Stage 2: Survey with Students

For my workshop, I would like to recruit between 5 and 10 neurodiverse female students of colour. The maximum capacity in the study room is 15, but my research suggests having too many participants in one workshop can be overwhelming and hinder its potential to achieve the intended outcome. I will deliver the workshop at the CSM Museum & Study collection for the action phase of my research. At the end of the workshop, I will ask participants to complete my survey to gather quantitative data.

Post-Workshop Survey

Thank you for attending the workshop! Your feedback will help us improve future sessions. Please take a few minutes to complete this survey.

1. Inclusivity

• How inclusive did you feel the workshop was for participants with diverse learning needs?
  • Not inclusive
  • Somewhat inclusive
  • Neutral
  • Inclusive
  • Very inclusive
• Optional: What specific aspects of the workshop made you feel included or excluded?

2. Engagement

• How engaging were the activities involving museum objects?
  • Not engaging
  • Somewhat engaging
  • Neutral
  • Engaging
  • Very engaging
• Optional: What part of the workshop did you find most engaging or inspiring?

3. Educational Value

• How effective was the workshop in helping you understand intersectionality through museum objects?
  • Not effective
  • Somewhat effective
  • Neutral
  • Effective
  • Very effective
• Optional: What key ideas or insights did you take away from the workshop?

4. Enjoyment

• How enjoyable did you find the workshop overall?
  • Not enjoyable
  • Somewhat enjoyable
  • Neutral
  • Enjoyable
  • Very enjoyable
• Optional: What did you enjoy the most and why?

5. Suggestions for Improvement

• What changes would make the workshop more effective or enjoyable for future participants?

Stage 1: Semi-Structured Interviews with Colleagues

Following the success of my semi-structured interviews with expert colleagues for the IP Unit, I will use this qualitative data collection method again to request their valuable feedback on key elements of my developed workshop plan. I will use their feedback to improve the content, delivery, inclusivity, and relevance to neurodiverse students of colour.

The colleagues I will contact are:

1. Judy Willcocks
2. Sarah Campbell
3. Carys Kennedy
4. Graham Barton
5. Jhinuk Sarkar
6. Chris Kelly
7. Anabelle Crowley

As my colleagues will be very busy during Autumn term and have conflicting schedules, I will most likely organise a joint interview with Sarah and Judy, Graham and Natasha, and individual interviews with Carys, Jhinuk, Chris, and Anabelle.

Semi-Structured Interview Questions

1. Can you explain what your experience of neurodiversity is as an individual and/or academic practitioner?
2. Based on your experience, what is your top tip for teaching neurodiverse students?
3. How well do you think the workshop plan addresses the needs of neurodiverse students of colour?
4. Are there any aspects of the workshop content or delivery that you think could be challenging or not inclusive enough for this group?
5. What suggestions do you have to make the workshop more engaging for students with different learning styles and disabilities?
6. Are there any questions I should remove or add in my post-workshop student questionnaire?
7. Is there anything specific you think should be added, removed, or modified to make the workshop more effective for this audience?
8. How do you think this workshop could be adapted for broader, long-term implementation across other UAL programs

Action Outcome

Fortunately, all of the colleagues I emailed agreed to meet me within the week before my ARP workshop, which means I will be able to gain insightful feedback from 7 semi-structured interviews in total.

Workshop Description

Exploring Intersectionality through Object-based Learning

This workshop will use the CSM Museum’s historic collection and hands-on practice of object-based learning to spark inspiring thoughts and important conversations about the intersections between race, neurodiversity, and gender. From learning about the CSM Museum’s services and field of object-based learning, to exploring diverse objects from the Graduate Award collection with peers, you will meet students from other courses, gain transferable skills, and knowledge that will enrich your coursework and inspire your creative thinking.

The workshop will be led by Curriculum Development Curator, Dayna Tohidi, and is part of her PgCert Action Research Project. As a neurodiverse woman of colour and recent Central Saint Martins alumna, Dayna understands the importance of embracing your identity and navigating your place within this creative institution. Your feedback will play a vital role in shaping future workshops and fostering a more inclusive and supportive academic environment.

While specifically designed for neurodiverse women of colour, all students are welcome to join and share their valuable feedback. The workshop will be based at the CSM Museum in Kings Cross and take approximately 3 hours, with breaks included to ensure a comfortable and engaging experience.

