Bottom (oldest post) > Top (newest)

1. Reflections 1 – 4
2. Microteaching
3. Case studies 1-3
4. Peer review – as an observee
5. Peer review – as an observer
6. Peer review – as an observee (tutor)

Record of Observation or Review of Teaching Practice   

Session/artefact to be observed/reviewed: 1:1 technical help with embroidery 

Size of student group: 1 

Observer: Rachel Marsden  

Observee: Sophie Reynolds  

Note: This record is solely for exchanging developmental feedback between colleagues. Its reflective aspect informs PgCert and Fellowship assessment, but it is not an official evaluation of teaching and is not intended for other internal or legal applications such as probation or disciplinary action. 

Part One 
Observee to complete in brief and send to observer prior to the observation or review: 

What is the context of this session/artefact within the curriculum? 

This personalized, one-on-one technical tutorial is designed for students who want to use the workshop, for embroidery, for the first time, or as a refresher. During the session, we begin by discussing the student’s goals and then introduce them to the software, guiding them through its tools and settings. Once the design is finalized, we provide step-by-step instructions on how to properly frame the fabric and stitch it out on the embroidery machine. 

How long have you been working with this group and in what capacity? 

This varies depending on who is booked in. All students will be from Ba or MA Textile & Fashion pathways  

What are the intended or expected learning outcomes? 

LO1 – Knowledge: Demonstrate knowledge and understanding of Wilcom software and how to effectively framing-up and prepare fabric. 

LO2 – Enquiry: Leverage knowledge of software and embroidery techniques to align with the student’s ideas and project, inspiring continued experimentation and creative exploration. 

LO3 – Process: Provide support to the student in using the software and sampling, troubleshooting challenges, and offering guidance on any necessary improvements or adjustments for further experimentation. 

LO4 – Communication:  Clearly communicate both digital and practical skills to the student, ensuring a mutual understanding of their goals and what they aim to achieve. Aim is for the student to walk away with the ability to confidently use the space/software again in future.  

LO5 – Realisation: Utilize technical skills to assist students in experimenting and sampling, helping them create stitched textile work that enhances and supports their project. 

What are the anticipated outputs (anything students will make/do)? 

A digital embroidery file + most likely a physical embroidered outcome  

Are there potential difficulties or specific areas of concern? 

The workshop can become quite busy, and sessions are often interrupted by walk-in questions. As a result, it can be challenging to support students effectively while maintaining the flow of the explanation. 

How will students be informed of the observation/review? 

Students will be informed via email before the session and verbally informed at the start of the session.  

What would you particularly like feedback on? 

I would appreciate feedback on the clarity of my communication and the effectiveness with which I explain the techniques and processes. Additionally, I’m open to any suggestions for improvement in the overall session 

How will feedback be exchanged? 

Through written feedback and discussion  

Part Two 

Observer to note down observations, suggestions and questions: 

Thanks for sending over the two recordings from your tutorial session Sophie (and for your patience with accessing the recordings). A thank you to the student participant for being part of the review too. It was wonderful to gain insight into your physical teaching and learning space of the workshop, and approach to supporting students through tutorial sessions. I definitely felt like “a fly on the wall.” Below are some reflections, suggestions and prompts to help think about different aspects of the tutorial session. Feel free to select/ choose areas to respond to in ‘Part Three’ of the ROT form below (rather than responding to it all) and I hope it’s helpful. Overall, the recordings are making me think about learning through doing and making, experiential learning, and material learning – these might be theoretical areas (from Kolb, Dewey, Piaget and Bruner – foundational voices) to examine in more depth in the future.  

The computer tutorial:  

The sound quality of the recording made some aspects difficult to hear. The session began with the student asking your name, after which you moved straight to the computer, leading the process of finding and downloading files, opening software, and navigating tools for measurements, checks, sizing, and edits. 

By 11 minutes in, the student logged into a computer to try for themselves, with you allowing them to take the lead and ask for support when needed. This could be a useful moment for informally assessing their digital literacy – what strategies might help further develop their skills beyond the session? 

Throughout, the student asked process-specific questions (e.g. “Does it impact the quality?”), which you answered clearly while explaining reasoning and offering alternative approaches. Your problem-solving approach – “Let’s see what it does” – helped reinforce a solutions-focused mindset. 

