Cat Busk PG Cert

How can developing Kinaesthetic Empathy enable a sustainable collaborative approach for new groups working together in Theatre Making?  

This small action research project is being developed with a group of newly enrolled MA students on a Performance course at Wimbledon College of Art (WCA). 

I have been using Kinesthetic Empathy in my practice as a lecturer in subjects around “the physical in theatre”, as well as in my practice as a dance movement psychotherapist for more than 15 years. (More info on my background can be found here: https://cbuskpgcert.myblog.arts.ac.uk/2024/12/09/hello-world/) 

Kinesthetic empathy is the experience of “placing… ..ourselves ‘inside’ another’s kinesthetic experience” (pg 1, Artpradid, V. 2023), and when related to Theatre Making and performance cultures it is the process where performers and audiences physically and emotionally resonate with movement, creating a shared embodied experience , and thus a non-verbal level from communication (Reynolds &  Reason 2012).   

Kinesthetic empathy is used in practices such as theatre making, movement direction, Intimacy and consent training, as well as creative arts therapies (Reynolds & Reason 2012) . It is core and inherent to our human experience as living beings who relate emotionally and cognitively to one another and our surroundings and is indeed what young babies and toddlers rely on to find their needs met, before the notion of a verbal language exists (Fischmann D.2009).  

I am asking the question;  How can developing Kinaesthetic Empathy create a sustainable collaborative approach to Theatre Making?  Through a series of 3 workshops, with new MA students. I will collect data from the students relying on their embodied experience to reflect upon the concepts mentioned above after the 3^rd and final workshop. However, the student participant and their autoethnographical reflections will inform how the workshops unfold (more on this can be found in Research Methods). 

I will be researching this question by using practices such as Viewpoints Suzuki, as well as well know “classic” exercises used in physical theatre, dance, as well as skills from dance movement therapy, such as mirroring and movement improvisation.  

All 3 of the workshops that will have a structure of:  

• Check in 

• Physical warm up 

• Process 

• Check out / reflection. 

This research, as well as a semi structured interview with the Course leader, and bibliographical research is further mentioned in Research Methods.  

Bibliography

Artpradid, V. (2023). Kinesthetic empathic witnessing in relation to embodied and extended cognition in inclusive dance audiences. Cogent Arts & Humanities, 10(1). https://doi.org/10.1080/23311983.2023.2181486 

Fischmann D (2009). Therapeutic Relationships and Kinesthetic Empathy  in Chaiklin, S., & Wengrower, H. (Eds.). . The Art and Science of Dance/Movement Therapy: Life Is Dance (1st ed.). Routledge.  

Leroy C (2025). Kinesthetic Empathy, Ethics and Care: A Phenomenology of Dance 

Reynolds D &  Reason M (2012). Kinaesthetic Empathy in Creative and Cultural Practices.  Bristol, UK: Intellect Ltd. 

I have chosen to look at the use of Kinesthetic Empathy in forming new groups of post graduate students for performance. Feedback from the student survey highlighted two points that students found difficult when working together: overcoming language barriers between them, as well as the varying levels of experience in the field. This has led to students preferring to work on solo pieces rather than work in an ensemble. However, the course content requires, at times, that students work collaboratively.  

 I have used Kinaesthetic Empathy within my practice for over 15 years, in the UK and South America. I am interested in the nonverbal aspect of this relationship building approach to working in a collaborative and way, and I have witnessed time and time again that working with the body, movement and play can bring dysfunctional groups together when there is an emphasis on the tools that develop kinesthetic empathy. By which I mean groups who find it difficult to work together.  

I believe it is important for the post graduate community as within the college I work in, the community is small and has expressed a feeling of isolation and not part of the wider academic community at Wimbledon. For this course in particular,  low numbers of home students, and high numbers of overseas students ( a ratio of 1:10)* mean that students have a varying level of English as a second language which can cause a lack of cohesion in cohorts particularly when working within the verbal realm.  