Workshop Outline

Workshop structure:

• Welcome and Introduction:
• Introductions, workshop goals, and agenda overview

• Icebreaker: What Does Intersectionality Mean to You?
• Participant sharing and facilitator explanation

•  Object-Based Learning (OBL) Activity:
• Introduction to OBL.
• Handling instructions.
• Exploration and discussion (observation, analysis, reflection)

• Comfort Break

• Group Reflection and Discussion:
• Reflecting on the theme of intersectionality and workshop learnings

• Closing and Evaluation:
• Summary of key points.
• Participant feedback (survey/questionnaire)

For my project, Exploring Intersectionality through Object-based Learning, I aim to gather valuable feedback on my workshop from both colleagues and students. To ensure the research is comprehensive and inclusive, I have chosen a combination of semi-structured interviews, mixed-methods surveys, and thematic analysis.

Semi-Structured Interviews with Colleagues

For gathering feedback from colleagues, I opted for semi-structured interviews. This method offers flexibility while ensuring I can gather specific insights about the workshop’s design, effectiveness, and potential improvements.

• Semi-structured interviews are an effective way to allow participants to share their views in their own words while also focusing on key topics relevant to my research. This balance between structure and openness is ideal for exploring colleagues’ perspectives and gaining rich, detailed feedback
• The semi-structured format allows me to ask follow-up questions and adapt the interview based on the conversation, providing deeper insights into specific aspects of the workshop

Mixed-Methods Surveys with Students

To collect feedback from students, I have chosen a mixed-methods survey. This approach combines both quantitative and qualitative methods, allowing me to capture a broad range of data and provide a well-rounded analysis.

• The quantitative portion of the survey uses closed-ended questions, which are easy to analyse and allow for clear comparisons. This helps to identify trends, such as which aspects of the workshop were most beneficial or effective
• The qualitative portion allows students to provide open-ended responses, sharing personal experiences and insights. This adds depth and nuance to the data, enabling me to understand the “why” behind the trends

The combination of both approaches ensures that I can both measure the impact of the workshop and understand the reasons behind students’ reactions.

Thematic Analysis for Data Analysis

For analysing the feedback from both colleagues and students, I’ve chosen thematic analysis. This method is particularly suited to identifying patterns in qualitative data, which will help me understand how the workshop was received and how it can be improved.

• Thematic analysis allows for the identification and interpretation of patterns or themes within the data. By analysing the responses thematically, I can pinpoint key issues that emerged in both interviews and surveys, such as recurring concerns or successful elements of the workshop
• Thematic analysis helps in organising large volumes of qualitative data in a manageable way, making it easier to interpret and draw meaningful conclusions

This analysis tool is ideal for my research because it allows me to stay focused on the core themes related to intersectionality, inclusivity, and effectiveness, ensuring the data is meaningful and can be used to improve the workshop.

Conclusion

The combination of semi-structured interviews, mixed-methods surveys, and thematic analysis ensures that I am gathering both rich qualitative insights and clear quantitative data. By triangulating these methods, I will gain a deeper understanding of how the workshop works and how it can be improved to meet the diverse needs of neurodiverse students of colour.

During the second workshop at LCC, my colleagues and I discussed and shared feedback on our data collection methods. This was more helpful than I anticipated because I received valuable feedback on modifications I hadn’t already considered.

My original semi-structured interview questions were:

1. Can you explain what your experience of neurodiversity is as an individual and/or academic practitioner?
2. Based on your experience, what is your top tip for teaching neurodiverse students?
3. How well do you think the workshop plan addresses the needs of neurodiverse students of colour?
4. Are there any aspects of the workshop content or delivery that you think could be challenging or not inclusive enough for this group?
5. What suggestions do you have to make the workshop more engaging for students with different learning styles and disabilities?
6. Is there anything specific you think should be added, removed, or modified to make the workshop more effective for this audience?

My colleagues advised me to write an introductory paragraph to introduce the key subjects my study entails and give context to my workshop plan and research aims. They also recommended I send my material in advance and schedule a 30 minute meeting to not put colleagues off from participating. Finally, they advised me to conduct the interviews on Teams so I can share my material and easily record the sessions, once their consent is given. Lastly, they recommended I add a question about their feedback on my post-workshop questionnaire to ensure it achieves my research aims.

