Embedded Files
"Education is the non-coercive rearranging of desire"
-Gayatri Spivak
My approach to teaching is grounded in a pedagogy of hospitality: the classroom as a space of welcome, challenge, and genuine encounter. I aim to create environments in which students are invited to engage deeply with new and sometimes unfamiliar ideas—not for the sake of performance, but for the sake of understanding. This means designing learning experiences that prioritise curiosity over compliance, and application over memorisation. I work intentionally with flipped classroom models and scaffolded assessments, not only to meet the demands of dense curricula with limited contact time, but to protect space for slow, thoughtful, and socially engaged learning. At the heart of it all is a belief that teaching and learning are acts of shared meaning-making, rooted in structure, guided by care, and open to surprise.
Teaching philosophy
Teaching philosophy
Learning as Encounter: a pedagogical reflection
Learning as Encounter: a pedagogical reflection
From a young age, I’ve resisted the idea that learning is primarily about passing. I remember teachers who began their courses by walking us through old exam papers before we’d learned anything at all - well-meaning, perhaps, but to me this felt like a betrayal of what learning could be. I preferred classrooms where the lesson began before the teacher had even set down their bag - where the momentum of curiosity silenced the room and drew us into a space of shared attention. These early experiences have deeply shaped my pedagogical values. I was privileged to have been able to have them.
My teaching is rooted in what I call a pedagogy of hospitality, an approach that sees learning as the encounter with what is unfamiliar, and the classroom as a space in which such encounters are welcomed, rather than neutralised. Inspired by hermeneutic thinkers like Gadamer and Kearney, I believe that education is not simply the accumulation of knowledge or the development of technical skill, but also the cultivation of practical wisdom, curiosity, and ethical openness.
Practically, my teaching is structured around three core commitments:
1. Prioritise application and practice
1. Prioritise application and practice
Students should not encounter key concepts for the first time in a high-stakes environment. This kind of setup tends to drive performative intelligence rather than genuine learning. But in content-heavy courses with limited contact time, creating enough space for sustained practice can be challenging. My solution has been to adopt a flipped classroom model across all my courses, freeing up classroom time for collaborative engagement, troubleshooting, and reflection. As an autistic educator, I’m acutely aware that students’ learning preferences and processing styles can vary widely. By offering primary content in a range of asynchronous modalities, flipped learning allows students to shape their own engagement—at their own pace, and in ways that suit their cognitive rhythms.
2. Trust the student to take ownership
2. Trust the student to take ownership
Given clear structure and access to quality materials, I believe students are capable of managing their own primary learning experience. Flipped classrooms require this trust, and I see it as an act of respect that encourages autonomy, accountability, and growth.
3. Design for meaning, not just compliance
3. Design for meaning, not just compliance
I distinguish between tasks that are merely compulsory and those that are meaningful. The former elicits performance out of fear; the latter invites participation out of interest. It’s well established that fear, by activating the sympathetic nervous system, can inhibit the relaxed openness that deep learning requires. Following Spivak’s beautiful formulation of education as “the non-coercive rearranging of desire,” I aim to design learning experiences that draw students in. This includes:
Carefully sequencing course components so that each builds on the last
Framing content within larger conceptual or social questions
Scaffolding assessments to allow for growth and revision
Offering feedback that students can act on
Allowing open-book formats, flexible timing, and revision opportunities—especially in assessments
These practices reflect a core belief: that students are not problems to be managed, but minds to be met. And that real learning happens in the space between the known and the new—if we can hold that space with care, clarity, and welcome.
More about flipped learning
More about flipped learning
Student-centred learning provided the impetus for what is now widely known as the “inverted” (Lage et al. 2000) or “flipped” classroom (Bergmann & Sams 2012). One of my most significant teaching achievements has been piloting and successfully implementing a flipped classroom model across all of my courses.
In brief: each lecture is recorded and made available as a video, accompanied by a worksheet designed to help students practise applying the concepts introduced. Students are expected to watch the lecture and attempt the exercises before coming to class.
Face-to-face sessions are then used to work through these exercises together. These classes are highly responsive and intentionally flexible. I take my lead from the students in real time, pausing to clarify, expand, or add further examples based on their questions and needs. This format allows classroom time to be driven by active engagement and collaborative problem-solving, rather than passive content delivery.
