.080 --> 00:15:32.899
talking so it's just really interesting to hear

00:15:32.899 --> 00:15:35.019
those conversations and also the students that

00:15:35.019 --> 00:15:37.419
didn't know each other who are both disabled

00:15:37.419 --> 00:15:39.799
in different schools like sometimes different

00:15:39.799 --> 00:15:42.299
levels of study I did try and kind of match them

00:15:42.299 --> 00:15:46.190
to a similar level of study um just hearing about

00:15:46.190 --> 00:15:47.830
the other students' experience in that school

00:15:47.830 --> 00:15:49.730
and how it differs or how it might be similar

00:15:49.730 --> 00:15:52.350
and things that adjustments might have been put

00:15:52.350 --> 00:15:53.950
in place for them that they didn't know that

00:15:53.950 --> 00:15:55.850
they could have. And again, they talked just

00:15:55.850 --> 00:15:57.889
a lot about funding, like the government funding

00:15:57.889 --> 00:15:59.889
that disabled students can get. And I just didn't

00:15:59.889 --> 00:16:01.389
anticipate that that would be such a hot topic

00:16:01.389 --> 00:16:02.909
of conversation, which is really interesting.

00:16:03.110 --> 00:16:05.450
I think it does depend a little bit as well on...

00:16:05.759 --> 00:16:07.419
the nature of your project so if your project

00:16:07.419 --> 00:16:09.960
is very exploratory then something like listening

00:16:09.960 --> 00:16:12.559
rooms is so powerful because you start from a

00:16:12.559 --> 00:16:16.360
place of curiosity and exploration and you you

00:16:16.360 --> 00:16:19.700
allow your participants to um take those prompts

00:16:19.700 --> 00:16:21.879
where they want to where they think it's really

00:16:21.879 --> 00:16:25.279
important if i had a very specific set of research

00:16:25.279 --> 00:16:28.320
questions to answer listening rooms might not

00:16:28.320 --> 00:16:30.500
have been the right method for my project but

00:16:30.500 --> 00:16:32.639
because i was i went into it with this mindset

00:16:32.639 --> 00:16:35.740
of i just want to know what students think about

00:16:35.740 --> 00:16:37.940
when I was looking at underrepresented student

00:16:37.940 --> 00:16:40.360
perceptions of student success so we were looking

00:16:40.360 --> 00:16:43.220
at access continuation attainment and progression

00:16:43.220 --> 00:16:45.899
and they were the prompts that's what we used

00:16:45.899 --> 00:16:47.919
so they were really really broad they covered

00:16:47.919 --> 00:16:50.240
the entire student journey they weren't designed

00:16:50.240 --> 00:16:52.480
to be really prescriptive and I didn't have really

00:16:52.480 --> 00:16:54.559
strict research questions that I was trying to

00:16:54.559 --> 00:16:57.220
answer so for me having listening rooms was really

00:16:57.220 --> 00:16:59.519
powerful but I think there'd be so much scope

00:16:59.519 --> 00:17:01.299
if you had a very specific question that you

00:17:01.299 --> 00:17:04.569
were trying to answer that wasn't so broad I

00:17:04.569 --> 00:17:06.190
think there's a risk with listening rooms that

00:17:06.190 --> 00:17:08.089
you might not get your questions answered. Yeah,

00:17:08.150 --> 00:17:09.789
so this is what I found. And I did see in the

00:17:09.789 --> 00:17:12.849
toolkit, it said that it can be useful as that

00:17:12.849 --> 00:17:15.329
initial kind of exploratory thing. And then you

00:17:15.329 --> 00:17:19.009
can design your survey or whatever around that,

00:17:19.049 --> 00:17:21.089
what comes out of it. And I definitely think

00:17:21.089 --> 00:17:23.789
it is probably more suited to that. I don't know.

00:17:23.910 --> 00:17:25.289
There was some really useful stuff that came

00:17:25.289 --> 00:17:26.829
out of it. To be honest, I haven't finished analysing

00:17:26.829 --> 00:17:28.250
the data because there's just so much of it.

00:17:28.690 --> 00:17:31.950
And as a non -academic member of staff who's

00:17:31.950 --> 00:17:34.910
never done data analysis. It's really daunting,

00:17:35.029 --> 00:17:40.190
just the sheer volume of it. So it was fascinating.

00:17:40.269 --> 00:17:43.589
I'm so glad I did it. But I think the surveys

00:17:43.589 --> 00:17:45.910
were probably a bit more useful in terms of my

00:17:45.910 --> 00:17:49.109
specific research project that I was doing. I've

00:17:49.109 --> 00:17:52.130
written down two things. One is prompts and an

00:17:52.130 --> 00:17:54.430
example of how you went about choosing the prompts

00:17:54.430 --> 00:17:57.710
would be lovely. And also the question of an

00:17:57.710 --> 00:18:01.640
analysis. That's obviously... Like you say, it's

00:18:01.640 --> 00:18:04.799
a really big job, an important job. And there's

00:18:04.799 --> 00:18:06.839
no one way of doing either of those things, I

00:18:06.839 --> 00:18:11.640
guess. Yeah, I think I probably went a bit too

00:18:11.640 --> 00:18:14.759
detailed in mine. They were open -ended questions.

00:18:16.079 --> 00:18:18.940
But I think I got a bit too caught up in how

00:18:18.940 --> 00:18:22.980
to ethically ask the most neutral question. So

00:18:22.980 --> 00:18:27.019
they had framings like... do you agree or not

00:18:27.019 --> 00:18:29.940
agree, rather than just like asking a question

00:18:29.940 --> 00:18:32.039
in a more conversational tone that's really central

00:18:32.039 --> 00:18:36.480
to the listening rooms. And I did, after doing

00:18:36.480 --> 00:18:38.480
the first one, I did refine one further because

00:18:38.480 --> 00:18:40.400
the participant was like, I don't actually really

00:18:40.400 --> 00:18:42.920
know what you're asking me here, which was really

00:18:42.920 --> 00:18:45.460
useful feedback to get midway through. But had

00:18:45.460 --> 00:18:48.240
they not said that, that might have, you know,

00:18:48.240 --> 00:18:50.680
been a challenge for every single subsequent

00:18:50.680 --> 00:18:55.019
one I did. So... I think I had some questions

00:18:55.019 --> 00:18:57.079
that I wanted to ask, but then after completing

00:18:57.079 --> 00:19:00.140
the survey, I had a few more prompts that kind

00:19:00.140 --> 00:19:03.099
of reflected either gaps that I saw that I kind

00:19:03.099 --> 00:19:05.599
of wish I'd asked about in the survey or to kind

00:19:05.599 --> 00:19:09.359
of probe themes that came out of the survey in

00:19:09.359 --> 00:19:12.839
a bit more detail. So analysing listening rooms

00:19:12.839 --> 00:19:15.240
data is challenging for a number of different

00:19:15.240 --> 00:19:17.859
reasons, partly as Claire touched on already.

00:19:18.539 --> 00:19:20.500
The volume of data that you get from listening

00:19:20.500 --> 00:19:24.180
rooms, an hour -long conversation in response

00:19:24.180 --> 00:19:28.940
to prompts with quite a lot of detail, it takes

00:19:28.940 --> 00:19:31.380
up a lot of time. And when I was looking, I did

00:19:31.380 --> 00:19:32.940
all the transcription for my project myself,

00:19:33.279 --> 00:19:35.559
which took hours and hours and hours and hours

00:19:35.559 --> 00:19:37.819
all by itself. So I was really, really close

00:19:37.819 --> 00:19:39.339
to the data. I was really familiar with the data.