Working with nonverbal communication is important to the subject, as not all theatre making needs to be on a verbal level. Infact, before we relate through words, we relate through movement, and movement and play, in and of itself can create powerful metaphors as well as symbolic work (LeFeber, M.M., 2013 ). It is through symbolism that we can connect diverging identities in a non-direct way (Levy, F., 2005). Symbolism is inherent in storytelling and thus within theatre making. 

Parekh-Gaihede’ (2012) explores how theatre has the potential to explore empathy across differences in culture and experience,  and although there is the possibility to reinforce differences through stereotypes (for example in representation within theatre), working with kinesthetic empathy  also has the possibility to activate embodied connections with others which, “breakdown monolithic identities by raising awareness of differences within the self” (pg 320).  

Reynolds D (2012) says, “movement, physicality and the non-verbal have the potential to articulate levels of difference and intersubjective connection in ways that intersect with but are not always reducible to language, thereby bringing new complexities into play” (Pg 325) 

It is precisely this that drives me through this mini project. The need to connect through movement and play, something that within a very adult and academic world gets easily lost, but for theatre making is essential. 

*Taken from the dashboards 

Bibliography 

Kolb, D.A. (1984) Experiential Learning: Experience as the Source of Learning and Development. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. 

LeFeber, M.M., 2013. Working With Children Using Dance/Movement Therapy. In: E. Green & A. Drewes, eds., Integrating Expressive Arts and Play Therapy With Children and Adolescents. John Wiley & Sons. 

Levy, F., 2005. Dance Movement Therapy: A Healing Art. National Dance Association. 

Parekh-Gaihede, R. (2012) ‘Breaking the Distance: Empathy and Ethical Awareness in Performance’. In: Reynolds, D. and Reason, M. (eds.) Kinesthetic Empathy in Creative and Cultural Practices. Bristol, UK: Intellect Ltd, pp. 177–192. 

Reynolds, D., & Reason, M. (Eds.). (2012). Kinesthetic empathy in creative and cultural practices. London: Intellect Books. 

University of the Arts London (n.d.) Inclusive Teaching and Learning Framework. Available at: 
https://www.arts.ac.uk/about-ual/learning-and-teaching/teaching-and-learning-exchange/inclusive-teaching-and-learning 
(Accessed: 12 December 2025). 

 I use practice-based research, meaning that my research is not only action-based, but that knowledge is generated through practice itself and through critical reflection on that practice (Candy, 2021, Barrett & Bolt, 2010). As a practitioner-researcher, I work within my professional role while simultaneously exploring questions that arise from my own day-to-day practice (Robson, 1993, p. 446).  

This project is Iterative as I am approaching the research with the understanding that the work is developed through ongoing cycles, or in my case spirals of practices, observation and reflection, which has allowed me to develop this mini project over a space of 3 months.  

I am using a combination of Kemmis and McTaggart’s  (2000) O’Leary’s (2010) action research  spiral. Please see the images bellow of these as a reference.  

O’Leary’s (2010) action research  spiral

 Kemmis and McTaggart’s  (2000)

My spiral looks like this.  

The research I am conducting is qualitative, meaning, that it “aims to gather and analyse non-numerical (descriptive) data” (Wikipedia) to gain an understanding the lived experience of the participants (Denzin & Lincoln, 2003). 

 The methods I have chosen to use are: 

• Semi structured interview with Course leader 
• Creative Research Methods : 

I am facilitating workshops , based on experiential learning (meaning I am continually asking the participants to reflect upon their lived experiences as well as invite embodied reflections [Kolb, D.A.,1984]). Therefore, I am drawing from the participants auto ethnographical reflections, as well as my own auto ethnography (Ellis B 2006). The workshop includes time for reflection after each experiential activity, with participants engaging in real-time peer interviewing. This process is guided by a non-hierarchical, non-judgmental approach that avoids interpretation and supports reflective dialogue (Kara, 2015). 

After the practical elements of the workshops, participants are asked to share reflections or check out with an open space dialogue, where knowledge emerges from the reflections of the participants (Heron & Reason, 2001). 