Epistemological ecology and active learning
Epistemological ecology and active learning
In favour of a constructivist approach to teaching and learning, King (1993) points out that traditional transmittal models of education, which conceptualise the lecturer as "having" knowledge and "transferring" that knowledge intact to the students, fail to recognise that whereas information can be transferred, knowledge can only be constructed. The process of knowledge construction is rooted in social interaction, culture, and history, and takes place actively and uniquely in each student, who is conceptualised as a historically and socio-culturally situated being, and not as a disconnected mind. Historically, (social) constructivist learning theories follow on from cognitive theories, which conceptualise learning as essentially a process in the (disconnected) mind, one in which knowledge is synonymous with information, and in which the starting point, process, and end point are same for everyone. Transmittal models of education are based on cognitive theories. Cognitive learning theories in turn followed on from behaviourism, which conceptualised learning simply as a process altering behaviour.
In the present day, we do not think of the knowledge that each student constructs, based on the information conveyed in classroom, as constructed in a vacuum in the student's mind. Rather, it enters what I like to think of as the epistemological ecology of the individual's knowledge systems. In other words, new knowledge enters a pre-existing ecology of knowledge in each individual. How that knowledge is constructed - what shape it takes, how it grows, and what it does - depends fundamentally on the preconditions of the ecology. As with ecosystems in general, we cannot be entirely sure at the outset what the effect will be of introducing a new element to a pre-exiting complex system. So, while there are always certain outcomes that need to be achieved in a course, fully respecting the uniqueness of the knowledge-construction process on the part of the student requires a certain humility on the part of the lecturer. With this humility comes a shift in focus away from the lecturer and onto the student's active processing of information and knowledge construction. This is humorously and succinctly described in King's (1993) title 'From Sage on the Stage to Guide on the Side'.
"The professor is still responsible for presenting the course material, but he or she presents that material in ways that make the students do something with the information - interact with it - manipulate the ideas and relate them to what they already know. Essentially, the professor's role is to facilitate students' interaction with the material and with each other in their knowledge-producing endeavor.
(King 1993:30)
King (1993:31) provides Table 1 with a set of examples of learning activities that shift focus in the classroom away from the lecturer and onto the students. While King's suggested learning activities in Table 1 are all student-centered, they do not necessarily all derive from a single learning theory, and many / most are inspired by more than one: Constructivism, active learning (Prince 2004), collaborative learning (Smith & MacGregor 1992; Goodsell et al. 1992), and problem-based learning (Barrows 1996) all evolved in some way from Piaget's (1967) notion of cognitive conflict. Cooperative learning (Johnson et al. 1984; Slavin 1991; Rottier & Ogen 1991) and peer-assisted learning (Topping & Ehly 1998) derive from Vygotsky's (1978) zone of proximal development.
It is a fact that properly integrating student-centered learning activities such as those recommended by King (1993) in Table 1 drastically reduces the number of hours that are available in a course for the traditional lecture, where we typically expect the bulk of information relating to the course content to be conveyed to students. This is because the core concepts, ideas, and arguments need to be introduced to students before students can engage with those concepts, ideas, and arguments in student-centered learning activities. So time becomes a crucial factor, and there seems to be a playoff between the amount of content that can be covered, and the extent to which a course can be truly student-centered. Usually, reducing the content density of a course is simply not an option. So the conundrum, again, is:
How to take student-centered learning seriously while still covering all the necessary content in a course?
Theoretical underpinnings
Theoretical underpinnings
Flipped classroom
Flipped classroom
Very generally, the 'inverted' (Lage et al. 2000) or 'flipped' classroom (Bergmann & Sams 2012) is a type of blended learning. Not everyone agrees on the definition of blended learning (cf. Bonk & Graham 2012, and particularly chapter 11, for an overview). I follow Graham (2012) in defining blended learning as a method that combines online and face-to-face instruction. Crucially, blended learning is not simply "a repetition... of online versions of classroom-based courses" (Singh 2003:51).
In other words, with blended learning, there isn't total overlap between face-to-face and e-based learning. In the flipped classroom, specifically, "events that have traditionally taken place inside the classroom now take place outside the classroom and vice versa" (Lage et al. 2000:32). One way of understanding this is that "homework" is now done in class, whereas students are expected to engage with information that would conventionally be conveyed in a traditional lecture through e-based learning, usually by watching pre-recorded lecture videos or listening to produced podcasts.
When it comes to student-centered approaches to learning, the flipped classroom really seems to be a win-win. The first win is that concepts, ideas, and arguments that would typically be conveyed in the form of a traditional lecture are now recorded as videos or podcasts. This means that students are free to engage in self-paced learning where they can pause and rewind as often as they find it necessary to do so. This online material then also becomes a resource for test and exam preparation. The second win is that all contact hours can now be entirely devoted to student-centered learning activities of the type suggested by King (1993) in Table 1 above.