My original post-workshop questionnaire questions were:

1. How do you feel after attending this object-based learning workshop?
2. In what ways did the object-based learning approach help or hinder your understanding of the material?
3. Did you feel supported and understood in the learning environment?
4. What elements of the workshop resonated most with you, given your learning needs?
5. Were there any moments during the workshop where you felt unable to participate fully?
6. What improvements do you think could make the workshop more effective for students with neurodiverse conditions?

My colleagues advised me to remove terms, such as ‘disability’ and ‘exclusion’ from my questions to prevent ostracising and making my students feel self-conscious or bad about themselves. Moreover, my colleagues helped me edit my questions to make them more concise by removing two-part questions and superflous words.

This session was useful because it helped me draw parallels between my ARP and that of my colleagues. We were able to bounce ideas off each other and practice communicating our proposals to a larger audience.

Key Feedback and Insights

• Use Times Higher as an educational resource – Judy has recommended a useful article for me about neurodiversity within higher education
• Use my network to market my pilot workshop to my target audience of neurodiverse women of colour. Lindsay suggested I post my workshop in the PgCert Q&A – Misc forum and ask colleagues to share it with their students to encourage sign ups
• My group thinks I should use my positionality and experience as a former neurodiverse woman of colour studying at CSM to strengthen my pilot workshop call-out and inspire current students to participate
• It would be great if I can complete two action research cycles by piloting my workshop with colleagues first, but as long as I complete one cycle, I will be on track for the unit
• The main thing I need to consider is how I will meaningfully document and evaluate my workshop. This is something to trial with colleagues first and seek their critical advice before I approach students
• Lindsay said I could borrow her copy of ‘Rethinking Disability’, which she recommended for my research
• Andrea’s project inspired me to contact Academic Support to get an insight into how neurodiverse students are using workshops to support their learning needs

Next steps

• I should reflect on the 250+ student responses I have collected after my object-based learning workshops through my Google feedback form and see what suggestions would be beneficial to implement in my pilot workshop
• I should spend some time researching the Universal Design Principles and various research methods so I can figure out how to improve my pilot workshop draft structure and collect meaningful feedback from colleagues and students
• I should make an Excel spreadsheet of all the courses I have already delivered OBL workshops for and list the email addresses of the course leaders to send my pilot workshop open-call
• I should get some provisional dates in the diary to run the pilot workshop with my colleagues and also to run it for students

Project Focus

Promote inclusivity in arts education by developing an object-based learning blueprint and workshop that benefits all students, with a particular focus on addressing the learning needs and lived experiences of neurodiverse women of colour.

October 2024

1. Do a literature review on key subjects and theories
   • Intersectionality theory
   • Critical Race theory
   • Learning Styles Theory
   • Universal Design Principles
   • Inclusive Pedagogies
   • Neurodiversity
2. Complete ethics approval documentation
   • Write my ethical action plan
   • Write my participant information form
   • Write my participant consent form
   • Receive feedback on above from tutor
3. Explore research methods and data collection tools
   • Semi-structured interviews
   • Questionnaires
   • Thematic analysis

November 2024

1. Develop my pilot workshop plan:
   • Implement feedback from IP Unit
   • Apply knowledge from literature review
   • Shortlist objects to use during workshop
   • Evaluate workshop with museum team
2. Plan semi-structured interviews with colleagues:
   • Plan my interview questions
   • Schedule interviews with my colleagues
   • Record their responses and insights
   • Summarise findings and key themes
   • Use insights to refine the workshop design
3. Recruit students for object-based learning Workshop:
   • Create a Participant Information Sheet
   • Distribute my Participant Information Sheet

December 2024

1. Deliver workshop to students
   • Conduct the workshop at the CSM Museum
   • Collect data through a student questionnaire
2. Analyse data from questionnaire:
   • Identify major findings and themes
   • Begin compiling insights for the report

January 2025

1. Prepare for final submission:
   • Edit and write more blog posts
   • Create my 10-minute presentation
   • Submit coursework by 17 January 2025

Name of practitioner-researcher: Dayna Tohidi

Feedback from Lindsay Jordan

This is looking great Dayna — I love that the first cycle is a pilot and that you have such knowledgeable & expert colleagues signed up to take part. It’s a real strength of your project design and will help you to revise and refine the workshop.

