One area of feedback from the questionnaire that I hadn’t explicitly asked for, but which came up consistently, was students’ concerns about access to workshops and technical spaces. Many respondents highlighted that these spaces often lack the capacity to accommodate all students, an issue that frequently arises in broader discussions with students about university provision.
Question 6: What is the biggest barrier for you when using technical spaces (e.g., computer rooms, software, or printing equipment)?
Responses included:
- “We need more computers with the software.”
- “Computer usage.”
- “If the space is busy.”
- “Them being occupied.”
This feedback aligns strongly with staff observations. As staff, we often agree with students’ frustrations and are sometimes surprised by the extent to which limited studio space and equipment hinder learning. For courses that are highly practical, access to technical spaces and equipment is critical.
At the same time, it is important to recognize the pressures on technical staff. For example, at CSM, workshops often operate with minimal staffing. In our workshop, Surface Design Lab: seven machines are in high demand, with only one staff member present for one day of the week and two staff for the remaining four days. This can result in waitlists of up to two weeks. Such understaffing inevitably contributes to burnout, especially at peak times like term ends or submission periods. This highlights that the problem is systemic: simply increasing the number of students or equipment will not resolve it without corresponding investment in staffing and support.
Supporting this, a 2024 Arts SU survey on UAL’s studio and workshop spaces revealed:
- 58% of respondents felt they did not have adequate access to studios or workshops during the 2023/24 academic year.
- 68% indicated that holiday closures negatively affected the quality of their work.
- Fewer than one-fifth had access to a designated workspace at home, meaning the majority rely entirely on university facilities.
One student comment noted that studios “dictate … our ambitions,” underscoring how crucial access is to artistic practice. Limited access is therefore not a minor inconvenience—it directly impacts students’ ability to learn, create, and succeed.
[Screenshot – The studio & Workshop report, UAL 2024
To address these challenges, systematic changes are required: additional staffing, extended facility access, and funding for new equipment or open-access spaces are necessary to meet student demand while supporting staff wellbeing. Simply extending hours or opening during holidays is unlikely to resolve staff burnout and could exacerbate pressures.
Within our immediate control, there are practical steps we can implement in the workshop to improve the student experience:
- Provide clearly visible term dates, opening hours, and workshop schedules.
- Offer accessible and well-structured learning materials, including videos and guides.
- Communicate clearly how to book and use the space through inductions, emails, and signage.
- Consider more equitable allocation of machine and software time per student. For instance, with the upcoming addition of a large embroidery machine for MA and final-year BA students, a maximum stitch-out time could help manage demand.
The feedback highlights a clear tension between student demand for technical spaces and the practical limitations of staffing and resources. While long-term investment in staffing, facilities, and equipment is essential, there are also immediate steps we can take in the workshop to improve access, communication, and fair use. Addressing these challenges will not only enhance the student experience but also support technical staff, ultimately creating a more sustainable and productive learning environment for everyone.
References:
Sherwood, C. (2024). Studios Report 2024. [online] Issuu. Available at: https://issuu.com/artstudentsunion/docs/sr2024_final_pages?utm_source=website&utm_medium=website&utm_campaign=studiosreport [Accessed 10 Dec. 2025].