Selected References
Selected References
Barrows, H. S. 1996. Problem-based learning in medicine and beyond: A brief overview. New Directions for Teaching and Learning 68. pp. 3–12.
Bergmann, J. and Sams, A., 2012. Flip your classroom: Reach every student in every class every day. International society for technology in education.
Bonk, C.J. and Graham, C.R., 2012. The handbook of blended learning: Global perspectives, local designs. San Francisco: John Wiley & Sons.
Graham, C.R. 2012. Blended Learning Systems: Definition, Current Trends, and Future Directions. In Bonk, C.J. and Graham, C.R. (ed.s). The handbook of blended learning: Global perspectives, local designs. [Chapter 11]. San Francisco: John Wiley & Sons.
King, A., 1993. From sage on the stage to guide on the side. College teaching, 41(1). pp.30-37.
Lage, M.J. , Platt, G.J., and Treglia M. 2000. Inverting the classroom: A gateway to creating an inclusive learning environment. The Journal of Economic Education 31(1). pp. 30–43.
Piaget, J. Elkind, D. and Tenzer, A. 1967. Six psychological studies. Random House New York.
Prince, M. 2004. Does active learning work? A review of the research. Journal of Engeneering Education 93. pp. 223–232.
Rottier, J. and B.J. Ogan. 1991. Cooperative learning in middle-level schools. NEA: Professional Library, National Education Association.
Singh, H. 2003. Building Effective Blended Learning Programs. Educational Technology 43 (6). pp. 51-54.
Smith, B.L. and J.T. MacGregor. 1992. What is collaborative learning? In M. Maher, A.M. Goodsell and V. Tinto (ed.s). Collaborative learning: A sourcebook for higher education. National Center on Postsecondary Teaching, Learning and Assessment. pp 10-30.
Talbert, R. 2012. Inverted Classroom. Colleagues. Summer/Fall. pp. 18-19.
Topping, K. and Ehly, S. (ed.s) 1998. Peer-assisted learning. Routledge.
Vygotsky, L. S. 1978. Mind and society: The development of higher mental processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Meet the students: meaningful cultivation of graduate attributes
Meet the students: meaningful cultivation of graduate attributes
Teaching for access, learning, and justice
Teaching for access, learning, and justice
A meaningful teaching philosophy cannot stand apart from questions of access—physical, digital, epistemological, and psychological. When I began teaching at UWC, I quickly realised that student success could not be reduced to effort or attitude. It is tempting, and deeply damaging, to subscribe to the belief that hard work guarantees results, and that those who fall behind simply didn’t try hard enough. I wanted to interrogate that assumption.
My early investigations revealed some of the access challenges that shape student outcomes. In a 2017 LCS222 survey, 80% of respondents indicated that transport difficulties impacted their class attendance. Fewer than 15% had access to their own vehicle, and many relied on public transport that was unavailable after 15:30. Most of the students I teach do not live on campus (see more detailed results from the survey below). For many, learning requires navigating a daily geography of delay, exhaustion, and precarity. Digital access poses another constraint: national surveys show that nearly half of African students do not have a personal laptop or home internet, with many relying on public labs or expensive mobile data. And beyond physical and digital access lies the challenge of epistemological access—of entering unfamiliar discourses, acquiring disciplinary literacy, and cultivating the confidence to ask questions that matter.
All of this shapes how I teach.
My pedagogy is both pragmatic and philosophical. Pragmatic, because I work in a high-volume, contact-limited environment and have had to adopt models—like the flipped classroom—that free up class time for discussion, clarification, and practice. Philosophical, because I believe teaching is also about inviting students into the discomfort and possibility of the unfamiliar. I draw on what I have called a pedagogy of hospitality: an approach that treats learning as an encounter with strangeness, and asks both teacher and student to respond with care, openness, and rigour.
These ideas intersect meaningfully with UWC’s Graduate Attributes
These ideas intersect meaningfully with UWC’s Graduate Attributes
Scholarship: I emphasise knowledge as a conversation, rooted in scholarly debates, histories, and diverse perspectives. Students are encouraged to see themselves as emerging participants in those conversations.
Critical Citizenship: In all my courses, students engage with a range of languages and varieties—including Northern Cape and Kaapse Afrikaans, Khoekhoe, and isiXhosa, with the aim of recognising each as a complex and worthy linguistic system worthy of scholarly attention. While I do not moralise this, I design the curriculum to show, not tell, that linguistic diversity and equity are foundational concerns.
