PgCert

Background
I am Joao Maraschin, and I am a fashion designer and educator. Since 2021, I have been teaching on the BA Fashion Design Technology Womenswear course at London College of Fashion. Currently, I am a design lecturer and the Design Unit Leader for two Year 2 units. Prior to this, I gained experience teaching and leading design in two Year 1 units over two years. I am interested in building connections across textiles, craft, community building, knowledge exchange, skill preservation, all intertwined with education.

Context
When I stepped into this role, I encountered several contextual challenges. Year 2 design had been led by my current counterpart for four years, with various practitioners stepping in periodically, leading to a lack of consistency and frequent renegotiations of the unit’s vision and purpose. Despite this, the Sample Room unit leader did an excellent job maintaining a satisfactory student experience under these circumstances. However, the design side needed restructuring to address key issues. The brief felt disjointed, students expressed concerns about workload, pass rates were low, and morale among both students and staff was affected. This created a perception that these units were the “trouble child” of the course.

Year 2 is a pivotal stage for students, requiring them to consolidate the tools and methods learned to produce thoughtful, critical, and forward-thinking projects. This is compounded by the pressure to secure industry internships and manage a demanding academic workload, which includes skills development and substantial content delivery. The high demand for close support from students was also unintentionally straining staff, creating additional challenges in ensuring a balanced and effective learning environment.

Rationale – Bigger Picture
The core problem addressed by this action participatory research project lies in supporting students as they navigate the complexities of balancing personal and academic life within the context of higher education, particularly in one of the units I teach in Year 2 of the BA WW course at LCF, PPD (Professional Product Development) and looking specifically at students from B.A.M.E or IMD backgrounds. By integrating my expertise in design with my teaching practice, the intervention aims to create a space where students can feel empowered to explore their creative potential while also managing the pressures of academic demands and supporting staff.

The project focuses on reducing stress within the unit by addressing students’ challenges in meeting assessment requirements and enhancing tutors’ support. It seeks to bridge the gap between academic demands and staff intervention, fostering a collaborative and supportive learning environment. The aim is to improve well-being, enhance collaboration, and achieve higher pass rates and better attainment.

Rationale – Unit Oriented

• Pass rates were low.
• Attainment fell significantly below the university’s target.
• The unit was flagged by the Quality Assurance Committee.
• Student satisfaction, as reflected in the NSS and CSS, was insufficient to meet targets. The unit was perceived as overly complicated, packed with multiple tasks, unattainable and not inclusive for some students, and lacking a structure that catered to diverse needs.
  
  Research Question: How can a visual toolkit designed to help students better understand submission requirements in practice improve attainment within the PPD unit of the BA Fashion Design Technology course at LCF?
  
  Research Methods

Engagement with participants

Initial surveys were conducted with current Year 2 students studying the unit and Year 3 students who had previously completed it.

A broader survey was distributed to London College of Fashion students to gauge stress levels related to assessments.

A “Fashion Break” workshop pilot was delivered to two groups within the PPD unit during design classes.

A “Design Surgery” workshop pilot was conducted with selected students to test the toolkit and gather feedback via surveys and feedback forms available in the session.

The toolkit was made available for independent use by students who attended the workshops.

Two students were closely monitored to evaluate their progress and include their experiences in the full study.

Journey

Intervention
The intervention was broken down into five stages: the first one involved mind-mapping, brainstorming, and surveys to understand the angle; the second focused on framing the intervention and delivering the “Fashion Break,” which provided greater insight into the stress levels affecting students’ performance; the third stage was the “Design Surgery,” delivered to targeted students to test the Toolkit; the fourth stage was the implementation of the Toolkit by students; and the fifth stage involved evaluating the results, both from a grading perspective and through the feedback received from the students involved.

Looking at the impact of stress and well-being in higher education was crucial for the research. Ashwin (2020) explores reflective teaching as a means to address student needs, and Brookfield (2015) emphasizes responsive teaching practices. Additionally, Creswell & Plano Clark (2017) provide insight into mixed-methods research that blends quantitative and qualitative approaches, much like the surveys and feedback employed in my project.