00:19:40.230 --> 00:19:42.650
And what I decided to do, because I felt like

00:19:42.650 --> 00:19:43.970
it was the right thing to do. And bearing in

00:19:43.970 --> 00:19:46.009
mind, this was my first kind of formal research

00:19:46.009 --> 00:19:49.009
project. So I still felt very new, lots of imposterism

00:19:49.009 --> 00:19:50.829
about being a researcher. Am I doing research

00:19:50.829 --> 00:19:53.450
properly? So I thought, well, I'll just I'll

00:19:53.450 --> 00:19:55.789
do the method of analysis that was originally

00:19:55.789 --> 00:19:58.369
intended for Listening Room. So Emma Herron and

00:19:58.369 --> 00:20:00.630
Helen Parkin, as I mentioned, originally came

00:20:00.630 --> 00:20:02.819
up with the Listening Room's methodology. And

00:20:02.819 --> 00:20:05.160
they analyze listening rooms data using what

00:20:05.160 --> 00:20:06.980
they call roundtable analysis. And there are

00:20:06.980 --> 00:20:10.279
other papers now published on this. And roundtable

00:20:10.279 --> 00:20:13.059
analysis is the idea that you get a group, a

00:20:13.059 --> 00:20:15.779
small group of stakeholders to come along to

00:20:15.779 --> 00:20:19.920
analyze the data sort of collectively. So every

00:20:19.920 --> 00:20:23.220
member of that stakeholder group has at least

00:20:23.220 --> 00:20:26.140
a couple of transcripts that they read. Every

00:20:26.140 --> 00:20:28.599
transcript in the batch gets read at least by

00:20:28.599 --> 00:20:31.500
by two people. And then you come together and

00:20:31.500 --> 00:20:33.539
it's. quite a structured kind of conversation

00:20:33.539 --> 00:20:36.400
the way that Emma and Helen have done it. But

00:20:36.400 --> 00:20:38.940
you essentially come up with some themes from

00:20:38.940 --> 00:20:41.480
the data and some kind of key findings and sort

00:20:41.480 --> 00:20:44.000
of actions to take forward. And so I did that

00:20:44.000 --> 00:20:48.190
for my project. It has so many benefits doing

00:20:48.190 --> 00:20:50.730
it that way because you get the benefit of having

00:20:50.730 --> 00:20:52.470
stakeholders who are invested. They've given

00:20:52.470 --> 00:20:57.069
up time. So they get access to the sort of transcribed

00:20:57.069 --> 00:20:59.210
data, which is really powerful. I think that

00:20:59.210 --> 00:21:00.930
has much more impact than just giving someone

00:21:00.930 --> 00:21:02.990
a report, giving them some findings that you've

00:21:02.990 --> 00:21:04.869
generated. They can create their own kind of

00:21:04.869 --> 00:21:06.190
meaning from that, which is really powerful.

00:21:07.390 --> 00:21:09.450
The downside of that is you've got such a high

00:21:09.450 --> 00:21:12.359
volume of data. doing that data justice in a

00:21:12.359 --> 00:21:14.220
relatively short amount of time, because you

00:21:14.220 --> 00:21:16.440
can't have stakeholders there for days and days

00:21:16.440 --> 00:21:18.279
to analyze the data. So you maybe do it in two

00:21:18.279 --> 00:21:21.980
or three hours. So the findings, I think, from

00:21:21.980 --> 00:21:25.039
just Roundtable can be quite limited at first,

00:21:25.140 --> 00:21:26.799
really powerful and a really good way of doing

00:21:26.799 --> 00:21:29.460
it. But I think for me, it would need to be combined

00:21:29.460 --> 00:21:31.740
with something else as well, just so that you

00:21:31.740 --> 00:21:32.940
make sure that you're not really missing anything.

00:21:33.799 --> 00:21:36.119
And we did do that. We did another kind of read

00:21:36.119 --> 00:21:38.400
through. looking for kind of practical things

00:21:38.400 --> 00:21:40.880
that we could take forward. But I would love

00:21:40.880 --> 00:21:42.900
to go back over that data and do a more detailed

00:21:42.900 --> 00:21:44.960
analysis, if I'm honest. I think that's a really

00:21:44.960 --> 00:21:46.579
good point about there's not necessarily one

00:21:46.579 --> 00:21:49.019
way of, I was about to find out, of analysing,

00:21:49.019 --> 00:21:51.180
but also you don't have to just choose one as

00:21:51.180 --> 00:21:53.140
well. You might have different people, students

00:21:53.140 --> 00:21:55.380
being co -creative, involving students in analysis

00:21:55.380 --> 00:21:59.700
as well. Absolutely. Fantastic. I had written

00:21:59.700 --> 00:22:02.039
the roundtable analysis into my original ethics

00:22:02.039 --> 00:22:04.259
proposal, but unfortunately ran out of time to

00:22:04.259 --> 00:22:10.769
run it. So despite, you know, doing research

00:22:10.769 --> 00:22:13.250
as part of my PhD, it was in the field of history,

00:22:13.329 --> 00:22:15.230
which is very different to scholarship teaching

00:22:15.230 --> 00:22:17.329
and learning and different to the kind of qualitative

00:22:17.329 --> 00:22:20.049
and quantitative methods, which are much more

00:22:20.049 --> 00:22:23.789
formalized, I think I'd say. And so part of what

00:22:23.789 --> 00:22:25.890
I had to do was read about those methods and

00:22:25.890 --> 00:22:30.369
try to try to understand them. And the colleague

00:22:30.369 --> 00:22:32.069
that commissioned the fellowship that I worked

00:22:32.069 --> 00:22:35.769
on gave me this like 900 page social research.

00:22:36.380 --> 00:22:39.940
social science research methods volume and out

00:22:39.940 --> 00:22:42.200
of interest they had the historical methods section

00:22:42.200 --> 00:22:45.279
and it was four pages long it essentially amounted

00:22:45.279 --> 00:22:48.400
to historians read identify meaning and then

00:22:48.400 --> 00:22:49.980
they decide when they're done with their research

00:22:49.980 --> 00:22:52.789
because they can't possibly read everything And

00:22:52.789 --> 00:22:54.710
it kind of resonated with me from the listening

00:22:54.710 --> 00:22:55.990
rooms, because like you were saying, Stacey,

00:22:56.009 --> 00:22:58.849
there's so much there that at some point you

00:22:58.849 --> 00:23:01.910
do have to stop or decide that you have enough

00:23:01.910 --> 00:23:03.569
or decide that you can put it down and come back

00:23:03.569 --> 00:23:07.369
to it later. So on a very, I think maybe the

00:23:07.369 --> 00:23:09.109
opposite side of the scale, that's genuinely

00:23:09.109 --> 00:23:13.400
what I did. I used the same skills. that I would

00:23:13.400 --> 00:23:15.920
use to do primary historical research and read

00:23:15.920 --> 00:23:19.900
through the transcripts, pulled out key themes,

00:23:20.000 --> 00:23:22.019
pulled out quotes that really resonated. I think

00:23:22.019 --> 00:23:24.960
the quotes were a really powerful kind of output

00:23:24.960 --> 00:23:29.079
from the listening room transcripts and from

00:23:29.079 --> 00:23:32.200
those kind of generate some key overarching themes

00:23:32.200 --> 00:23:34.839
in that kind of exploratory way so that other

00:23:34.839 --> 00:23:38.559
people could pick up on those themes and take

00:23:38.559 --> 00:23:41.460
further work forward if they wanted to in those

00:23:41.460 --> 00:23:44.799
areas. I mean, I was really daunted just by the

00:23:44.799 --> 00:23:46.019
amount of data. And to be honest, I was just

00:23:46.019 --> 00:23:51.039
daunted by analysing data generally. And actually,

00:23:51.119 --> 00:23:53.400
I was daunted by doing the fellowship. And I

00:23:53.400 --> 00:23:56.559
was daunted by the ethics room. So yeah, every

00:23:56.559 --> 00:23:58.440
step of the way, it felt like I was learning

00:23:58.440 --> 00:24:00.819
something new that I had no kind of prior experience

00:24:00.819 --> 00:24:06.579
of. So Lucy Hemingway in Light helped me enormously.