Lifelong Learning: I invite students to 'embrace the stranger'—to recognise unfamiliar material, or even unfamiliar aspects of themselves, not as threats but as opportunities for growth.
Communication and Collaboration: The flipped classroom fosters both autonomy and teamwork. Students are expected to prepare independently but learn through collective exploration and feedback. They are given tools to engage with complexity, express ideas clearly, and revise their thinking.
Social and Ethical Awareness: My teaching links directly to issues of access, inequality, and epistemic justice—encouraging students to reflect on how structures shape knowledge, identity, and belonging.
Flexibility and Confidence: Above all, I aim to model intellectual humility and curiosity. I make space for students to ask hard questions, voice uncertainty, and develop the resilience to think across difference.
My teaching is still evolving. But it is grounded in the belief that good pedagogy is not just about delivering content or measuring compliance. It is about cultivating capacity, creating space, and making it possible—for more students, more of the time—to do real, lasting, transformative learning.
Selected references for further discussion
Selected references for further discussion
Boughey, C. 2005. 'Epistemological' Access to the University: An Alternative Perspective. South African Journal of Higher Education 19 (3). pp. 230 - 243.
Chetty, Raj, and Nathaniel Hendren. 2018. The Impacts of Neighborhoods on Intergenerational Mobility I: Childhood Exposure Effects.” Quarterly Journal of Economics 113 (3). Available at: https://opportunityinsights.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/movers_paper1.pdf. Accessed 13/11/2018.
Chetty, R., Friedman, J.N., Hilger, N., Saez, E., Diane, S. W., and Yagan, D. 2010. How Does Your Kindergarten Classroom Affect Your Earnings? Evidence from Project Star. The National Bureau of Economic Research. Working Paper No. 16381. Available at: https://www.nber.org/papers/w16381. Accessed 13/11/2018.
Dison, A. 1997. The Acquisition and Use of Literacies Within Social Contexts: Tsholo Mothibi's Story. Academic Development 3 (2). pp. 53-74.
Kvasny, L., 2006. The cultural (re)production of digital inequality. Information, Communication and Society 9 (2). pp. 160–181.
Oyedemi, T. D. 2012. Digital inequalities and implications for social inequalities: A study of Internet penetration amongst university students in South Africa. Telematics and Informatics 29. pp. 302 - 313.
University of the Western Cape. 2016. Annual Report. Available at: https://www.uwc.ac.za/SO/Finance/.../UWC%202016%20Annual%20Report.pdf. Accessed 13/11/2018.
Vedantam, S. 2018. Zipcode Destiny: The Persistent Power Of Place And Education. Hidden Brain. NPR. Available at: https://www.npr.org/2018/11/12/666993130/zipcode-destiny-the-persistent-power-of-place-and-education. Accessed 13/11/2018.
Feedback about flipped learning from my students
Feedback about flipped learning from my students
LIN737 - Formal language studies (honours level)
LIN737 - Formal language studies (honours level)
My honours class is never very big: in 2024, there were 9 students. This makes lots of one-on-one interaction and feedback feasible. Additionally, it is possible for me to really interpret the students' feedback about the course qualitatively and in detail.
Feedback from the 9 honours students regarding the flipped classroom setup was unanimously positive. Many highlighted the positive self-paced aspect of watching the lecture in a video in addition to having the opportunity for an in-depth follow up with the lecturer after watching the video. When asked an open-ended question about what they would change/keep the same about the course, several replied that they would keep the flipped classroom. Students also clearly perceive the learner- centeredness of this approach.
It was also clear that the students did not feel that the flipped classroom setup put any distance between them and the lecturer - on the contrary. Furthermore, the assessment style that is made possible by the flipped setup made students feel like they had a fair opportunity to showcase what they were learning, and felt that the assessments themselves contributed to the learning process.
LCS121 & 222 - (Advanced) Design Features
LCS121 & 222 - (Advanced) Design Features
Interpreting the students' feedback from the undergraduate classes necessarily involves greater reliance on quantitative responses. This is due to the large students numbers (e.g. in LCS121, we typically have around 750 students in the class).
Based on the students' feedback, the experience of the flipped setup was still overwhelmingly positive. However, it is also clear that the students experience pressure to 'keep up', and that this is a big responsibility for first and second year students who are still learning how to be proactive and manage their time.
When I asked the tutors whether they thought the students were keeping up, their impression was that between 4-6/10 students coming to class prepared:
The students do experience a benefit in being able to use class time to work through exercises with the lecturer:
Report abuse