There is also an essence of participants co-designing the workshops, as their reflections from each workshop feed together with my observations into the planning of the next learning space (Barrett & Bolt, 2010).   

All of this happens within the spiral mentioned above. 

Below is my action plan:

Bibliography. 

Barrett, E. and Bolt, B. (eds.) (2010) Practice as research: Approaches to creative arts enquiry. London: I.B. Tauris. 

Candy, L., Edmonds, E. and Vear, C. (2021) The Routledge international handbook of practice-based research. London: Routledge. 

Denzin, N.K. and Lincoln, Y.S. (eds.) (2003) Strategies of qualitative inquiry. 2nd edn. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. 

Ellis, C.S. and Bochner, A.P. (2006) ‘Analyzing analytic autoethnography: An autopsy’, Journal of Contemporary Ethnography, 35(4), pp. 429–449. https://doi.org/10.1177/0891241606286979 

Heron, J. and Reason, P. (2001) ‘The practice of co-operative inquiry: Research “with” rather than “on” people’, in Handbook of action research. London: Sage Publications, pp. 179–188. 

Kara, H. (2015) Creative research methods in the social sciences: A practical guide. Bristol: Policy Press. 

Kemmis, S. and McTaggart, R. (2000) Action research spiral, cited in Koshy, V., Koshy, V. and Waterman, H. (2009) Action research for improving educational practice: A step-by-step guide. London: Sage Publications.

O’Leary, Z. (2010) The Essential Guide to Doing Your Research Project. London: SAGE Publications. 

The main ethical feedback I received from my tutor and peers, beyond considerations of data collection, storage, and management of data, concerned issues of consent. This encompassed obtaining informed consent for the interviews, ensuring participant consent, and addressing consent within the workshops themselves—for instance, regarding the appropriateness of physical contact. 

Whilst working on my Ethical Action Plan, I received the following, specific feedback. 

• Re word some interview questions as they were a little confusing. 
• Aim for 3 – 5 questions in semi structured interview. 
• Add in Equities Intimacy and consent advice with regards to touch, should touch arise in the workshops. 
• Add a few sentences about how the data will be practically stored and managed for the consent forms (using BERA guidance). 

Here is my ethical plan: 

For this plan my main references used were: 

BERA https://www.bera.ac.uk/publication/ethical-guidelines-for-educational-research-fifth-edition-2024-online 

Equity http://equity.org.uk/advice-and-support/know-your-rights/higher-education-intimacy-coordination-direction-guidelines 

The full Bibliography can be found in my ethical action plan. 

Participant Facing Documents 

Below are the participant facing documents: 

• Project Description 
• Consent form or semi structured Interview
• Consent form for Students 

I have analysed data following a thematic reflexive analysis approach (Braun and Clarke. 2021, &, Kara, H. 2015), meaning that I have been looking for patterns of meaning or themes across the data (semi structured interview and student feedback) to address my research question. Reflective Thematic Analysis is considered to be interpretive, created and situated, and therefore speaks to the nature of the project being experiential. More specifically, I am following a “more latent way” meaning that my “coding and theme development report concepts and assumptions underpinning the overt content of the data” (https://www.thematicanalysis.net/understanding-ta/). 

Byrne (2022) discusses six phrases of reflexive thematic analysis, and summarizes that coding and theme development are iterative, non-linear and shaped by my (in this case) theoretical position as well as my reflexive connection to the data.  Bryne (2022) also discusses that themes aren’t discovered, but that they are actively constructed by the researcher. This fits with my approach to the auto ethnographical nature of the project and the data. 

Bellow you can see some images of my process and how I have grouped, brainstormed and analyzed the data, with the above approach in mind.  

Bibliography 

Braun, V. & Clarke, V. (2021) Thematic Analysis: A Practical Guide, London: SAGE 

Braun, V. and Clarke, V. (no date) Understanding TA | Thematic Analysis. Available at: https://www.thematicanalysis.net/understanding-ta/ (Last Accessed: 22 January 2026). 