00:24:06.900 --> 00:24:09.740
And she was just kind of by my side, kind of

00:24:09.740 --> 00:24:13.109
guiding me through the process. I used Envivo

00:24:13.109 --> 00:24:18.230
to kind of code it. Probably not using the right

00:24:18.230 --> 00:24:22.730
terminology even. Yeah, so, I mean, I think it

00:24:22.730 --> 00:24:24.789
was Lucy or Emma described Envivo as like a giant

00:24:24.789 --> 00:24:26.589
highlighter pen. And that's just what I kept

00:24:26.589 --> 00:24:30.230
in mind. And actually, it's quite a simple concept,

00:24:30.269 --> 00:24:33.839
really. I think it just appeared. kind of more

00:24:33.839 --> 00:24:36.240
intimidating than perhaps it actually was once

00:24:36.240 --> 00:24:38.079
I started doing it. I think that's often the

00:24:38.079 --> 00:24:39.880
case because it's things that we all do in our

00:24:39.880 --> 00:24:42.099
day -to -day work. We're always analysing stuff.

00:24:42.460 --> 00:24:44.460
Yeah. It's just different language or different

00:24:44.460 --> 00:24:46.740
programmes, right? Yeah, yeah. And I could do

00:24:46.740 --> 00:24:49.380
a whole... Same person. I could do a whole podcast

00:24:49.380 --> 00:24:53.579
around just the language, you know, even knowing

00:24:53.579 --> 00:24:55.460
what, like, pedagogy is and what a fellowship

00:24:55.460 --> 00:24:58.240
is. But anyway, so, yeah, that's a tangent. A

00:24:58.240 --> 00:25:01.240
good one and a relevant one. Yeah, particularly

00:25:01.240 --> 00:25:04.069
as... a non -academic member of staff as well

00:25:04.069 --> 00:25:06.390
kind of you're in it feels like kind of in this

00:25:06.390 --> 00:25:09.849
different world that's so so far removed from

00:25:09.849 --> 00:25:14.089
your day -to -day role so yeah and I think in

00:25:14.089 --> 00:25:18.869
vivo I got used to it I was coding on that but

00:25:18.869 --> 00:25:20.349
I just haven't got through it all I just haven't

00:25:20.349 --> 00:25:23.049
got through all the transcripts yet because there's

00:25:23.049 --> 00:25:26.869
just so much of it and I think with the kind

00:25:26.869 --> 00:25:30.019
of survey results and things just people have

00:25:30.019 --> 00:25:31.920
kind of less space to put things it's just literally

00:25:31.920 --> 00:25:33.720
just the layout of having these like big blocks

00:25:33.720 --> 00:25:36.059
of writing and there's something about kind of

00:25:36.059 --> 00:25:37.960
working through that and like having that concentration

00:25:37.960 --> 00:25:41.660
and just sticking with it and chipping away at

00:25:41.660 --> 00:25:44.019
it and also I think because I was seeing things

00:25:44.019 --> 00:25:45.880
that weren't necessarily related to my research

00:25:45.880 --> 00:25:49.960
questions I was kind of thinking this is a lot

00:25:49.960 --> 00:25:51.779
of time that I'm spending on something and I've

00:25:51.779 --> 00:25:53.819
got a deadline to get this project completed

00:25:53.819 --> 00:25:59.349
so I would love to go back and kind of continue

00:25:59.349 --> 00:26:02.990
that and and I do like the idea of a round table

00:26:02.990 --> 00:26:05.769
and I think it's really important that these

00:26:05.769 --> 00:26:08.490
students have given up a lot of their time to

00:26:08.490 --> 00:26:09.930
take part in the listening room and they've really

00:26:09.930 --> 00:26:13.529
opened up and they've been vulnerable and I just

00:26:13.529 --> 00:26:15.930
really value the fact that they've kind of took

00:26:15.930 --> 00:26:19.069
part in it and I kind of want something good

00:26:19.069 --> 00:26:21.930
to come out of it or something I want other members

00:26:21.930 --> 00:26:23.769
of staff in disability services to see what they've

00:26:23.769 --> 00:26:27.130
written And I think you probably get a bigger

00:26:27.130 --> 00:26:29.210
impact of that as a member of staff from actually

00:26:29.210 --> 00:26:32.130
reading the transcripts. Like Stacey said, if

00:26:32.130 --> 00:26:33.730
someone just gives you a report saying this is

00:26:33.730 --> 00:26:35.490
what I found, it just doesn't have the same impact

00:26:35.490 --> 00:26:37.210
as actually reading the words that they're saying.

00:26:37.670 --> 00:26:41.069
You read for different things. So as much as

00:26:41.069 --> 00:26:43.890
I am somewhat critical of the limitations of

00:26:43.890 --> 00:26:46.529
roundtable analysis, they're also really powerful.

00:26:46.650 --> 00:26:50.069
So one example that I've given previously when

00:26:50.069 --> 00:26:52.960
I've talked about this is... I had a colleague

00:26:52.960 --> 00:26:54.759
who read a set of transcripts. And bear in mind,

00:26:54.859 --> 00:26:56.880
I'd transcribed the data. I'd read all the transcripts.

00:26:56.880 --> 00:27:00.259
I was super familiar with the data. And he'd

00:27:00.259 --> 00:27:02.880
read two or three transcripts. And he came out

00:27:02.880 --> 00:27:05.099
and he said, you know, the real key thing that

00:27:05.099 --> 00:27:07.779
I've taken away from these transcripts. OK, yeah.

00:27:08.740 --> 00:27:12.299
Whereas he previously had always thought that

00:27:12.299 --> 00:27:15.640
university open days were schmaltzy sort of marketing

00:27:15.640 --> 00:27:17.220
affairs. He didn't want to go to them. He was

00:27:17.220 --> 00:27:19.299
like, oh, I have to be an ambassador and all

00:27:19.299 --> 00:27:22.529
like shiny and exciting. When he read through

00:27:22.529 --> 00:27:24.250
the transcripts, bearing in mind our first topic

00:27:24.250 --> 00:27:26.470
prompt was around admission, which also could

00:27:26.470 --> 00:27:29.369
include open days. And he said he read around

00:27:29.369 --> 00:27:31.730
them and he really understood then from reading

00:27:31.730 --> 00:27:35.569
the transcripts directly the importance of a

00:27:35.569 --> 00:27:38.490
wide variety of different staff attending open

00:27:38.490 --> 00:27:40.890
days, being there to represent the university,

00:27:40.910 --> 00:27:43.630
because that made underrepresented students feel

00:27:43.630 --> 00:27:45.730
more inclusive. It made them feel seen. It made

00:27:45.730 --> 00:27:47.029
them feel as though they would have a sense of

00:27:47.029 --> 00:27:50.559
belonging. I never would have taken that out

00:27:50.559 --> 00:27:52.299
of the transcript because it just wasn't something

00:27:52.299 --> 00:27:54.599
that I would have thought. Because perhaps I

00:27:54.599 --> 00:27:56.299
always thought I would go to open days. I don't

00:27:56.299 --> 00:27:57.799
know. I just hadn't. I didn't have that perspective.