Though I was unable to see you both in this recording, the positive tone, laughter, and productive interactions were evident, reflecting an engaging and supportive learning environment. 

Moving onto the workshop tutorial: 

Your tutorial had a welcoming tone, with a well-paced approach to guidance and instruction. The student asked thoughtful questions, and you not only provided solutions but also explained the reasoning behind them – the why. Their curiosity showed engagement with the process, and you responded receptively, offering suggestions and brief introductions to synthetic and digital processes. 

There were positive cues from the student, such as “ah, cool,” indicating interest. You also set realistic expectations by discussing limitations, using phrases like “I wouldn’t suggest that,” reinforcing insight into the process. Your patience and positivity were evident, with frequent reassurance and encouragement (e.g. “that’s ok”). 

At times, I noticed the student used small hand gestures suggesting a desire for more hands-on involvement. It might be worth considering whether there’s an opportunity to let them engage more directly in the process – though this could be a trade-off with efficient use of time. You often led by example, demonstrating steps before allowing the student to try independently while providing continuous support. The student was seen continuing independently when the recording ended. I wonder if they came to find you with further questions? 

There was a moment when the student had to wait for your attention due to the demands of assisting others. They sought you out to ask, “what next?” – highlighting the time pressures you manage. The friendly interactions with peers, colleagues, and students – background chatter – was fantastic to hear and contributed to a welcoming and supportive learning environment. 

Given that the workshop is a noisy, multi-use space, it might be beneficial to check in about health and safety and accessibility considerations before starting a tutorial – though I assume there is a general briefing beforehand, or a health and safety induction at the start of term? A few questions might comprise (and you may already ask these): 

• Do you have any mobility needs or physical considerations I should be aware of while using the space or equipment? Could stools or chairs be available? 

• The workshop can be quite noisy – would you find it helpful to use ear protection or have a quieter space for discussion? Also are ear protection options available like ear defenders or ear plugs? This is in consideration of sensory needs. 

• Would you prefer additional visual demonstrations, written instructions/ note-taking, or verbal descriptions to support your learning? 

• Let me know if you need a short break or the pace adjusting to suit your needs? 

All suggestions!  

Part Three 

Observee to reflect on the observer’s comments and describe how they will act on the feedback exchanged: 

In reflection to Rachel’s feedback, I feel there are 3 main areas I would like to work on: 

1. Supporting Digital Literacy Development:  

Students often feel apprehensive or lack confidence in their digital literacy skills, which can hinder their ability to fully engage with the learning process. To help students develop these skills beyond the session, several strategies can be implemented:  

• Signpost to resources: Directing students to the workshop’s Padlet, where we’ve curated learning materials specific to the processes used in the session, can serve as a valuable reference. However, I believe we may have an overwhelming number of worksheets that students need to follow. Streamlining and refining these resources could prevent overload (Glazzard, 2024) and allow students to engage more effectively.  

• Provide physical worksheets: Offering printed worksheets alongside digital tasks can provide students with a tangible guide to follow, helping them feel more comfortable and less overwhelmed by having to switch between multiple digital tools at once. This approach could make the learning experience feel more manageable and approachable.  

• Notetaking: Encouraging students to record the tutorial or take notes can form a sense of ownership over their learning. Having a personal log to refer to allows students to reflect on the process and reinforces learning retention beyond the session.  

This also aligns with Rachel’s feedback, suggesting that in addition to signposting, I should directly ask the student something like: “Would you prefer additional visual demonstrations, written instructions/ note-taking, or verbal descriptions to support your learning?” This approach would encourage the student to share their specific needs, enabling a more tailored learning experience. Creating more visual guides and demonstrations is also something I’m eager to focus on. While we currently have written guides with text and images, I believe that incorporating video and audio demonstrations would better support the diverse learning styles of our students and complement the resources we already offer.  