The Interview with the course leader highlighted several points that did not allude to a direct need for Kinesthetic Empathy as a tool, but to issues of a bigger picture that dramatically affect the building of community and kinship within the cohorts. Thus, indirectly confirming a need for methods that can enable a better sense of collaborative approaches within the cohorts.  

The issues mentioned were around: 

Space: A lack of dedicated space that students could truly inhabit and shape, limiting their ability to immerse themselves in the work as a cohesive company or within a theatre-making residency model. 

Group cohesion: Challenges emerged due to uneven levels of professional experience, dominant voices, and differing cultural norms, which at times inhibited equitable participation and made it difficult for some students to find their place within the group. 

Time: Insufficient time to cultivate a collaborative environment or build shared experiences beyond the rehearsal space. 

Skills: Limited time to both deliver the curriculum and support skill development for less-experienced students, particularly in foundational practices such as play, voice, and movement. 

Students voices

“You can be very Free but at the same time work with the group and create something beautiful together” (Student Voice) 

“It created an environment of Saftey and freedom” (Student Voice) 

In general, the students described a sense of feeling more of a group as the workshops went on, as well as one student noting more specifically, moments when the group attuned and listened to one another, and when the group were less cohesive –and more individualistic. This reflection shows that a sufficient level of attunement was reached to be able to differentiate when the group moved cohesively or not, which suggests a high level of kinesthetic empathy was reached.  

Themes that emerged from the students’ reflections were: 

Play: The experience encouraged students to return to play and creative exploration. One described play as a form of research, allowing them to “use different angles [physically] to observe” (student Voice) and break habitual bodily patterns, while others described feeling more connected to peers during play. I link this sense of connection to Spolin’s age-old notion of play being democratic participation, as students explored and “researched” with their bodies regardless of differences in theatre-making skills. 

“Play is democratic! Anyone can play! Everyone can learn through playing! Play touches and stimulates vitality, awakening the whole person – mind and body, intelligence and creativity, spontaneity and intuition …” (Spolin, 1986, p. 3) 

Feeling: Sensing the other, “listening to the other without just listening but by responding to them”. These reflections point towards empathy by being aware of their emotional state, as well as that of the other.  

Mirror: Students frequently reflected on mirroring and attuning to others. While they did not explicitly link this to non-hierarchical practice, the process of responding in real time to another’s improvised movement inherently gives space, voice, and presence to the other, fostering collaborative, non-hierarchical approaches to theatre-making (Bogart & Landau, 2005). 

These three themes align with the course leader’s interview, indicating that across the workshops, space was created for a non-hierarchical way of working despite differing levels of experience. The group developed sufficient cohesion to feel safe, enabling students to attune to one another and engage in playful, collaborative exploration 

Three thematic concepts that stood out to me were Transform, Expand, and Practise, which I had not initially anticipated. I relate these to practice-based research, suggesting that the project could be further developed to explore how kinesthetic empathy might function as a tool for research. 

Bibliography 

Bogart, A. & Landau, T. (2005) The Viewpoints Book: A Practical Guide to Viewpoints and Composition. Theatre Communications Group 

Spolin, V. (1986) Theater games for the classroom: A teacher’s handbook. Evanston, IL: Northwestern University Press. 

Conclusion: 

How can developing Kinaesthetic Empathy enable a sustainable collaborative approach for new groups working together in Theatre Making?  

By developing skills of mirroring, attunement, and play, students can kinesthetically sense and emotionally connect with one another, fostering an empathetic and cohesive collaborative ensemble process. For this to be sustainable, there needs to be space and time within the curriculum, for students to build upon existing skills and nurture non-hierarchical modes of working as an ensemble.  

Critique: 

This project has highlighted 3 main areas of critique, for me personally (in terms of research skills), as well as with the subject area. These are; 

A struggle to ask the right questions:  

I struggled to ask the right questions in both the semi-structured interviews and the post–workshop stimuli questions. By “right questions,” I mean those that directly address the research question and generate relevant data. While I have encouraged broader reflections in the interview, I found it more challenging to ask questions that speak directly to my research focus. 