It will be great to see how the workshop design evolves and what changes you decide on that will better meet the needs of your ‘target audience’. I also look forward to seeing what you come up with in terms of how to document and evaluate what takes place; make sure you work this process into your first cycle with colleagues; I’m sure they will have lots of ideas. 

Overview

Key Points

Reflections

• I can improve my Ethical Action Plan by explaining that my colleagues will be part of my validation group and that I intend to include them as part of my systematic evaluation procedure
• I can also improve my plan by explaining that my project focus is driven by my personal values and my desire to make arts learning more inclusive and accessible for neurodiverse women of colour like myself. It is strongly influenced by my positionality as a practitioner-researcher and former learning needs as a CSM student
• Another modification I can make to my plan is explaining that my idea was inspired by the issue I identified, which is the attainment gap between White and BAME students at CSM and knowing that supporting neurodiverse learning needs better can help to close this gap

Teaching Context

As the Curriculum Development Curator of the CSM Museum & Study Collection, I design and deliver all the object-based learning workshops we run for UAL and external learners. In the last nine months since starting my role, I have taught 25 bespoke workshops for more than 700 students, which has exposed me to a variety of learning styles and needs. While no student has explicitly identified as neurodiverse yet, some course leaders and student feedback have indicated the presence of neurodiverse individuals in my workshops.

My awareness and interest in the relationship between neurodiversity and creativity started early on in my role when artist, Chris Kelly, curated the exhibition: Interwoven for our window display (CSM Museum, 2023). Moreover, I recently learned that 50% of our students identify as neurodiverse (Willcocks, 2024). According to the Annual Report (2022), CSM has the highest percentage of students who have declared a disability, standing at 21% in 2023/2024. Given that CSM also has the highest attainment gap between White and B.A.M.E students, measuring -17% in 2021/2022, I am curious to know how much of that disparity is influenced by disability.  

Earlier this year, I attended the British Museum’s Multi-Sensory Learning in Museums Conference (2024). I was fascinated and inspired by the Learning department’s use of smell and taste in their object-based learning workshops for children with special educational needs and disabilities. At the Museum, we primarily teach using three key methodologies: Jules Prown’s forensic reading, Gillian Rose’s visual analysis, and the emotional or extra-rational reading. Since these frameworks effectively stimulate multiple senses, like sight, sound, and touch, we had not previously considered incorporating taste and smell. This realisation led me to question ways in which I could expand the sensory modalities engaged through objects in my workshops for adults.

Intervention Plan

I aim to create a new object-based learning methodology that is tailored to support the learning needs of neurodiverse women of colour. To avoid asking students to participate in free labour, I will first test out my methodology in a pilot workshop for suitable colleagues. After I have received and incorporated their feedback, I will invite Academic Support to co-run my workshop to expand its reach. While all students will be invited to attend for parity, it will be specifically targeted to neurodiverse women of colour.

My plan is based on Jean McNiff and Jack Whitehead’s Action Research Cycles method (2009). For my intervention, I will complete the first cycle by researching and developing the object-based learning methodology. During my action research, I will complete the second cycle by delivering and evaluating my workshops for colleagues and students. For Fellowship, I will complete the third cycle by further developing and delivering my workshops for external museums.

Positionality

My positionality has strongly influenced my intervention. I am a British-Iranian woman of colour, who was diagnosed with dyspraxia late into high school while studying for my A-Level exams. As a neurodiverse member of staff and former student at CSM, I can relate to some of the experiences of my target group. However, I acknowledge that everybody’s experience is unique, so it is important I consider their individual needs. Moreover, I am wary not to exclude trans women of colour, who are also part of the neurodiverse community.

Supporting Theories and Data

Object-based learning is an inherently inclusive form of experiential pedagogy. As Paolo Freire advocated in his seminal publication, Pedagogy of the Oppressed (1968), object-based learning positions educators as facilitators of knowledge rather than authoritative figures who impose their knowledge on passive learners. Therefore, it empowers them to foster a participatory and dialogical learning environment in which students can engage critically with material culture. This transformative approach also aligns with Michel Foucault’s critique of power structures within educational institutions and the need to challenge dominant narratives and systems of oppression (Foucault, 1977). The positive feedback I received from Kwame Baah and Danielle Radojin for my peer observed workshops in Unit 1, attests to my ability to deliver inclusive workshops.   