2. Engaging student more directly in the process:  

• I often demonstrate the technique from start to finish before having the student try it themselves, with me available for any questions that might arise. I recognise that this approach sometimes stems from my lack of confidence, feeling fully able to verbally explain the steps and finding it easier to demonstrate while providing explanations. However, upon reflection, I realise I should either set expectations upfront by informing the student that I’ll first demonstrate and then they’ll try, or ask the student for their preference—whether they’d prefer to be shown first or guided step-by-step with them doing the process themself. This would also allow me to incorporate more learning advocacy into my approach.  

• This also highlights the importance of starting the session with Rachel’s suggestion: “Let me know if you need a short break or if you’d like the pace adjusted to suit your needs.” Upon reflection, while I do try to personalize the pacing of my demonstrations based on the student’s verbal and nonverbal cues, a question like this would better set the tone for the session. It would help create a sense of openness and reassure the student that they have a say in shaping the session to meet their needs. While I often ask, “Does that make sense?” or similar questions to gauge understanding, a simple, direct question like this would foster a more comfortable and collaborative atmosphere for learning.   

3. Ensuring the workshop supports accessibility needs:  

– Do you have any mobility needs or physical considerations I should be aware of while using the space or equipment? Could stools or chairs be available?  

– The workshop can be quite noisy – would you find it helpful to use ear protection or have a quieter space for discussion? Also are ear protection options available like ear defenders or ear plugs? This is in consideration of sensory needs.  

• Although my colleagues and I are aware of the noisy environment in the workshop, with sometimes up to four sewing machines running and music often playing, I realise upon reflection that we could improve how we address this issue. While we’ve considered sound barriers and have ear defenders available in a drawer for students to use, we should make ear protection more readily accessible. For example, during student inductions at the start of the year, we could highlight the location of earplugs/defenders, or ensure there is a visible supply available in the workshop for students to use as needed.  

• Additionally, the suggestion of asking, “Would you find it helpful to have a quieter space for discussion?” is something I hadn’t considered before. Perhaps this oversight was due to the fact that the workshop is often busy with other users, and there aren’t always multiple technicians on hand to support or ensure health and safety measures are being followed. However, this doesn’t mean I can’t incorporate this question when possible. For example, during consultations, we could ask this question to ensure we can accommodate students, or we could schedule consultations in quieter parts of the day, such as mornings, and leave noisier machine sessions for the afternoons.  

• I also need to become more aware of the need to consider students’ mobility and physical needs. While we have stools and tall chairs available for students in the space, simply informing them of these options and letting them know they are free to use them would communicate that they have choices for their comfort. Furthermore, when working on more physically demanding tasks, like framing embroidery hoops, I can check in with students about their physical needs to ensure I’m providing the right level of support. Much like with software support, I often demonstrate how to frame, then ask the student to do it themselves. Knowing about any mobility or physical concerns will help me tailor my approach more effectively.  

Ultimately, developing an open, adaptable, and responsive learning environment is key to supporting diverse learning styles and needs. Personalising learning by directly engaging students in the process—whether through demonstrating techniques, adjusting the pace, or providing clear options for students to communicate their needs —helps create a more tailored and inclusive experience. By continuously reflecting on and refining my approach in the workshop, I can enhance both the learning experience and student outcomes. I found this to be a highly beneficial learning reflection, so thank you!! 

References

Glazzard, J. (2024). Introductory Chapter: The Application of Cognitive Science in Supporting Learners with Dyslexia. [online] www.intechopen.com. Available at: https://www.intechopen.com/chapters/88755 [Accessed 1 Apr. 2025].

Record of Observation or Review of Teaching Practice

Session/artefact to be observed/reviewed: Knit Machine Refresher

Size of student group: 12

Observer: Sophie Reynolds

Observee: Farah Govani

Part Two

Well-structured lesson & clear communication:

Followed this rough structure:

• Reflect on the techniques covered in previous sessions.
• Outline what will be covered in future sessions, including a breakdown of techniques for the rest of the week.
• Provide an overview of today’s session content.
• Ask the group (6-9 students) for input on what they’d like to focus on during the session.
• Begin the technique tutorial.
• Pause halfway through and at the end of the tutorial to ask if anyone has questions.
• At the end of the technique demonstration, give clear instructions on how long students have to practice (15-20 minutes).
• Advised students on where to find resources on Moodle and offered to show them on their phones if needed.