Lack of quantitative evidence: 

This may also reflect a lack of quantitative research in the field. As Koch (2020) notes, there is an inherent difficulty in quantifying the subjectivity of non-verbal, embodied processes. Kinesthetic empathy is felt, sensed, and perceived; it is predominantly non-verbal and cannot be easily defined, measured, or observed outside the body. As a result, it remains highly subjective, presenting ongoing challenges for research and professional interpretation (Koch, 2020). 

Professional Interpretation: 

This leads to my next point. While a creative methods approach aligns closely with my daily practice, it is highly dependent on my own professional interpretation (Kara, 2015). For example, the semi-structured interview provided valuable contextual insight but reflected my somewhat “romantic” or emotionalist approach, revealing authentic inner perspectives but failing to generate more objective data (Alvesson, 2012). Similarly, when listening to students’ verbal reflections and reading their ‘post-it’ notes, I sensed their feedback was somewhat overly positive, and that I may have been hearing what I wanted to hear. Although this supported my research question, there was a lack of critique or counterargument. This may be due to limited time, insufficient invitation for critique, or unacknowledged power dynamics. As a tutor and a white European, I potentially hold unspoken authority within the space. Again, Alvessons (2012) skeptical review resonates strongly, and although he focuses mainly on Interviews, I relate to his invitation to move beyond naive uses of data collection, and engage in a more critical, reflexive and theoretically informed analysis.  

Bibliography 

Alvesson, M. (2012) ‘‘Views on Interviews: A Skeptical Review’’, in Interpreting Interviews, London: SAGE Publications Ltd, pp. 9–42. 

Kara, H. (2015) Creative research methods in the social sciences: A practical guide. Bristol: Policy Press. 

Koch, S.C. (2020) ‘Indications and contraindications in dance movement therapy: learning from practitioners’ experience’, GMS Journal of Arts Therapies, 2, p. Doc02 https://doi.org/10.3205/jat000006. 

Alvesson, M. (2012) ‘Views on interviews: A skeptical review’, in Interpreting Interviews. London: SAGE Publications Ltd, pp. 9–42. 

Artpradid, V. (2023) ‘Kinesthetic empathic witnessing in relation to embodied and extended cognition in inclusive dance audiences’, Cogent Arts & Humanities, 10(1). https://doi.org/10.1080/23311983.2023.2181486 

Barrett, E. and Bolt, B. (eds.) (2010) Practice as research: Approaches to creative arts enquiry. London: I.B. Tauris. 

Braun, V. and Clarke, V. (2021) Thematic analysis: A practical guide. London: SAGE. 

Byrne, D. (2022) ‘A worked example of Braun and Clarke’s approach to reflexive thematic analysis’, Quality & Quantity, 56(3), pp. 1391–1412. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-021-01182-y 

Candy, L., Edmonds, E. and Vear, C. (2021) The Routledge international handbook of practice-based research. London: Routledge. 

Denzin, N.K. and Lincoln, Y.S. (eds.) (2003) Strategies of qualitative inquiry. 2nd edn. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. 

Ellis, C.S. and Bochner, A.P. (2006) ‘Analyzing analytic autoethnography: An autopsy’, Journal of Contemporary Ethnography, 35(4), pp. 429–449. https://doi.org/10.1177/0891241606286979 

Equity (n.d.) Higher education intimacy coordination direction guidelines [online]. Available at: http://equity.org.uk/advice-and-support/know-your-rights/higher-education-intimacy-coordination-direction-guidelines (Accessed: [insert date]). 

LeFeber, M.M., 2013. Working With Children Using Dance/Movement Therapy. In: E. Green & A. Drewes, eds., Integrating Expressive Arts and Play Therapy With Children and Adolescents. John Wiley & Sons. 

Levy, F., 2005. Dance Movement Therapy: A Healing Art. National Dance Association. 

Fischmann, D. (2009) ‘Therapeutic relationships and kinesthetic empathy’, in Chaiklin, S. and Wengrower, H. (eds.) The art and science of dance/movement therapy: Life is dance. 1st edn. London: Routledge. 