My intervention also aligns with Critical Race Theory because it focuses on neurodiverse women of colour, acknowledging their intersecting identities of race, gender, and disability. Moreover, it seeks to empower marginalised voices and challenge dominant educational practices that favour white, neurotypical students. My intervention is a small act of social justice that seeks to create an equitable learning environment, which could help to reduce the attainment gap. Aware that Museums were historically inaccessible to minority ethnic groups (Hatton, K, 2015), Willcocks’ has made anti-racism a key consideration in our work. Due to our rigorous collecting process for the annual Graduate Award (Tohidi, 2023), we have a diverse selection of contemporary objects I could teach with that will spark critical thinking and engaging discourse about the intersectional issues above.

Feedback from Colleagues and Peers

The first colleague I consulted feedback from is Jhinuk Sarkar. This conversation had a huge impact on my intervention because it helped me identify a niche. Inspired by Kimberle Crenshaw’s Intersectionality Theory and intrigued by the “potential coalitions” between race, gender and disability (1991), I decided to aim my intervention at supporting neurodiverse women of colour. Moreover, a subsequent feedback session I arranged with Head of Museum, Judy Willcocks, and Associate Dean of Learning, Silke Lange, enforced the significance of my research because neurodiversity, particularly from an intersectional lens, has not yet been a focal point in the field of object-based learning.

Initially, I intended to co-create and deliver a pilot workshop at the CSM Museum & Study Collection with neurodiverse women of colour studying at CSM. However, Willcocks advised me to change my approach because the museum is not embedded in a particular course, which makes co-creation challenging. Instead, she suggested I use my research to develop my workshop and test it out with colleagues who share characteristics of my target group. Then, once I have revised my methodology using their feedback, I could run it as a student workshop in collaboration with Academic Support. Not only would this approach be more ethical, but it would also broaden the scope of students who could attend my workshop. Feedback from my blog group also highlighted the ethical concerns of creating a focus group of neurodiverse women of colour, affirming the value of Willcocks’ approach.

My feedback session with Willcocks provided me with many practical suggestions to implement in my workshop, based on her decades of teaching experience and knowledge of neurodiversity. For example, she recommended I break down instructions and deliver them in multiple formats, limit my selection of objects, pace my content and frequently check in, factor in regular breaks, and engage a limited number of senses to prevent sensory overload. Willcocks also made me aware of external factors to consider, like the time of day I run the workshop, the temperature of the room, and background noise, since all these elements can distract and overwhelm neurodiverse students.

For my next feedback session, I sought the advice of MA Culture and Enterprise Programme Director, Richie Manu. Manu helpfully introduced me to his relevant research in this field. In the Learning Styles diagram below (Cohune, 1968), we can see that sight was the predominant modality, accounting for 83% of the pie chart. This was followed by hearing (11%), smell (3.5%), touch (1.5%), and taste (1%).

I agree with Manu that this approach is outdated and non-inclusive; we both feel that educators should adopt the Experiential Learning Style (2017) instead. Shown below, it advocates that each modality should be given equal emphasis so that learners have agency and choice. This approach is supported by Carey Jewitt (2008), who said that “multimodality asserts that all modes are partial. Each contributes to the production of knowledge in distinct ways and therefore no one mode stands alone in the process of making meaning.”

Inspired by Manu’s wider-sensory project scope and idea generation diagram below (2017), I will ensure my workshop includes an object that represents each modality and design the layout in a way that learners can choose their exit point.

My conversation with film director, Lotje Sodderland, was also very informative. In her Netflix documentary, My Beautiful Broken Brain (2014), she recalls going from a neurotypical to neurodiverse person overnight due to suffering a stroke aged 34. Her unique lived experience affirmed her belief that communication is key to learning. During our meeting, Sodderland tells me she used Siri to read her script for Channel 4 aloud since she still struggles to read. This insight gave me the idea to offer text to speech for my post workshop object notes so participants can digest notes in their preferred format. Sodderland also emphasised that many neurodiverse people are sensitive to sound and can feel claustrophobic in crowded environments. These are important factors I will consider when I plan my workshop in Unit 3.

Since my consultations with colleagues and peers occurred before my second tutorial with my PgCert tutor, I did not know if consent forms were necessary at this stage and how to write one. This is something I will discuss with my tutor and implement for the Action Research project.