The technique was clearly communicated and demonstrated to the group. Farah first walked through the process of adding or removing stitches on one side, then repeated the steps on the opposite side, reinforcing the technique by recapping along the way. To enhance understanding, Farah provided both working samples on the knit machine and finished product examples for students to refer to.

During the demonstration, Farah also highlighted potential challenges with the technique and offered practical solutions for overcoming them.

One student asked for clarification on a more specific and complex shaping technique. Farah responded by drawing and designing on gridded paper to visually explain the process, combining both verbal and practical instruction. She first walked through the steps of drawing the shape, then demonstrated how to knit it on the machine, addressing any questions as they arose. Farah began with a simple shape, then moved on to a more complex one that incorporated the previously demonstrated techniques along with an additional step. This approach provided a comprehensive and well-rounded tutorial.

Adaptability:

• Farah effectively handled latecomers, keeping them engaged without disrupting the class.
• After the main technique tutorial, she took the time to speak to each latecomer individually, offering a breakdown of what the session covered and any changes that had occurred.
• She then guided the latecomers through the technique, ensuring they caught up with the rest of the group.

Pacing:

• The session was well-paced with clear timing. Farah regularly checked in, asking if anyone needed help or had questions throughout.
• There was ample time for students to practice the technique.

Areas for Development

• It could be helpful to pause the demonstration at times and encourage students with limited visibility (at the back of the group for example) to come forward for a closer view, as the space and student-to-view ratio can be a challenge. However, the technique was clearly explained, and Farah ensured there was plenty of opportunity for questions and clarifications throughout.
• It might be helpful to have another example on hand—preferably an extreme one—that demonstrates the full potential of the shaping technique, showcasing the lengths to which it can be taken.

Part 3

Upon reflection, I find Sophie’s feedback to be highly helpful and informative. Moving forward, I will implement several strategies to further enhance the learning experience.

Enhancing Visibility During Demonstrations

To ensure all students can clearly see the techniques being demonstrated, I will encourage those positioned further back to move closer when needed. Additionally, I will explore the use of a camera or projector to provide a clearer, close-up view of intricate details, making it easier for everyone to follow along regardless of their seating or standing position.

Expanding the Range of Examples

To deepen students’ understanding, I will introduce a wider variety of samples, including more extreme variations of shaping techniques. By demonstrating the full potential of these

methods, students will gain a broader perspective and feel more confident experimenting with their own work.

By implementing these improvements, I aim to create a more engaging and supportive learning environment, ensuring that all students, regardless of skill level, feel confident in applying the techniques independently.

Record of Observation or Review of Teaching Practice   

Session/artefact to be observed/reviewed: 1:1 technical help with embroidery 

Size of student group: 1 

Observer: Farah  

Observee: Sophie  

Part One 

What is the context of this session/artefact within the curriculum? 

This personalized, one-on-one technical tutorial is designed for students who want to use the workshop, for embroidery, for the first time, or as a refresher. During the session, we begin by discussing the student’s goals and then introduce them to the software, guiding them through its tools and settings. Once the design is finalized, we provide step-by-step instructions on how to properly frame the fabric and stitch it out on the embroidery machine. 

How long have you been working with this group and in what capacity? 

This varies depending on who is booked in. All students will be from Ba or MA Textile & Fashion pathways  

What are the intended or expected learning outcomes? 

LO1 – Knowledge: Demonstrate knowledge and understanding of Wilcom software and how to effectively framing-up and prepare fabric. 

LO2 – Enquiry: Leverage knowledge of software and embroidery techniques to align with the student’s ideas and project, inspiring continued experimentation and creative exploration. 

LO3 – Process: Provide support to the student in using the software and sampling, troubleshooting challenges, and offering guidance on any necessary improvements or adjustments for further experimentation. 

LO4 – Communication:  Clearly communicate both digital and practical skills to the student, ensuring a mutual understanding of their goals and what they aim to achieve. Aim is for the student to walk away with the ability to confidently use the space/software again in future.  

LO5 – Realisation: Utilize technical skills to assist students in experimenting and sampling, helping them create stitched textile work that enhances and supports their project. 

What are the anticipated outputs (anything students will make/do)? 