00:27:58.319 --> 00:28:01.160
So his interpretation of reading that raw data

00:28:01.160 --> 00:28:04.839
gave something different and powerful and impactful.

00:28:04.920 --> 00:28:07.140
And he changed his practice. He goes to open

00:28:07.140 --> 00:28:09.619
days. He attends open days and does more work

00:28:09.619 --> 00:28:12.200
because he has that perspective. And if he'd

00:28:12.200 --> 00:28:13.839
not spent that time reading those transcripts,

00:28:13.839 --> 00:28:16.059
if he'd not been able to go to that meeting.

00:28:16.759 --> 00:28:19.579
to do that work he wouldn't have had that perspective

00:28:19.579 --> 00:28:21.640
and I wouldn't have that as a really nice example

00:28:21.640 --> 00:28:24.779
of impact and findings because you know so for

00:28:24.779 --> 00:28:27.440
me the power of actually reading that raw data

00:28:27.440 --> 00:28:31.400
just like you say is you get a different interpretation

00:28:31.400 --> 00:28:35.099
of it and that for me was the most important

00:28:35.099 --> 00:28:38.160
thing because who am I as one researcher to be

00:28:38.160 --> 00:28:40.759
the person that interprets the experiences of

00:28:40.759 --> 00:28:42.819
this group of people I want to do it justice

00:28:43.720 --> 00:28:46.119
Roundtable analysis might not be sufficient to

00:28:46.119 --> 00:28:49.339
do it justice in terms of time and depth, but

00:28:49.339 --> 00:28:51.480
it does add something else to it. Yeah, I think

00:28:51.480 --> 00:28:54.500
as you say, a combination of different types

00:28:54.500 --> 00:28:57.420
of analysis probably works best in an ideal world.

00:28:57.579 --> 00:29:00.119
It's just time. It's really time intensive. That's

00:29:00.119 --> 00:29:03.960
the big issue, isn't it? As is often the way

00:29:03.960 --> 00:29:06.480
where these episodes are found, we had a list

00:29:06.480 --> 00:29:08.839
of sort of sections and then we end up covering

00:29:08.839 --> 00:29:12.920
it all in different... Which is actually exactly

00:29:12.920 --> 00:29:16.819
what we want. Okay, that's good. So we've touched

00:29:16.819 --> 00:29:20.180
upon a lot of benefits in terms of richness of

00:29:20.180 --> 00:29:23.400
data, agency for participants. Are there any

00:29:23.400 --> 00:29:25.099
other particular benefits that you found from

00:29:25.099 --> 00:29:28.140
your experiences of using listening rooms? I'm

00:29:28.140 --> 00:29:29.680
at the risk of repeating myself, but I think

00:29:29.680 --> 00:29:31.819
just for disabled students, and I think this

00:29:31.819 --> 00:29:33.420
would apply to lots of other groups of students,

00:29:33.500 --> 00:29:38.190
having that variety of formats. and like online

00:29:38.190 --> 00:29:40.589
or in person and offering that range I think

00:29:40.589 --> 00:29:42.769
the listening rooms can work really well and

00:29:42.769 --> 00:29:45.529
for the in -person ones I made the room really

00:29:45.529 --> 00:29:47.789
cozy it had like lighting that they could change

00:29:47.789 --> 00:29:49.950
and like a variety of different seats I put some

00:29:49.950 --> 00:29:52.490
fidget toys out it's big egg timer it was just

00:29:52.490 --> 00:29:55.950
like a really nice environment I mean they commented

00:29:55.950 --> 00:29:57.990
on that's not just my interpretation they were

00:29:57.990 --> 00:30:00.029
like oh this is nice it's like a plate of biscuits

00:30:00.029 --> 00:30:04.400
and um um so I think there's some students just

00:30:04.400 --> 00:30:05.960
really liked coming into disability services

00:30:05.960 --> 00:30:10.220
and doing that and some students do prefer the

00:30:10.220 --> 00:30:14.140
in -person the majority were online because there's

00:30:14.140 --> 00:30:16.720
students who can't kind of get into campus or

00:30:16.720 --> 00:30:18.180
i mean the students with caring responsibilities

00:30:18.180 --> 00:30:20.079
and commute and things that would suit them so

00:30:20.079 --> 00:30:22.839
i think that the flexibility of it was great

00:30:22.839 --> 00:30:24.940
and i think that's what worked particularly well

00:30:24.940 --> 00:30:28.779
in my project i think for mine it was the authenticity

00:30:28.779 --> 00:30:32.109
that that you know We talk about them having

00:30:32.109 --> 00:30:34.490
that space and that kind of autonomy and the

00:30:34.490 --> 00:30:36.730
agency over what they're saying. But the authenticity,

00:30:36.970 --> 00:30:39.150
especially, say for my project, the people did

00:30:39.150 --> 00:30:41.829
know each other. They brought their friend and

00:30:41.829 --> 00:30:44.529
they had their conversation. And, you know, sometimes

00:30:44.529 --> 00:30:47.990
it was, I felt like I was listening to not a

00:30:47.990 --> 00:30:49.329
private conversation. They knew they were being

00:30:49.329 --> 00:30:53.069
recorded. But I would hear kind of the way that

00:30:53.069 --> 00:30:54.549
they kind of interacted with each other was,

00:30:54.569 --> 00:30:56.809
I just couldn't imagine them interacting with

00:30:56.809 --> 00:30:59.190
me like that. If I was the one asking questions.

00:30:59.930 --> 00:31:01.470
or even just talking about the prompt or having

00:31:01.470 --> 00:31:03.849
a conversation with them, it just wouldn't have

00:31:03.849 --> 00:31:06.069
had that depth and that flow and that sort of

00:31:06.069 --> 00:31:08.990
vibe. Occasionally they sort of broke the fourth

00:31:08.990 --> 00:31:11.410
wall and went, the person recording this, the

00:31:11.410 --> 00:31:13.329
person listening to this, we're so sorry because

00:31:13.329 --> 00:31:15.809
we've just been cackling or whatever. So, you

00:31:15.809 --> 00:31:17.450
know, it was really authentic and it was really

00:31:17.450 --> 00:31:19.890
nice. And there was bits where I was sort of

00:31:19.890 --> 00:31:21.829
laughing away in the recording thinking, okay,

00:31:22.029 --> 00:31:23.970
right, I'll do this transcription. And, you know,

00:31:23.970 --> 00:31:25.769
because they just go off on tangents and then

00:31:25.769 --> 00:31:27.150
they go, oh, we probably should get back to it.

00:31:27.850 --> 00:31:30.450
Maybe that segues quite nicely into the limitations

00:31:30.450 --> 00:31:34.490
of listening rooms. I was going to say. Because

00:31:34.490 --> 00:31:37.369
I know, yeah, limitations of listening rooms,

00:31:37.430 --> 00:31:39.369
the primary one for me is that they can go rogue.