The use of visual tools such as the Toolkit (the concrete outcome of this intervention) connects to co-design and the idea of creative exploration in learning. Gauntlett’s work on creativity and the social meaning of making shows how design, especially when it’s connected to personal identity and collective experiences, can foster engagement and understanding. Co-creation (Sanders & Stappers, 2008) in design further stresses collaboration and shared knowledge-building, which the Toolkit embodies by involving students in the creation and testing process.

The toolkit serves as a visual methodology that allows students to interact with the content in tangible ways. It reflects principles from Universal Design for Learning (UDL), ensuring accessibility and engagement for a diverse student body. The iterative nature of the back-and-forth of the project also aligns with design experiments, as suggested by Brown (1992), where tools are developed and refined through real-world application.

Findings

Fashion Break (Stage 1)
Students often experience significant stress leading up to submission deadlines and assessments.
This session included questions to gauge stress levels, with results showing high levels of anxiety.
Students found it helpful to connect with peers, realizing they share similar struggles and concerns.

Design Surgery (Stage 2)
A highly effective session that allowed students to catch up on work with supervised, open office time.
This was the first pilot test for the toolkit, where students quickly responded positively and demonstrated immediate results.

Toolkit (Stage 3)
The toolkit reflects a commitment to social justice by:
Creating equitable learning opportunities.
Fostering a sense of belonging.
Addressing systemic barriers that impact attainment, particularly for students from underrepresented or disadvantaged backgrounds.

Final publication of assessment feedback (stage 4)

Summary
The project went through significant changes, incorporating feedback from tutors, peers, students, and staff. Initially rigid, it evolved into a flexible process as new ideas reshaped the focus toward a more specific, impactful outcome. The methods effectively transitioned from broad concepts to targeted decisions, delivering tangible results.

A key strength was the shared commitment to addressing inequities in a supportive but competitive environment that can hinder student potential. While engaging all students remains a challenge, those who fully participated achieved excellent grades and felt empowered and more aligned with other students which also helped them to feel like they belong.

Building community and a sense of belonging is also crucial in higher education and one of the focus of this study. Bell Hooks (1994) highlights the importance of love, care, and compassion in teaching practices to create a nurturing environment. The Belonging through Compassion initiative also explores how students feel supported by peers and faculty, something I tried to directly apply in the “Fashion Break” workshop where students could openly share and acknowledge common struggles.

The unit’s performance improved significantly, surpassing targets and addressing prior concerns. Challenges included skepticism from staff, balancing the project with existing responsibilities, and ensuring sufficient time with students – areas to improve in future iterations.

The social justice impact was particularly rewarding, as the targeted group of students benefited greatly, and the tutorials provided sharp, generous, and effective feedback.

The focus on students from B.A.M.E. or IMD backgrounds directly connects with social justice pedagogy, especially in how marginalized groups experience higher education. Paulo Freire’s pedagogy centres on the concept of education as liberation, which fosters critical thinking and empowers students to act on social injustices. The toolkit and the participatory approach seek to bridge systemic barriers and provide equitable learning opportunities.

Rachel’s expertise was instrumental in refining the project. Time management was a personal hurdle, but I managed to balance competing commitments. The experience provided space for experimentation and helped me develop skills I’ll carry forward. Looking ahead, I plan to continue developing this work, aiming for even greater impact not only within the units I lead but also across the course and, eventually, the wider university community. Overall, this project has been a deeply rewarding and meaningful journey.

Next Steps

1. Share the toolkit with my immediate team to gather initial feedback based on the practical evidence developed in this unit.

2. Create and deliver this as a workshop during the next away day, allowing colleagues to experience it from a student’s perspective and provide feedback for further improvement. This will help refine the toolkit before testing it in the next academic year with a larger sample of students and diverse tutors.