Heron, J. and Reason, P. (2001) ‘The practice of co-operative inquiry: Research “with” rather than “on” people’, in Handbook of action research. London: SAGE, pp. 179–188. 

Kara, H. (2015) Creative research methods in the social sciences: A practical guide. Bristol: Policy Press. 

Kemmis, S. and McTaggart, R. (2000) Action research spiral, cited in Koshy, V., Koshy, V. and Waterman, H. (2009) Action research for improving educational practice: A step-by-step guide. London: Sage Publications. 

Koch, S.C. (2020) ‘Indications and contraindications in dance movement therapy: Learning from practitioners’ experience’, GMS Journal of Arts Therapies, 2, Article Doc02. https://doi.org/10.3205/jat000006 

Kolb, D.A. (1984) Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and development. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. 

Koshy, E., Koshy, V. and Waterman, H. (2011) ‘What is action research?’, in What is action research? London: SAGE Publications Ltd, pp. 1–24. 

Leroy, C. (2025) Kinesthetic empathy, ethics and care: A phenomenology of dance. [Publication details to be confirmed]. 

O’Leary, Z. (2010) The Essential Guide to Doing Your Research Project. London: SAGE Publications.

Parekh-Gaihede, R. (2012) ‘Breaking the Distance: Empathy and Ethical Awareness in Performance’. In: Reynolds, D. and Reason, M. (eds.) Kinesthetic Empathy in Creative and Cultural Practices. Bristol, UK: Intellect Ltd, pp. 177–192.

Reynolds, D. and Reason, M. (2012) Kinaesthetic empathy in creative and cultural practices. Bristol: Intellect Ltd. 

Robson, C. (1993) Real world research: A resource for social scientists and practitioner researchers. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers. 

Spolin, V. (1986) Theater games for the classroom: A teacher’s handbook. Evanston, IL: Northwestern University Press. 

Thematic Analysis (n.d.) Understanding thematic analysis [online]. Available at: https://www.thematicanalysis.net/understanding-ta/ (Accessed: [9.01.2026]). 

University of the Arts London (n.d.) Inclusive Teaching and Learning Framework. Available at: 
https://www.arts.ac.uk/about-ual/learning-and-teaching/teaching-and-learning-exchange/inclusive-teaching-and-learning 
(Accessed: 12 December 2025). 

Wikipedia (n.d.) Qualitative research [online]. Available at: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qualitative_research (Accessed: [30.12.2025]). 

AI Declaration

This reflective report is discussing the proposal of a welcome pack for students on one of the performance courses (BA Acting and Performance) that I work with. The  welcome pack aims to give a space where students can identify, from their lived experience, any additional support they may need upon arrival to the course, as well as provide the First Year and with information on students  (access) needs, prior to starting. Therefore, it is designed to improve the experience of the incoming students, as they transition into higher education at BA level, focusing on support with physical, and neuro diversity. The pack would be given to the students upon completing  enrolment when they receive their UAL e-mail.

You can see a draft for the form section of the pack here:

https://forms.office.com/e/CYmCW7EUDq

But to give an Idea, I have asked questions focusing on the areas of training students will receive such as: voice, breath, movement and script, describing briefly what will be expected of the students across the different areas of the course. For example, “you will work your voice; spoken, sung or making noise”, and then go on to ask, that “with all this in mind is there anything you think is useful for us to know about so that we can best provide support when you arrive?” Similar examples are given for each area of actor training mentioned above.

To add to the context and where this design has come from, my role at UAL is that of a college admission tutor (CAT), as well as being an associate lecture. The role of a CAT is an academic one and we work closely with senior management teams, both academic, administrative including recruitment and admissions teams. As well as course leaders and lecturers. The role is heavily data driven, meaning that the demands upon the role aren’t always from a holistic perspective. It seems relevant to say that my experience at UAL has been that of both Interim Programme director and Course leader (at the same time) and so together with my CAT role, in terms of positionality I have an understanding of the structural and institutional mechanisms, as well as the  “on the ground”, day to day running of academics lives to try ensure a positive student  experience.