00:31:40.539 --> 00:31:42.579
And I know, Lauren, you had that experience,

00:31:42.700 --> 00:31:44.920
didn't you? Yeah, I had a listening room where

00:31:44.920 --> 00:31:47.400
the final transcript was about 14 pages long

00:31:47.400 --> 00:31:50.180
and it's on page 12 where the pair went, oh,

00:31:50.259 --> 00:31:53.000
should we talk about the prompts now? It's not

00:31:53.000 --> 00:31:55.380
to say that there wasn't useful information in

00:31:55.380 --> 00:31:57.619
the first kind of 12 pages of transcript, but

00:31:57.619 --> 00:32:00.900
it was maybe a bit more generic or I had to work

00:32:00.900 --> 00:32:05.160
a bit harder to relate it to my research. Yeah,

00:32:05.319 --> 00:32:08.339
so it is that kind of... go rogue element which

00:32:08.339 --> 00:32:09.980
which is I think both a blessing and a curse

00:32:09.980 --> 00:32:12.359
because sometimes they go rogue and you you know

00:32:12.359 --> 00:32:15.480
kind of hit gold and um you know uncover things

00:32:15.480 --> 00:32:17.359
you never thought you would or weren't even on

00:32:17.359 --> 00:32:21.180
your radar yeah I had to say a similar experience

00:32:21.180 --> 00:32:23.319
in terms of the students breaking the fourth

00:32:23.319 --> 00:32:25.519
wall and listening to the recording and hearing

00:32:25.519 --> 00:32:28.700
them and I also just really loved hearing that

00:32:28.700 --> 00:32:32.529
actually and just giving the participants this

00:32:32.529 --> 00:32:34.789
space to kind of have those kind of conversations

00:32:34.789 --> 00:32:35.990
particularly when they didn't know each other

00:32:35.990 --> 00:32:37.430
as well and I kind of thought this is so nice

00:32:37.430 --> 00:32:39.289
they don't even have never met each other before

00:32:39.289 --> 00:32:40.809
this and by the end of it they were kind of like

00:32:40.809 --> 00:32:43.410
chattering away and they kind of said oh you

00:32:43.410 --> 00:32:45.269
know at the start I didn't think we'd be able

00:32:45.269 --> 00:32:46.910
to fill up the time and by the end they're kind

00:32:46.910 --> 00:32:48.990
of almost overran um so yeah so that was really

00:32:48.990 --> 00:32:52.789
nice but the limitations are that it isn't particularly

00:32:52.789 --> 00:32:55.750
focused all the time and it does go off in tangents

00:32:55.750 --> 00:32:57.769
and things like that but I think that's kind

00:32:57.769 --> 00:33:00.859
of a risk It's a worthwhile risk because the

00:33:00.859 --> 00:33:03.339
benefits outweigh the risks of that happening.

00:33:04.039 --> 00:33:07.160
One of the risks you mentioned earlier was who

00:33:07.160 --> 00:33:10.140
do we exclude if they don't have a partner to

00:33:10.140 --> 00:33:13.039
bring into that space? I know you defined who

00:33:13.039 --> 00:33:16.279
they could bring in quite broadly. That was something

00:33:16.279 --> 00:33:19.839
that... I really thought about and actually I

00:33:19.839 --> 00:33:22.460
ended up offering monologues as an alternative,

00:33:22.779 --> 00:33:25.819
whereas one student would turn up and use the

00:33:25.819 --> 00:33:28.079
same prompts. I wouldn't be in the room as the

00:33:28.079 --> 00:33:30.960
researcher, but they would just speak on whatever

00:33:30.960 --> 00:33:33.819
they wanted to speak on. And when I offered that

00:33:33.819 --> 00:33:36.759
as an alternative, I did kind of. Kind of saw

00:33:36.759 --> 00:33:39.640
it as an alternative I should offer, but wasn't

00:33:39.640 --> 00:33:42.019
really hopeful for what the, I guess, thinking

00:33:42.019 --> 00:33:44.079
about myself, I feel like I could probably talk

00:33:44.079 --> 00:33:45.579
about something for five minutes and then I'd

00:33:45.579 --> 00:33:47.799
be like, right, that's too much. I'm done. But

00:33:47.799 --> 00:33:49.920
the students that did it, actually, one of them

00:33:49.920 --> 00:33:53.279
spoke for 40 minutes on their own, just reflecting

00:33:53.279 --> 00:33:55.380
on what they thought was important in the context

00:33:55.380 --> 00:33:58.740
of the prompts. And they were extremely rich

00:33:58.740 --> 00:34:02.380
because, you know, as I was thinking about belonging,

00:34:02.559 --> 00:34:05.450
obviously. The opposite of belonging is to not

00:34:05.450 --> 00:34:07.130
belong. And those are the sorts of people that

00:34:07.130 --> 00:34:09.530
may not have the connections that bring, you

00:34:09.530 --> 00:34:11.550
know, have a friend to bring into the research

00:34:11.550 --> 00:34:13.070
space. So I was really conscious that I wanted

00:34:13.070 --> 00:34:16.590
to capture that voice. And a methodology that

00:34:16.590 --> 00:34:19.170
I kind of saw as a needed alternative actually

00:34:19.170 --> 00:34:21.969
turned out to be arguably more robust than the

00:34:21.969 --> 00:34:25.449
listening room where my participants did go a

00:34:25.449 --> 00:34:28.969
bit more rogue than I would have liked. That's

00:34:28.969 --> 00:34:31.070
so interesting because that would never have

00:34:31.070 --> 00:34:33.539
occurred to me to offer that. And I think I,

00:34:33.579 --> 00:34:36.539
and that's my assumptions that they wouldn't

00:34:36.539 --> 00:34:39.119
want to do that. Yeah. To be honest, it just

00:34:39.119 --> 00:34:40.920
literally didn't occur to me. But so did a few.

00:34:41.389 --> 00:34:45.010
take up on yeah so I ended up doing four monologues

00:34:45.010 --> 00:34:46.969
in one listening room so it was actually more

00:34:46.969 --> 00:34:49.409
which again in the context of belonging I think

00:34:49.409 --> 00:34:51.670
could be a research finding in its own right

00:34:51.670 --> 00:34:54.030
especially for distance learning students and

00:34:54.030 --> 00:34:56.349
thinking about the connections um that they make

00:34:56.349 --> 00:34:59.070
but I have to have to give Claudia Rogers a shout

00:34:59.070 --> 00:35:01.369
out for the monologuing suggestion and because

00:35:01.369 --> 00:35:04.429
she offered that as an alternative when um a

00:35:04.429 --> 00:35:06.230
listening room was scheduled but one of the pair

00:35:06.230 --> 00:35:08.650
was unwell or couldn't attend for whatever reason

00:35:08.650 --> 00:35:11.429
and the monologue was the alternative that she

00:35:11.429 --> 00:35:14.369
offered the participant um and so i very much

00:35:14.369 --> 00:35:17.309
just kind of stole that idea and used it um and

00:35:17.309 --> 00:35:19.909
it turned out to work surprisingly well yeah

00:35:19.909 --> 00:35:21.530
that's great i guess yeah not all students would

00:35:21.530 --> 00:35:23.010
feel comfortable doing that but just offering

00:35:23.010 --> 00:35:25.530
it as an option is really good and i wish i'd

00:35:25.530 --> 00:35:28.389
thought of that because there were a couple of

00:35:28.389 --> 00:35:30.849
situations where apart like one of the pair couldn't

00:35:30.849 --> 00:35:33.489
come and in hindsight it would have been good

00:35:33.489 --> 00:35:35.969
to have that as an option i had a limitation

00:35:35.969 --> 00:35:40.480
around prompts Oh, great. Yeah. So just by saying

00:35:40.480 --> 00:35:42.699
that my prompts were probably too detailed earlier.