A digital embroidery file + most likely a physical embroidered outcome  

Are there potential difficulties or specific areas of concern? 

The workshop can become quite busy, and sessions are often interrupted by walk-in questions. As a result, it can be challenging to support students effectively while maintaining the flow of the explanation. 

How will students be informed of the observation/review? 

Students will be informed via email before the session and verbally informed at the start of the session.  

What would you particularly like feedback on? 

I would appreciate feedback on the clarity of my communication and the effectiveness with which I explain the techniques and processes. Additionally, I’m open to any suggestions for improvement in the overall session 

How will feedback be exchanged? 

Through written feedback and discussion  

Part Two 

Student A 

• Sophie provided step-by-step guidance on how to convert a JPEG file to a PDF in Photoshop, demonstrating the process on the computer. 

• Since the student didn’t have time to complete the steps themselves, Sophie sent them a PDF handout for reference. 

• Student was feeling anxious and uncertain about making mistakes. Sophie reassured them, encouraged them not to worry, and invited them to return after their lecture for a more in-depth session. 

Student B 

• Student arrived to learn how to use Wilcom software and embroider their piece, and didn’t have prior experience with the software. 

• The student needed to email their image to Sophie for upload but encountered technical issues. Sophie quickly found an alternative solution and used AirDrop instead. 

• While waiting for the student to send their file, Student A returned. Sophie took the time to go through the steps in detail, showing them how to reformat their image by dragging and dropping elements onto a board before proceeding to the next steps. 

• Sophie then guided Student through opening Wilcom software, explaining how to create a template, choose different frame sizes, and use various tools for tracing shapes and selecting stitch types. 

• Provided real-life samples of stitch types and frame sizes to help students visualise the process, ensuring they understood how digital templates translated into physical embroidery frames. 

• Student had difficulty remembering how to draw straight and curved lines using the tool. They asked Sophie to clarify the steps, and she demonstrated the process again on the computer. Once the student understood, Sophie encouraged them to try independently while she observed to ensure they grasped the technique. 

Student C 

• While assisting Students A & B simultaneously Student C was having problems with the embroidery machine and Sophie troubleshooted the problem efficiently. 

Sophie offered step-by-step guidance tailored to students at different skill levels, ensuring every instruction was clear and easy to follow. She supported those who were struggling by providing reassurance and a digital handout for reference. When technical issues emerged, she swiftly resolved them using AirDrop. By effectively managing multiple learners, she reinforced best practices, shared samples to boost understanding, and promoted independent learning, helping each student build confidence in their progress. 

Adaptability & Managing Multiple Students 

• Sophie tailored her step-by-step guidance to meet the diverse skill levels of her students. 

• She promptly addressed technical issues by switching to AirDrop, demonstrating flexibility in problem-solving. 

• By effectively managing multiple learners simultaneously, she adjusted her approach to provide targeted support where needed. 

• She balanced working with multiple students, ensuring each one received enough time and support without delays. 

Pacing & Reinforcement 

• Instructions were clearly communicated and demonstrated at a steady, manageable pace. Sophie adapted her approach based on each student’s level of understanding. 

• When students struggled, she reassured them and patiently re-explained steps, reinforcing key points until they felt confident to proceed independently. 

• She provided visual samples of embroidery effects and stitch types, helping students make informed choices and understand the range of possibilities on the embroidery machine. 

Areas for Development 

• Creating step-by-step handouts with clear instructions and visuals would help students remember the process and follow along independently. 

• Recording video demonstrations or screen recordings of the steps could provide students with a useful reference to revisit later, reinforcing their learning outside of the session. 

Regularly solicit student feedback to refine instructional pacing and ensure all learners’ needs are met. 

• Develop a troubleshooting guide for common technical issues (e.g., software errors, file format problems) to streamline problem-solving in future sessions. 

• If students struggle with specific steps, pausing to check their understanding before moving on could help ensure they feel confident in applying the skills independently.  

• Create a simple, easy-to-follow checklist to help students ensure they have completed all the key steps.    