Concluding Thoughts

This intervention has had a significant impact on me as a person and practitioner. On a personal level, it has made me feel more aware, accepting, and proud of my dyspraxia. Growing up, neurodiversity was not a topic of conversation and conditions like mine were seen as a setback. In hindsight, being diagnosed late into my education was a blessing in disguise because it enabled me to create learning processes and systems that now set me apart as a practitioner. It has also helped me be more empathetic and aware of the different learning needs my students may have. I am looking forward to continuing my research over the Summer break and piloting my workshop with colleagues before I pitch it to Academic Support.

References

1. Biggs, J. and Tang, C. (2011) Teaching for Quality Learning at University. 4^th edition. Maidenhead: Society for Research into Higher Education and Open University Press. [e-book in library]
2. Chatterjee, H. and Hannan, L. (2015), Engaging the Senses: Object-based Learning in Higher Education, London: Routledge.
3. Crenshaw, K. (1991) ‘Mapping the Margins: Intersectionality, Identity
   politics, and Violence against Women of Color’, Stanford Law Review, 43(6), pp.
   1241–1299. Available at: https://doi.org/10.2307/1229039.
4. Foucault, M. (1977) Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison. Translated by A. Sheridan. New York: Pantheon Books.
5. Freire, P. (1968) Pedagogy of the Oppressed. 13^th Edition. England: Penguin
6. Hatton, K. (2015) Towards an Inclusive Arts Education. London: Institute of Education Press, University of London
7. Kelly, C. (2023) Christopher Kelly Design. Available at: Christopher Kelly design (Accessed: 29 Feb 2024).
8. Manu, R. (ed.) (2017) ‘Wider-sensory exploration: fostering curiosity in teaching and learning strategies’, Spark: UAL Creative Teaching and Learning Journal, Vol. 2, No. 3. Available at: Wider-sensory exploration: Fostering curiosity in teaching and learning strategies | Spark: UAL Creative Teaching and Learning Journal (arts.ac.uk)  (Accessed: 10 July 2024)
9. McNiff, J, Whitehead, J. (2009) Doing and Writing Action Research. London: SAGE Publications
10. Multi-Sensory Learning in Museums. British Museum, 26 April 2024
11. My Beautiful Broken Brain (2014) Directed by Lotje Sodderland [Feature film]. Netflix
12. O’Brien, J. (2024) ‘Neurodiversity Celebration Week 2024: Jhinuk Sarkar talks adult diagnosis and learning strategies’, UAL. Available at: Neurodiversity Celebration Week 2024: Jhinuk Sarkar talks adult diagnosis and learning strategies (arts.ac.uk) (Accessed: 21 March 2024).
13. Paris, S. G. (2002), Perspectives on Object-Centred Learning in Museums, New York: Routledge.
14. Rekis, J. (2023) ‘Religious Identity and Epistemic Injustice: An
    Intersectional Account’, Cambridge University Press, Issue 38, pp.
    779-800, Available at: 10.1017/hyp.2023.86
15. Sarkar, Jhinuk. (2022) Square Hole [Podcast]. May. Available at: Square Hole | Podcast on Spotify (Accessed: 15 May 2024).
16. Social Justice in Museums. Museum of London, 18 June 2024
17. Ted X Talks (2015) Creativity unearthed by a sensory adventure. 4 December. Available at: Creativity unearthed by a sensory adventure | Richie Manu | TEDxClerkenwell (youtube.com)  (Accessed: 08 July 2024).
18. Tohidi, D. (2023) The Class of 2023: Graduate Award. Available at: https://www.arts.ac.uk/colleges/central-saint-martins/stories/the-class-of-2023-graduate-award [Accessed 16 July 2024]
19. Tohidi, D. (2024) CSM Museum & Study Collection Feedback Form. Available at: CSM Museum & Study Collection Feedback Form – Google Forms (Accessed: 29 Feb 2024).
20. UAL (2022). Equality, Diversity, and Inclusion Annual Report 2022/2023. UAL. Available at: UAL Equality Diversity and Inclusion annual report 2022/23 (arts.ac.uk) (Accessed: 06 May 2024)
21. Willcocks, J (2024) Decolonising Museums [Lecture]. Central Saint Martins. 09 May