3. Focus on enhancing the cards with a more visually engaging design to make them more stimulating and appealing.

4. Apply the same approach to another deliverable, specifically the portfolio edit.

5. Share the toolkit with the wider academic community to further refine and develop it.

Bibliography
Ashwin, P., 2020. Reflective Teaching in Higher Education. London: Bloomsbury Academic.
Brookfield, S., 2015. The Skillful Teacher: On Technique, Trust, and Responsiveness in the Classroom. 3rd ed. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Brown, A. L., 1992. Design experiments: Theoretical and methodological challenges in creating complex interventions in classroom settings.
Bryman, A., 2016. Social Research Methods.
Bunting, L. and Hill, V. et al., n.d. Belonging through Compassion. Available at: https://belongingthroughcompassion.myblog.arts.ac.uk/ [Accessed: 3 December 2024].
Clifford, J. and Marcus, G. E., 1986. Writing Culture.
Collins, P. H., 2019. Intersectionality as Critical Social Theory. Durham: Duke University Press.
Creswell, J. W. and Plano Clark, V. L., 2017. Designing and Conducting Mixed Methods Research.
Etherington, K., 2004. Becoming a Reflexive Researcher.
Fals-Borda, O., 2018. Participatory Action Research: Theory and Methods for Engaged Inquiry. 2nd ed. New York: Routledge.
Freire, P., 2018. Pedagogy of the Oppressed. 50th Anniversary ed. New York: Bloomsbury Academic.
Gauntlett, D., 2007. Creative Explorations.
Gauntlett, D., 2018. Making is Connecting: The Social Meaning of Creativity, from DIY and Knitting to YouTube and Web 2.0. 2nd ed. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Geertz, C., 1973. The Interpretation of Cultures.
Hooks, B., 1994. Teaching to Transgress: Education as the Practice of Freedom. New York: Routledge.
Krippendorff, K., 2018. Content Analysis: An Introduction to Its Methodology.
Leone, L. (ed.), 2020. Craft in Art Therapy: Diverse Approaches to the Transformative Power of Craft Materials and Methods. London: Routledge.
Marshall, J. and Powell, K., 2020. Art Practice as Research: Inquiry in the Visual Arts. 3rd ed. Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications.
Martin, B. and Hanington, B., 2012. Universal Methods of Design.
Morgan, D. L., 1997. Focus Groups as Qualitative Research.
Pink, S., 2013. Doing Visual Ethnography.
Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education (QAA), 2023. QAA’s Inclusive Education Framework. [online] Available at: https://www.qaa.ac.uk [Accessed 1 September 2024].
Richardson, L. and St. Pierre, E. A., 2005. Writing: A Method of Inquiry.
Rose, G., 2016. Visual Methodologies.
Sanders, E. B.-N. and Stappers, P. J., 2008. Co-creation and the new landscapes of design. CoDesign, 4(1).
Spradley, J. P., 1980. Participant Observation.
Tatum, B. D., 2017. Why Are All the Black Kids Sitting Together in the Cafeteria? And Other Conversations About Race. 20th Anniversary ed. New York: Basic Books.
Universal Design for Learning (UDL), 2024. Universal Design for Learning Guidelines. [online] Available at: https://udlguidelines.cast.org [Accessed 12 November 2024].
Yin, R. K., 2018. Case Study Research and Applications: Design and Methods.
Zimmerman, D. H. and Wieder, D. L., 1977. The diary-interview method.

The initial research questions was:

How can a “Fashion Break” intervention embody generous pedagogy to foster inclusivity and social justice in the PPD unit of the BA WW course by alleviating unnecessary stress, addressing power dynamics, and creating an equitable, supportive environment that encourages open collaboration and reflection during the final preparations for the project submission?

I conducted an initial intervention based on the research question above that helped me shape further developments in the project. Following this, I realized it didn’t answer fully what I was intending to find and then I organized another session with targeted students – those identified as having low achievement in other units or those with Extenuating Circumstances (ECs) and Individual Support Adjustments (ISAs).

This session, called “Design Surgery,” provided more detailed support and served as an opportunity to test a new concept for developing a toolkit/game aimed at helping students better understand submission requirements in practice. The toolkit also encouraged proactive work by breaking down the complete body of work into smaller, more manageable tasks. The insights gained from this session informed the refinement of my final research question, which concludes this project:

How can a visual toolkit designed to help students better understand submission requirements in practice improve attainment within the PPD unit of the BA Fashion Design Technology course at LCF?

In reflecting on my exploration of research methods and analysis, particularly after the tutorial and Rachel’s feedback, I’ve realized the importance of embedding more theoretical grounding and literature into these discussions. Taking this step not only strengthens the foundation of my arguments but also enriches the understanding of how these methods intersect and complement one another.