00:35:43.079 --> 00:35:47.519
One of the things that I would reflect on is

00:35:47.519 --> 00:35:49.820
because you can't be in that space to redirect

00:35:49.820 --> 00:35:52.820
as the researcher, setting a kind of clear expectation

00:35:52.820 --> 00:35:55.559
for your participants. So I had a lot of participants

00:35:55.559 --> 00:35:59.639
kind of deviate and give. verbal feedback on

00:35:59.639 --> 00:36:01.599
the modules and programs that they'd studied,

00:36:01.760 --> 00:36:04.079
which again is useful in its own way, but kind

00:36:04.079 --> 00:36:05.820
of deviated from the purpose of the research.

00:36:06.199 --> 00:36:09.619
And I think some people framed it as they, you

00:36:09.619 --> 00:36:12.719
know, they really valued participating so they

00:36:12.719 --> 00:36:15.579
could give feedback. on their study experience

00:36:15.579 --> 00:36:18.599
rather than the kind of broader purpose of the

00:36:18.599 --> 00:36:20.980
research. So there's something to take away there

00:36:20.980 --> 00:36:22.880
of kind of setting the scene for the listening

00:36:22.880 --> 00:36:25.880
room of what it is, what it isn't, while still

00:36:25.880 --> 00:36:28.679
allowing for all of that freedom for your participants

00:36:28.679 --> 00:36:31.780
to take it where they want to take it. And I

00:36:31.780 --> 00:36:33.539
think there's something to add to that, I think,

00:36:33.539 --> 00:36:35.440
in terms of we've talked about briefing participants

00:36:35.440 --> 00:36:37.980
beforehand, maybe having a bit of a debrief with

00:36:37.980 --> 00:36:39.920
them afterwards. And I think actually having

00:36:39.920 --> 00:36:41.840
the briefing is really important because it gives

00:36:41.840 --> 00:36:44.239
you that space to sort of... Set the context,

00:36:44.280 --> 00:36:47.179
set the scene, remind people of kind of key things

00:36:47.179 --> 00:36:48.980
from the participant information sheet, for example,

00:36:49.000 --> 00:36:50.920
because if they've signed that two weeks beforehand,

00:36:51.139 --> 00:36:53.039
even if you say, you know, have a read through

00:36:53.039 --> 00:36:55.320
it, are they taking that in? So kind of reminding

00:36:55.320 --> 00:36:57.320
them of things like, you know, you can pause

00:36:57.320 --> 00:36:59.199
or you can stop. You don't have to say things

00:36:59.199 --> 00:37:02.659
that you don't feel comfortable with. But also

00:37:02.659 --> 00:37:04.199
really importantly about the prompts as well.

00:37:04.539 --> 00:37:08.260
Our prompts were not designed to be prescriptive.

00:37:08.780 --> 00:37:10.840
We had a sort of word header and then we said

00:37:10.840 --> 00:37:13.969
this might include things like. And what we found

00:37:13.969 --> 00:37:16.150
was actually students just went through the list

00:37:16.150 --> 00:37:17.590
of things that we'd suggested sort of one by

00:37:17.590 --> 00:37:19.949
one. And it was only kind of at the end of the

00:37:19.949 --> 00:37:21.469
project or not the end of the project, but at

00:37:21.469 --> 00:37:23.650
the end of the data collection that when I was

00:37:23.650 --> 00:37:25.829
transcribing, I was like, oh, they did that right.

00:37:26.269 --> 00:37:28.510
If I'd have clocked that sooner, if I'd have

00:37:28.510 --> 00:37:29.730
been in the room, I would have known that that

00:37:29.730 --> 00:37:31.150
was happening and I could have kind of steered

00:37:31.150 --> 00:37:34.170
it. But because I wasn't, I wasn't able to do

00:37:34.170 --> 00:37:35.630
that. So I was like, actually, I probably would

00:37:35.630 --> 00:37:37.550
tweak the briefing next time to be a bit more

00:37:37.550 --> 00:37:40.079
kind of clear that. The prompts are just as a

00:37:40.079 --> 00:37:41.920
guide. They're not, you know, you don't have

00:37:41.920 --> 00:37:43.920
to be sticking to the kind of examples of things.

00:37:44.860 --> 00:37:46.599
But I think briefing and debriefing is really

00:37:46.599 --> 00:37:49.139
important. And debriefing actually with a method

00:37:49.139 --> 00:37:52.320
like this, certainly for our project, it was

00:37:52.320 --> 00:37:56.460
the first time. Other than the projects at Hallam,

00:37:56.500 --> 00:37:57.900
it was the first time that I was aware of the

00:37:57.900 --> 00:37:59.699
project, kind of the method having been used.

00:38:00.440 --> 00:38:02.619
So we wanted a bit of debrief on kind of how

00:38:02.619 --> 00:38:04.219
did the participants actually feel when they

00:38:04.219 --> 00:38:06.019
were doing it? You know, was it was it a good

00:38:06.019 --> 00:38:07.500
experience for them? Was there anything that

00:38:07.500 --> 00:38:09.019
they found challenging? Was there anything that

00:38:09.019 --> 00:38:11.340
they thought was particularly good? Was there

00:38:11.340 --> 00:38:12.900
anything in the conversation that they wanted

00:38:12.900 --> 00:38:15.860
to flag to us? And a couple of things did come

00:38:15.860 --> 00:38:17.539
up from that where we could signpost to additional

00:38:17.539 --> 00:38:20.699
support, which was really powerful. Yeah, I mean,

00:38:20.699 --> 00:38:23.940
just to plug the toolkit again, because. It gives

00:38:23.940 --> 00:38:29.079
quite a good structure to the briefing beforehand

00:38:29.079 --> 00:38:32.840
and then the ideas for the topic prompts and

00:38:32.840 --> 00:38:36.440
the debriefing as well. And signposting, I think

00:38:36.440 --> 00:38:39.380
that is really important to remind students that

00:38:39.380 --> 00:38:41.739
if anything does come up for them, then there

00:38:41.739 --> 00:38:44.599
are other services we can signpost to if anything

00:38:44.599 --> 00:38:46.340
distressing comes up and stuff. So I think it

00:38:46.340 --> 00:38:48.320
is really important to have the pre -briefing.

00:38:49.230 --> 00:38:52.969
The one afterwards as well. I think I underestimated

00:38:52.969 --> 00:38:55.469
the importance of that. So I would, going back

00:38:55.469 --> 00:38:58.190
in time, I'd give those as much attention as

00:38:58.190 --> 00:39:01.630
I'd given my prompts. One of my prompts was belonging,

00:39:01.829 --> 00:39:04.150
which obviously is a bit of a buzzword for staff

00:39:04.150 --> 00:39:07.130
at the university. But for the students, I think

00:39:07.130 --> 00:39:09.489
they were a bit like, so what does that actually

00:39:09.489 --> 00:39:11.230
mean? And I was like, well, yeah, so it kind

00:39:11.230 --> 00:39:13.289
of, and I tried to kind of explain it. So I think

00:39:13.289 --> 00:39:16.309
it's easy to think that students will know exactly.

