While my Action Research Project has confirmed the value of integrating Analogue drawing into Digital learning environments, it also raised new questions about how to deepen its impact and measure its alignment with social justice goals.
Straightforward Applications of using Analogue Drawing
One key finding was Year 3’s enthusiasm for incorporating creative Analogue drawing earlier in their design process, particularly during the ‘Concept Development’ unit. This feedback emphasises that drawing exercises not only enhance technical skills but also inspire deeper creative thinking.
I was surprised that students are happy to draw on large sheets of paper on the floor – there is not much space in the Digital teaching rooms so they were quite close, but this did not hinder their open creative drawing, and in some cases fostered group bonding by placing students next to other students whom they may not know very well or usually speak to, and revealed how spatial limitations can be turned into opportunities for collaboration and connection.
For Bespoke Tailoring specifically, I have learned that displaying students’ Analogue work alongside their Digital projects and physical garments during sessions reinforces the connection between these approaches, enriching their creative workflow.
Expanding the Scope of the Research
I would like to explore further how my methods affect Social Justice outcomes, such as Inclusion, Equity, and Digital Literacy. I am aware that most students graduate with ownership of a laptop and adequate Digital competencies even if they start Year 1 without these, so a future iteration of this project could track and assess this more formally to see how less advantaged students develop their Digital Literacy and Digital Hardware from Year 1 to Year 3.
I am also keen to explore how my approach could benefit courses with lower student satisfaction or engagement. Creating adaptable resources for broader UAL implementation, as suggested by my peer Kayal, would be an interesting avenue, though it would require investigating the distinct needs of other courses. Bespoke Tailoring is exceptionally well run with high student satisfaction and high grades, and perhaps my approach could be useful for other courses which don’t have such high student engagement and attainment; perhaps some students on other courses with higher cohorts feel they don’t get enough attention, perhaps courses could integrate technical learning more closely with the creative aspects.
Balancing Structure and Flexibility in the Classroom
My positionality as a tutor has always made me conscious of not placing myself as the “expert” who unilaterally imparts knowledge. Instead, I aim to foster inclusive, discussion-led sessions that promote peer-to-peer learning and move away from the hierarchy and rigidity of traditional classroom dynamics. This approach aligns with my philosophy of embracing Context and Relevance, ensuring that students see how the tools and techniques we explore relate to their creative practice and broader coursework.
However I have occasionally found an interesting dichotomy in students’ preferences for classroom structures. A few students, on other coureses than Bespoke Tailoring, have expressed an appreciation for the formality of “classic” classroom settings, particularly in Adobe sessions. Perhaps these structured environments, with their clear objectives and immediate outcomes, may offer a balance to more unstructured parts of their courses?
This balance of structure and flexibility also intersects with the ongoing debate around the use of Learning Outcomes in Higher Education. During the TPP (Teaching Practice Programme) unit, we explored the value and limitations of Learning Outcomes, referencing Nicholas Addison’s article, ‘Doubting Learning Outcomes in Higher Education Contexts: From Performativity Towards Emergence and Negotiation’ Addison critiques the performative nature of Learning Outcomes, suggesting they can be restrictive and fail to account for the diverse learning styles and approaches of students.
I think Addison shows very valuable insight, and also we can recognise that not all students perceive Learning Outcomes as restrictive. One tutor on the PgCert shared an insightful observation about her international students, who often appreciate the objectivity and clarity that Learning Outcomes provide. For these students, well-defined goals serve as navigational tools, helping them confidently engage with the course content and expectations.
This tension between structure and flexibility is also tied to the diversity of learning styles in any given classroom. While some students thrive in open, discussion-led environments that encourage exploration and creativity, others prefer the certainty and linearity of predefined objectives. Recognising and responding to this diversity is a crucial part of designing effective teaching strategies.
For instance, students who wish to focus solely on mastering specific tools like Adobe software can attend sessions provided by the Learning Technology Support team, which offers Adobe Certified Professional qualifications. This option provides a clear and structured pathway for those seeking technical proficiency. On the other hand, my sessions aim to integrate these tools into a broader creative and contextual framework, encouraging deeper engagement and critical thinking.
It is important to strike a balance between offering structure for those who need it and providing the flexibility to accommodate diverse learning preferences. By fostering an environment where students can navigate their own paths – whether through structured objectives or emergent, discussion-driven learning – I aim to support a richer, more inclusive learning experience. It highlights the importance of adaptability in my teaching practice, as well as the need for dialogue with students to understand their unique needs and preferences. By doing this, I aim to create spaces not only to impart knowledge but also to empower students to become active participants in their learning journeys.
Challenges and Further Questions
Understanding why certain groups did not participate is crucial for refining future data collection methods. Increasing questionnaire response rates will require more strategic timing and possibly integrating surveys into sessions themselves. Additionally, the influence of physical environments, such as uninspiring computer labs, on learning outcomes deserves deeper investigation.
I found engaging with students regarding their learning experience very enriching, and directly affected my approach to sessions; I will continue with students’ action in voluntarily displaying their work on the walls during the Digital part of sessions to keep that Analogue exercise in mind as students work at a computer.
Students’ openness, creativity, and unique styles continually inspire me to refine my teaching approach. Active listening from me has encouraged diverse perspectives and collective problem-solving, and I have encouraged my students to be active listeners too. The individual students’ Drawing style also helped me to understand their learning style, and their discussions also gave me insights into group dynamics, and which students could be encouraged to open up more and have more confidence in their own work. Tuckman’s work about Group Dynamics has been very helpful, with his theory of Forming, Storming, Norming, Performing and Mourning.
Addison, N., 2014. ‘Doubting learning outcomes in higher education contexts: from performativity towards emergence and negotiation’. International Journal of Art & Design Education, 33(3), pp.313-325.
Tuckman, B. W. and Jensesn, M. A C. (1977) ‘Stages of Small-Group Development Revisited’ Group and Organisation Studies, 2 (4), 419 – 427
Students voluntarily put their work on the wall