It seems relevant to note that I have over 25 years of experience in movement-based performance and am particularly interested in the intersection of wellbeing and performance training. I have previously worked as a performer in an inclusive dance company with both disabled and non-disabled dancers and I developed my practise of adapting movement practices to suit diverse participants whilst lecturing in South America for 10 years,  and most recently 4 years in the UK. All this shapes and influences my design for the welcome pack.

Often, there is a gap where information doesn’t pass from the admissions process to enrolment, and so with regards to access needs or support plans academic staff often don’t know until way after the student has arrived, how best to adapt teaching plans for the individual and the cohort. This disjointed first encounter of a student is clumsy, and this highlights the institutional inequities from the get go in these invisible handover spaces ( Nichols and Stah, 2019).

The university can improve how it supports new students by responding more quickly and effectively upon their arrival. When communication breaks down between admissions, enrolment, and academic teams, first year leads carry heavy loads, providing individual support and adjusting teaching to diverse student needs on the go. While learning outcomes must remain consistent, teaching methods and curriculum delivery can be adapted to the individual’s needs (Sadiq A, 2023),. With this is mind, the headings used in the welcome pack, are to situate the student in the learning that they are about to encounter, without assuming that they have prior experience.

They will be required to use their voice, their movement (body), as well as learn using text and script work. This does not mean that all students will move, vocalize or approach text in the same way (Sadiq A, 2023), however, that they will need to work with teachers and vice versa in understanding their own boundaries of learning, what works for them and when it doesn’t how with their tutors they can find adaptations.

The rationale behind this intervention, is seeing the gap, and the stress this puts staff under when students start. Feedback from first year lead has said, “the first 3 months are like constant 1:1’s fit around my teaching schedule, often just to understand where the student needs help. It would be really helpful if we could access the EDI information that students have given before they start”. Whilst the later may not be completely possible in terms of data protection, we are able to ask students.  Here of course, poses the most obvious risks:

If a student doesn’t engage with their UAL e-mail, then of course none of this will be relevant. The enrolment and getting used to the habit of checking an institutional e-mail is often the biggest barrier, and is indeed, very non inclusive.

Which leads me onto other feedback from both tutor and colleagues who recommended that perhaps the welcome pack could be designed more interactively, with ‘images, and videos or embedded voice notes that don’t rely on reading alone’- this would help build a more inclusive language. This is also supported by Alabi (2024) who discusses that pairing visual and written formats in order to lessen a cognitive load and make processes more tangible is important. Similarly, recommendations also, to include current students in the design of the welcome pack to’ help build an inclusive language from the students perspective and make the pack feel peer-informed’, would also make the welcome pack more sustainable in terms of its implementation being refined year on year, with students who have been through the process of enrolment and into HE. I would go further to say that co-creating and co-modifying the pack with current students and yr lead, would also challenge set positionalities and encourage a more intersectional view of the needs (Crenshaw, K 1991). I.e. It would not be based on how I see students as needing support, but also how students find they need support in the practical elements of the course.

Another risk, of course is if a student does not wish to divulge information, then we can only go at the pace a student wished to go at.

Similarly, it may be the case that a student is not aware they need support, however, I do eco the feedback from a peer that said, “even if they aren’t aware they need support, this kind of pack can help them to reflect upon their learning and if they need anything extra in the up and coming months”.

Another feedback from a colleague suggested I could think of the welcome pack as coming in different languages, in particular in Mandarin or Cantonese. This was in mind for overseas students, whose first language is not English, but also who’s cultural context may not necessarily mean that they have experience in understanding  the support mechanisms available within the UK HE (Rekis, 2023). For example, well meaning inclusion efforts can reproduce assumptions over what feels “normal” in one learning context, which might feel alienating or even oppressive in an other ( Aziz R, 1997).