In this post, I revisit the methods discussed in two of my earlier blog posts (linked here and here): surveys, focus groups, observation, journaling, ethnographic research and creative participatory methods. My aim is to link these methods to relevant literature and show how their corresponding analysis approaches align with my own practices.

Bryman (2016) describes surveys as efficient tools for gathering large-scale data, often analysed through statistical methods or thematic approaches for open-ended questions. This was particularly helpful early in the project, providing insights and evidence to shape the rationale for my work (more evidence here). Similarly, focus groups, as Morgan (1997) explains, allow for rich, interactive discussions that capture both collective and individual perspectives. I applied this method with my colleagues who are part of the teaching team (linked here) and with groups of students during classes, as reflected in the presentations post.

When it comes to observation and journaling, Spradley (1980) highlights participant observation an important component of ethnographic research, helping researchers identify and analyse patterns in practices. This resonates deeply with my academic approach, where I consistently document and reflect on students’ experiences during tasks, lessons, and workshops. Incorporating their feedback has been central to refining my teaching methods and played a crucial role in shaping this project to be more responsive and meaningful. Journaling, as Etherington (2004) notes, is invaluable for reflection, offering personal insights that contribute to a deeper analysis. Together, these methods, combined with thematic or narrative analysis, provide a nuanced lens through which both behaviours and reflections can be understood.

Ethnographic research, as discussed by Hammersley and Atkinson (2007), offers a holistic way of studying cultural phenomena, often analysed through narrative approaches (Geertz, 1973). This aligns closely with creative participatory methods I used, where participant engagement leads to co-created knowledge – a theme that also runs throughout my practice outside the university (more examples here).

The integration of qualitative and quantitative approaches – comprehensive mixed methods – has been particularly compelling in this project. Creswell and Plano Clark (2017) provide a useful framework for combining these paradigms, ensuring that different data types inform and complement each other. Tashakkori and Teddlie (2010) emphasize the importance of a layered analysis strategy, such as using statistical techniques alongside thematic and grounded theory approaches to fully capture the depth of the findings.

To ensure consistency, aligning analysis methods with their respective research approaches is critical. Surveys naturally pair with statistical analysis or thematic coding for open-ended responses, while focus groups benefit from discourse analysis to explore group dynamics and unpack common/shared experiences. Observation lends itself to grounded theory or framework analysis to contextualize behaviors, and ethnographic research integrates well with narrative or visual analysis to bridge creative and scientific perspectives.

Final Reflections
This reflection has highlighted how grounding methods in relevant literature and theory not only enriches my understanding but also strengthens the coherence of my research process. By linking research approaches to specific analytical strategies, I’ve gained a clearer perspective on their connections. Moving forward, I aim to apply these insights more intentionally, ensuring that my methods and analyses are not only theoretically sound but also capable of generating meaningful outcomes.

References

• Bryman, A. (2016). Social Research Methods.
• Morgan, D. L. (1997). Focus Groups as Qualitative Research.
• Spradley, J. P. (1980). Participant Observation.
• Etherington, K. (2004). Becoming a Reflexive Researcher.
• Clifford, J., & Marcus, G. E. (1986). Writing Culture.
• Gauntlett, D. (2007). Creative Explorations.
• Pink, S. (2013). Doing Visual Ethnography.
• Rose, G. (2016). Visual Methodologies.
• Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2017). Designing and Conducting Mixed Methods Research.
• Geertz, C. (1973). The Interpretation of Cultures.
• Richardson, L., & St. Pierre, E. A. (2005). Writing: A Method of Inquiry.

Developing my intervention proposal has been an intellectually challenging yet deeply rewarding journey. It provided an invaluable opportunity to reflect on my teaching practice and focus extensively on a unit that has proven difficult to structure in a way that is both accessible and meaningful for staff and students.

Reflecting on the analytical methods I employed to frame and explore the intervention offers insight into the strategies and tools that shaped my approach, as well as the academic grounding that informed my choices. Below, I outline the key methods and how they contributed to the proposal, supported by relevant academic references. 