00:39:16.679 --> 00:39:18.679
exactly what you mean or and i know it's meant

00:39:18.679 --> 00:39:20.400
to be quite broad but i think just giving them

00:39:20.400 --> 00:39:22.119
a bit of an idea about the type of things they

00:39:22.119 --> 00:39:24.159
might go through but making clear it's not prescriptive

00:39:24.159 --> 00:39:25.760
that's particularly important in listening rooms

00:39:25.760 --> 00:39:27.420
because unlike interviews or focus groups you

00:39:27.420 --> 00:39:30.280
can't clarify that during the discussion yeah

00:39:30.280 --> 00:39:33.039
yeah exactly i think this is a very relevant

00:39:33.039 --> 00:39:35.739
discussion to discussion we had last week when

00:39:35.739 --> 00:39:37.340
we're talking about reflective journals and logs

00:39:37.340 --> 00:39:40.139
and talking about the student experience as a

00:39:40.139 --> 00:39:42.599
participant and as a co -creator as well and

00:39:42.599 --> 00:39:44.519
what you were saying earlier about creating the

00:39:44.519 --> 00:39:47.360
right environment Claire and getting feedback

00:39:47.360 --> 00:39:51.219
Lauren and um treating students as sort of you

00:39:51.219 --> 00:39:54.780
know as partners who are not just you know a

00:39:54.780 --> 00:39:57.980
source of not you know a source of information

00:39:57.980 --> 00:40:02.119
or data that you need to extract you know quotes

00:40:02.119 --> 00:40:05.719
or you know you know words on a paper from but

00:40:05.719 --> 00:40:10.519
as people who can contribute to change how did

00:40:10.519 --> 00:40:12.840
you see the role of participants in your projects

00:40:12.840 --> 00:40:16.469
and Do you think that from the perspective of

00:40:16.469 --> 00:40:19.110
a participant, listening rooms are empowering

00:40:19.110 --> 00:40:22.929
to be a part of? That's the impression that I

00:40:22.929 --> 00:40:25.610
got from the comments from the participants after

00:40:25.610 --> 00:40:28.469
each listening room. I think every listening

00:40:28.469 --> 00:40:31.329
room, it was kind of almost overwhelmingly positive

00:40:31.329 --> 00:40:34.230
feedback from the participants, which surprised

00:40:34.230 --> 00:40:37.409
me. I honestly thought that, you know, some might

00:40:37.409 --> 00:40:40.070
kind of enjoy it, but I was just surprised at

00:40:40.070 --> 00:40:43.849
how... kind of gushing they were about it and

00:40:43.849 --> 00:40:46.730
because I think students do get sent a lot of

00:40:46.730 --> 00:40:48.989
surveys and things and ask for their kind of

00:40:48.989 --> 00:40:52.789
input and feedback and I think this is it's having

00:40:52.789 --> 00:40:55.170
that time to kind of talk about what's meaningful

00:40:55.170 --> 00:40:58.250
to them and what's important to them was quite

00:40:58.250 --> 00:41:03.360
a novel experience for them Yeah, I had one of

00:41:03.360 --> 00:41:05.300
my prompts, one of my participants went, oh,

00:41:05.300 --> 00:41:06.880
that's not important to me at all, but I'm going

00:41:06.880 --> 00:41:09.079
to tell you about this instead. And I think that,

00:41:09.239 --> 00:41:12.980
you know, no one explicitly said that to me in

00:41:12.980 --> 00:41:15.900
order to Izzy, who was supporting as a research

00:41:15.900 --> 00:41:19.320
assistant. I feel like that is an empowering

00:41:19.320 --> 00:41:21.820
opportunity to say, you know, I don't actually

00:41:21.820 --> 00:41:23.739
care about the thing that you think is important

00:41:23.739 --> 00:41:26.019
here. Here's something that's more important.

00:41:26.539 --> 00:41:28.599
I think that's what's really exciting about listing

00:41:28.599 --> 00:41:32.280
rooms is the opportunity to hear that in a way

00:41:32.280 --> 00:41:33.619
that maybe they wouldn't be able to look you

00:41:33.619 --> 00:41:36.000
in the eye as the researcher and say, I don't

00:41:36.000 --> 00:41:39.400
think you're right. But yeah, I think that's

00:41:39.400 --> 00:41:42.619
a really exciting opportunity to position them

00:41:42.619 --> 00:41:45.110
as kind of... equal to you and to some extent

00:41:45.110 --> 00:41:47.449
as the researcher of framing what is important

00:41:47.449 --> 00:41:49.929
about the questions you're asking going forwards

00:41:49.929 --> 00:41:52.590
then does anyone have any plans to use listening

00:41:52.590 --> 00:41:55.130
rooms again or any ideas about ways in which

00:41:55.130 --> 00:41:58.030
it can be further developed lauren you're nodding

00:41:58.030 --> 00:42:00.829
yeah i mean a very very introductory stage if

00:42:00.829 --> 00:42:03.400
i ever did a like a A subtle type of research

00:42:03.400 --> 00:42:06.179
project again, absolutely. I definitely use them.

00:42:06.260 --> 00:42:09.820
In my non -light life, I work with the learning

00:42:09.820 --> 00:42:13.440
design team and work in kind of the design thinking

00:42:13.440 --> 00:42:16.940
space. And a lot of that, a key element of that

00:42:16.940 --> 00:42:19.920
process is developing empathy with a range of

00:42:19.920 --> 00:42:22.480
stakeholders. And we have spoken about listening

00:42:22.480 --> 00:42:24.059
rooms and I have used my light research as kind

00:42:24.059 --> 00:42:27.119
of an example of how those could work as a way

00:42:27.119 --> 00:42:31.760
to collect stakeholder experiences and opinions.

00:42:31.820 --> 00:42:34.780
and ideas moving away from a more traditional

00:42:34.780 --> 00:42:38.039
focus group or from a survey or from maybe some

00:42:38.039 --> 00:42:42.440
of those more familiar methodologies so nothing's

00:42:42.440 --> 00:42:44.300
happened you know nothing concrete has come out

00:42:44.300 --> 00:42:45.980
of that yet but it's definitely been something

00:42:45.980 --> 00:42:49.219
we've discussed as a methodology that could be

00:42:49.219 --> 00:42:52.420
really fruitful for a range of reasons. I don't

00:42:52.420 --> 00:42:54.679
currently have any plans to use them but if the

00:42:54.679 --> 00:42:56.360
opportunity arose I would definitely consider

00:42:56.360 --> 00:42:58.920
them I'd perhaps just do it slightly differently.

00:42:59.630 --> 00:43:01.949
maybe do listening rooms first to kind of scope

00:43:01.949 --> 00:43:04.670
out kind of what the themes are before moving

00:43:04.670 --> 00:43:08.670
on to the next stage. But I would certainly consider

00:43:08.670 --> 00:43:10.650
it and I really enjoyed doing them and I think

00:43:10.650 --> 00:43:13.110
it was well worth it to get through. Yeah, I

00:43:13.110 --> 00:43:15.769
think from what you've all described, listening

00:43:15.769 --> 00:43:18.329
rooms as a method that fits in as an exploratory

00:43:18.329 --> 00:43:22.489
part of a wider methodology is really, I think,

00:43:22.590 --> 00:43:25.469
exciting. It excites me. I'd love to use it in

00:43:25.469 --> 00:43:27.150
the future at some point if I had the opportunity.