Part Three 

In reflection to Farah’s observation, I believe have there to a shortfall in the availability of learning-aids and guidance for the digital embroidery workflow using Wilcom software. Comprehensive handouts already exist for fabric printing, which are appreciated and frequently used by students, clearly suggesting a similar approach would benefit embroidery students. Regarding specific areas for improvement:

• Creating step-by-step handouts:

I would like to focus more on this area, as I believe it will greatly enhance students’ learning and serve as a valuable teaching aid. Providing handouts with clear, concise instructions will support several key aspects of student development, including aiding neurodiverse learners, encouraging independent work, and offering a reliable reference for students to revisit when they wish. Additionally, Wilcom features an interactive feature where students can hover over an icon, press ‘F1,’ and be directed to the website for detailed instructions on how to use each tool, along with descriptions of each icon. Unfortunately, I often forget to mention this during inductions, but I believe it would be highly beneficial to incorporate this feature into the lessons moving forward. 

• Recording video demonstrations or screen recordings of the steps: 

I am eager to further develop this aspect within the workshop, particularly in exploring how to effectively facilitate and create video content that is accessible to all learners. In the meantime, it may be helpful to provide students with links to existing YouTube videos that cover relevant content, helping to bridge this gap until resources can be created. 

• Develop a troubleshooting guide for common technical issues:

A similar guide exists for fabric printing but has been overlooked for digital embroidery. It is apparent that this would provide an invaluable source of information for all users. Areas that we are often asked about and that could be included are; image export and workspace navigation.

• Create a simple, easy-to-follow checklist:

This is something I hadn’t previously considered, but I can definitely see the benefits. To enhance the learning resources, I’ll include a detailed checklist at the end that covers the key elements we regularly review and adjust once a student has finished designing their file. This includes factors such as: stitch density (which directly correlates with the thread being used), underlay, design size, how well the design fits within the frame and onto the fabric, as well as color order.

These elements are crucial for achieving a successful embroidery outcome, and it’s essential that students are not only aware of them but also knowledgeable about their importance, especially if they pursue work in the industry or beyond the workshop. This checklist will serve as a valuable tool to reinforce their learning and ensure they gain a comprehensive understanding of the process.

• If students struggle with specific steps, pausing to check their understanding before moving on: 

This is an area I should give more thought to when teaching a student. Typically, I walk through several steps or at the end of a session before asking questions like, “Does that make sense?” or “Do you understand?” However, upon reflection, it would be more effective to ask these questions more frequently or, even better, to proactively set the tone by saying something like, “Feel free to stop me if you’d like me to repeat or explain anything.” This approach would better support the student’s understanding and encourage more active engagement.

In conclusion, developing additional learning aids for Wilcom will greatly enhance students’ learning experiences. Step-by-step handouts, video demos, and interactive tools will support independent learning and cater to diverse needs. Incorporating student feedback, creating troubleshooting guides, and providing checklists will improve the learning process, while regularly checking comprehension will boost student engagement and confidence. These improvements will encourage a more effective and inclusive learning environment, preparing students for success in both the workshop and the industry.

In the workshop, although we’re not directly involved in assessments, we engage with students day-to-day by providing verbal feedback on design choices, technical improvements, and key considerations. When a student presents a piece of work, we ask pointed questions like “What do you think?”—as highlighted by Tofade, Elsner, and Haines (2013), questions help trigger prior knowledge, deepen understanding, and encourage critical thinking. 

Students often seek our opinions on design aesthetics, but we avoid imposing our preferences. Instead, we encourage them to think critically with questions like, “What color best complements your palette?” or “Do you want the colour to make the embroidery stand out?” After these questions, we offer technical advice that focuses on improving the technical aspects of their work, minimizing subjective and personal preferences. 

To enhance the quality of our feedback and create more understanding and room for technical feedback, I propose creating a checklist for students when they first use Wilcom (the embroidery software). A similar technical induction has been implemented in Year 2 at London College of Fashion, by the team including a peer Pg-Cert colleage Farah, resulted in improved work quality. The checklist would be referenced after preparing the digital design file, guiding students on any necessary adjustments that need to be made. This approach would not only help develop a critical eye but also encourage deeper design knowledge, enabling more meaningful feedback from both us and the students themselves. 

The checklist will also ensure students understand the tasks clearly. While we often ask, “Does that make sense?” students may affirm without fully grasping the concepts. A checklist provides a more visual and concrete way to reinforce their learning. 