It is of course important to acknowledge that this welcome pack, doesn’t particularly address the intersectionality of disability, inclusion and learning, in the sense that it is focusing on the physical and neuro divergence of students, and thus isn’t including, for example: Race, religion or even class. Perhaps by co creating it with students, these topics will become part of the pack? For example, touch could also be considered as a heading particularly due to its intersectional nature; physical contact will require an understanding of the different experiences of those who are using it: their relationship to touch, will be affected by their relationship to their race, age, physical and cognitive diversity, gender, sexual orientation and religion (Kapadocha, 2023). However,  this is a huge topic and since consent and  intimacy are a fundamental part of actor training, this is an area that  should be threaded gently throughout the curriculum.

Similarly, representation, in terms of Race for example, is also a huge part of actor training, and is embedded throughout the curriculum, through script, voice, breath, movement play and staging etc etc. Therefore, for the purpose of a welcome pack, perhaps it is enough to start small, and to encourage students to begin to think about their intersectionality with their own needs, being agents of their own learning. For example, if “The paradigm of intersectionality, coined by the American civil rights advocate Kimberlé Williams Crenshaw, can help us to rethink the representation of identity and its deconstruction in theatre” (Ajnwojner R, 2018), then this must be done together students with tutors and vice versa.

I also think, that perhaps, religion, in this instance has not been a part of the welcome pack, (up to now) as it hasn’t been mayor part of how I have viewed my practise revealing quite critically the gaps in my experience. For example, throughout this unit, I have been reflecting on the fact that within the performing arts scene that I have been involved with, (UK, Europe and south America), the diversity of religion has been relatively small. This has lead me to look at the diversity of students on this course, who are a high number of what UAL calls Contextual Admissions (see image 1), but in terms of religious diversity, they are quite homogenous (see image 2). In thinking about Kantia, T’s (2022) critique of the under and mis representation of Muslims in television and film for example, this leaves me to ponder over the effort, or lack of, perhaps that we are making  from a recruitment perspective of outreach work (also part of my job role) and therefore what more can be done.

References and Bibliography

Ajnwojner R (2018), Intersectionality and Identity in Theatre. https://www.theater-wissenschaft.de/miszellen-intersectionality-and-identity-in-theatre/

Alabi, V. (2024) ‘Visual Learning: The Power of Visual Aids and Multimedia’, International Journal of Educational Technology and Innovation, 9(1), pp. 33–47. Available at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/385662029_Visual_Learning_The_Power_of_Visual_Aids_and_Multimedia (Accessed: 20 July 2025).

Appiah, K.A. (2014). Is religion good or bad? (This is a trick question.) TED. Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X2et2KO8gcY [Accessed 17 May 2025].

Aziz, R. (1997) ‘Feminism and the challenge of racism: Deviance or difference?’. In Mirza, H. S. (ed.) Black British Feminism: A reader, London: Routledge, pp. 70-77

Crenshaw, K. (1991). Mapping the Margins: Intersectionality, Identity Politics, and Violence against Women of Colour. Stanford Law Review, 43(6), 1241–1299.

Kantia, T (2022) https://ktariq.medium.com/muslim-representation-in-film-and-television-d53db37178b4

Kapadocha C (2023) Tactile renegotiations in actor training: what the pandemic taught us about touch, Theatre, Dance and Performance Training, 14:2, 201-215,

Nichols, S., & Stahl, G. (2019). Intersectionality in higher education research: A systematic literature review. Higher Education Research & Development, 38(6), 1255–1268.

Sadiq, A. (2023) Diversity, Equity & Inclusion: Learning how to get it right. TEDx Talks. [YouTube video] 2 March. Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HR4wz1b54hw [Accessed 11 June 2025].

University of the Arts London (2024) Access and Participation Plan 2025–26 to 2028–29. Available at: https://www.arts.ac.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0030/458346/University-of-the-Arts-London-Access-and-Participation-Plan-2025-26-to-2028-29-PDF-1297KB.pdf [Accessed 11 June 2025].

University of the Arts London Contextual Admissions process

https://www.arts.ac.uk/study-at-ual/contextual-admissions

Images