00:43:27.530 --> 00:43:30.840
How about yourself, Stacey? um it's interesting

00:43:30.840 --> 00:43:32.420
because I feel like I've talked about listening

00:43:32.420 --> 00:43:34.880
rooms for years now and I feel I was maybe a

00:43:34.880 --> 00:43:37.579
little bit listening rooms out but but I I think

00:43:37.579 --> 00:43:39.679
it does have a space and and certainly for the

00:43:39.679 --> 00:43:41.420
right project I was talking to someone the other

00:43:41.420 --> 00:43:43.099
day and they were talking about their project

00:43:43.099 --> 00:43:46.139
and I said oh I don't want to imply that I suggest

00:43:46.139 --> 00:43:48.119
this for every single project but maybe listening

00:43:48.119 --> 00:43:50.139
rooms would work really well because they started

00:43:50.139 --> 00:43:52.619
much the same as yourself Claire where They wanted

00:43:52.619 --> 00:43:54.199
to do focus groups, but the conversations could

00:43:54.199 --> 00:43:56.840
be quite sensitive. And so I said, oh, have you

00:43:56.840 --> 00:43:59.039
heard about listening rooms? Which was weird

00:43:59.039 --> 00:44:00.500
because I felt like I'd not really kind of promoted

00:44:00.500 --> 00:44:04.460
it much before that, but for a while. But I think

00:44:04.460 --> 00:44:06.780
what we could use listening rooms for, and this

00:44:06.780 --> 00:44:08.119
kind of goes back to the previous question about

00:44:08.119 --> 00:44:12.280
how students kind of received it. We could use

00:44:12.280 --> 00:44:15.940
it more as a tool for student practice. So actually

00:44:15.940 --> 00:44:18.320
what we found in our listening rooms was that

00:44:18.320 --> 00:44:21.260
students really valued the opportunity to sit.

00:44:21.820 --> 00:44:24.539
and reflect and actually use that and reflect,

00:44:24.739 --> 00:44:26.460
especially because our project looked at the

00:44:26.460 --> 00:44:28.920
whole journey. So they could reflect on getting

00:44:28.920 --> 00:44:32.679
into university, staying at university, achieving

00:44:32.679 --> 00:44:35.340
their degree. And then we also asked them to

00:44:35.340 --> 00:44:38.159
think kind of in the future as well. So I think

00:44:38.159 --> 00:44:39.739
there's more opportunity there for us to use

00:44:39.739 --> 00:44:42.380
it in that kind of student -led sort of tool

00:44:42.380 --> 00:44:47.219
way. But yeah, I think there's a real opportunity

00:44:47.219 --> 00:44:49.929
there for us to think about how to use it. not

00:44:49.929 --> 00:44:53.650
just to harvest data from individuals, but actually

00:44:53.650 --> 00:44:57.030
how can we use it to help students? Because I

00:44:57.030 --> 00:45:00.250
think a few people went in our debriefs, a few

00:45:00.250 --> 00:45:02.250
of the participants said, I've not really had

00:45:02.250 --> 00:45:04.389
opportunity to have these kinds of conversations,

00:45:04.489 --> 00:45:06.170
even though I'm good friends with this person.

00:45:06.530 --> 00:45:08.329
We've not had this conversation before and I

00:45:08.329 --> 00:45:10.949
didn't know this. And from this, I've understood

00:45:10.949 --> 00:45:13.610
their experiences better. And maybe had I known

00:45:13.610 --> 00:45:15.050
about this before, I could have told them about

00:45:15.050 --> 00:45:17.639
this, this and this resource. I think actually

00:45:17.639 --> 00:45:19.820
kind of providing that, using listening rooms

00:45:19.820 --> 00:45:23.099
to provide that space, to provide that sort of

00:45:23.099 --> 00:45:27.139
tool to reflect and to think about our experiences

00:45:27.139 --> 00:45:30.079
can be really powerful. I know for one project

00:45:30.079 --> 00:45:32.639
they were used not as a method of data collection,

00:45:32.760 --> 00:45:35.159
but actually as a way to decompress. So people

00:45:35.159 --> 00:45:38.519
had had these training sessions that were really

00:45:38.519 --> 00:45:41.820
kind of emotionally. taxing, and they used listening

00:45:41.820 --> 00:45:43.960
rooms as an opportunity for people who'd been

00:45:43.960 --> 00:45:46.139
in the training session to actually kind of decompress,

00:45:46.139 --> 00:45:48.980
kind of debrief with each other. And that was

00:45:48.980 --> 00:45:50.800
really powerful as well. So again, not the way

00:45:50.800 --> 00:45:53.460
it was intended, perhaps originally, but a really

00:45:53.460 --> 00:45:55.340
nice way to develop the method moving forward.

00:45:55.579 --> 00:45:57.619
This is a really nice way of tying together the

00:45:57.619 --> 00:45:59.739
series that we've put together actually, Stacey,

00:45:59.840 --> 00:46:02.400
because one thing that we've realised is the

00:46:02.400 --> 00:46:04.880
applicability of methods used in, let's say,

00:46:04.920 --> 00:46:08.039
like fellowship. to wider forms of sort of practice,

00:46:08.159 --> 00:46:10.800
whether that's in working with students in a

00:46:10.800 --> 00:46:13.039
teaching capacity, in learning design capacity,

00:46:13.400 --> 00:46:17.019
in student support, all different areas, and

00:46:17.019 --> 00:46:20.260
how you can draw inspiration from, let's say,

00:46:20.300 --> 00:46:22.000
listening rooms or an aspect of listening rooms,

00:46:22.099 --> 00:46:24.340
and whether you're doing a fully -fledged...

00:46:24.590 --> 00:46:26.389
piece of research or you're using listening rooms

00:46:26.389 --> 00:46:28.070
in their entirety or you're taking inspiration

00:46:28.070 --> 00:46:29.969
from it and learning from some of the principles

00:46:29.969 --> 00:46:32.170
and some of the the opportunities it provides

00:46:32.170 --> 00:46:35.289
for reflection or for listening or for belonging

00:46:35.289 --> 00:46:38.530
and that's an exciting thing to explore I think

00:46:38.530 --> 00:46:42.989
going forwards so thanks everybody it's been

00:46:42.989 --> 00:46:45.389
a great conversation today really really enjoyed

00:46:45.389 --> 00:46:47.590
it hope you've enjoyed listening to it that's

00:46:47.590 --> 00:46:50.110
the end of our third episode We'd really welcome

00:46:50.110 --> 00:46:53.030
any feedback or suggestions on future episodes.

00:46:53.309 --> 00:46:56.030
If the reception to this series is strong, we'll

00:46:56.030 --> 00:47:00.070
do it again. If not, we might not. I'm sure it

00:47:00.070 --> 00:47:02.090
will be because they've been three really outstanding

00:47:02.090 --> 00:47:04.670
conversations. It's been a real pleasure to participate

00:47:04.670 --> 00:47:11.889
in them. A reminder that we'll soon be releasing,

00:47:11.929 --> 00:47:15.750
in a couple of weeks, a special Research Methods

00:47:15.750 --> 00:47:18.340
Question and Answers Edition. with some members

00:47:18.340 --> 00:47:21.179
of the light research team so do get your questions

00:47:21.179 --> 00:47:23.519
in if you haven't already via the link in the

00:47:23.519 --> 00:47:26.179
description thanks again for listening and see

00:47:26.179 --> 00:47:26.519
you soon