Sample checklist points include: 

• Stitch density: Have you checked? (General: Dense stitching: 0.3mm, cotton thread: 0.45mm) 

• Underlay: Have you selected the correct one? (e.g., Tatami for Satin, Zig Zag for Tatami) 

• Thread colors: Have you confirmed your thread colors? 

• Stitch order: Does your embroidery need branching? Is the color order optimal? 

• Size: Is the size correct? 

• Duplicates: Are there any duplicate shapes? 

To promote student agency, aligned with UAL’s Compassionate Feedback Prompts (2022), I propose that students will reflect on the checklist after a trial period, providing feedback on its utility and any potential improvements that could be made. This will empower students to take ownership of their learning while offering valuable insights for further refinement of the process. 

In conclusion, by implementing a structured checklist for students, we can enhance the quality and depth of feedback provided in the workshop. This approach not only encourages students to critically assess their own work but also creates greater student agency, allowing room to take ownership of their learning. The checklist will serve as a clear, visual guide to help students make necessary adjustments and improve their technical skills, while also reinforcing their understanding. 

References

AEM and Attainment Team, University of the Arts London (2022). Enhancing assessment for equity Compassionate feedback. [online] Available at: https://www.arts.ac.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0025/381364/Compassionate-feedback-prompts_Final_November-2022-3.pdf [Accessed 5 Mar. 2025].

Tofade, T., Elsner, J. and Haines, S.T. (2013). Best Practice Strategies for Effective Use of Questions as a Teaching Tool. American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education, 77(7), p.155. doi:https://doi.org/10.5688/ajpe777155.

I gave 2, 2-hour workshop on beading/embellishment to second year fashion print students, as part of their brief where they had to use analogue techniques rather than digital.  

I received positive feedback from the students, who said they enjoyed learning new techniques and this would be something that they would take forward. The workshop started by showing the groups samples, books that we have in the workshops that they can use as reference/inspiration and followed with showing an example piece that I had made that included all the techniques they would be learning in the session. The rest of the session I divided up into 10-15 minutes per technique, where I would show the group (of 8-10 students) and then consult with them individually.  

• OBL: After reading and reflecting on the importance of Object-Based Learning as outlined by Hardie (2015), I would incorporate more of this approach into the workshop. I initially felt that providing samples and examples would enhance the session, offering students visual references to inspire and guide their own work. However, upon further reflection, I believe it would be more beneficial to encourage deeper, initial observation of the samples and techniques. By prompting students with questions such as: What was the maker trying to achieve? What materials can you identify in the sample? What tools might have been used? I could promote a more inquisitive and reflective mindset. This approach would engage students’ senses—particularly touch (Hardie, 2015)—and encourage a more thoughtful exploration before delving into the process of creation.

• Record the session: Encourage students to document techniques through videos and drawings so they can refer back to these resources when revisiting the technique in the future. While I encouraged students to repeat challenging techniques in hopes of creating some sort of muscle memory, I realise that this approach may not fully accommodate the diverse learning needs of all students. It would have been more beneficial to have a tangible resource (other than the samples they make) by way of some instructions on the breakdown of each technique for example, that they can reflect back upon.

• Conclude the workshop: I feel to better conclude the workshop in future, there would be several ways to round up what students have learnt, one being to include peer to peer feedback, asking each student to share their favourite technique, along with an explanation of why they chose it and where they might apply it, would provide an opportunity to stengthen dialogue and develop language around the technique. This would also encourage critical reflection on their work. Additionally, it validates natural peer comparison, helping students engage in more effective self-reflection, as suggested by Race (2001).

By integrating these strategies, and taking on a more rounded approach to teaching the workshop, I feel that it would help students develop both technical skills and reflective practice.

References:

Hardie, K. (2015). Innovative pedagogies series: Wow: The power of objects in object-based learning and teaching. [online] Higher Education Academy. Available at: https://s3.eu-west-2.amazonaws.com/assets.creode.advancehe-document-manager/documents/hea/private/kirsten_hardie_final_1568037367.pdf.

Race, P. (2001). A briefing on self, peer & group assessment. York: York : Learning and Teaching Support Network, 2001.