1. Brainstorm Graphic Organizer
The use of brainstorming webs and tree diagrams, inspired by Universal Methods of Design (Martin & Hanington, 2012), provided an essential starting point for ideating and mapping the problem space – other reflection posts offer evidence on that. These visual frameworks facilitated the organization of ideas into coherent clusters, enabling a clear understanding of the intervention’s focus. As Martin and Hanington emphasize, brainstorming tools are pivotal in fostering divergent thinking, which was crucial in exploring innovative solutions to the challenges faced by the unit. 

2. Case Study Analysis
Examining the historical context of how the unit was previously run offered valuable insights into existing practices and gaps. This retrospective analysis was guided by methodologies discussed in Universal Methods of Design, particularly case studies as a means to explore real-world contexts. According to Yin (2018), case studies are indispensable for understanding complex phenomena within their contextual boundaries, making this approach important for my analytical process. 

3. Content Analysis
Content analysis served as a critical method to interpret the issues and deepen my understanding of the intervention’s purpose. This approach allowed for a systematic examination of qualitative data, identifying themes and patterns relevant to the unit’s operations and needs. Krippendorff (2018) highlights content analysis as a rigorous method for drawing inferences from text or other content forms, providing a robust framework for understanding the intricacies of the problem. 

4. Design Workshops and Surveys
The design workshops and surveys played complementary roles as methods for co-creating solutions and validating research findings. Workshops fostered collaborative engagement, allowing diverse perspectives to shape the intervention, while surveys provided quantitative insights and a broader understanding of stakeholder needs and perceptions. Sanders and Stappers (2008) argue that participatory design methods, such as workshops, are instrumental in bridging the gap between research insights and actionable outcomes, a perspective that aligns with my intention to create a relevant and impactful intervention and links back to my industry practice base background where that is constantly present and I wanted to bring that to the academic environment. Surveys further supported this goal by ensuring the intervention was informed by both qualitative collaboration and quantitative evidence.

5. Diary Studies
Incorporating diary studies added another dimension to the analysis, capturing participants’ experiences and reflections over time, that includes visual examples of before and after the intervention was completed – more visual evidence of that can be found across many reflective blog posts here. This method aligns with Zimmerman and Wieder’s (1977) foundational work on diaries as a qualitative research tool that offers rich, personal insights into user behaviour (the students in this case) and attitudes. Diary studies proved particularly effective in highlighting the evolving needs and experiences that informed the intervention – this was both conducted during this unit, but also informed by surveys ran during the Inclusive Practices unit also. 

6. Evaluative Research of Prototypes
Finally, evaluative research on the prototype – a cards and template bank resource (still in progress of development) – was a critical step in assessing the intervention’s potential efficacy. This iterative process aligns with the principles of design-based research, which emphasize the refinement of prototypes through cycles of testing and feedback (Brown, 1992). The prototype evaluation illuminated areas for improvement, ensuring the final resource is well-aligned with users’ needs. This will continue to be tested with the teaching team and students to refine it and ensure it becomes a useful tool for everyone.

Through these interconnected methods, my intervention proposal is grounded in a robust, multi-faceted analysis. Each approach, backed by academic insights, has contributed to a comprehensive understanding of the problem and the development of an actionable, contextually relevant and applicable solution. This reflective process underscores the importance of blending creativity with rigor in design-based research. 

Bibliography 
Brown, A. L. (1992). Design experiments: Theoretical and methodological challenges in creating complex interventions in classroom settings. 
Krippendorff, K. (2018). Content Analysis: An Introduction to Its Methodology. 
Martin, B., & Hanington, B. (2012). Universal Methods of Design. 
Sanders, E. B.-N., & Stappers, P. J. (2008). Co-creation and the new landscapes of design. CoDesign, 4(1). 
Yin, R. K. (2018). Case Study Research and Applications: Design and Methods. 
Zimmerman, D. H., & Wieder, D. L. (1977). The diary-interview method. 

As a result of reflecting on the first stage of the intervention and planning the next steps, I also explored the Make the Grade workshop, a UAL university-wide initiative that delivers unit-specific sessions tailored to various courses and programs. The evaluation of these sessions, which I attended and later analyzed through supporting documentation, provided valuable insights. This analysis significantly informed the development of physical resources—such as cards and templates that serve as the tangible outcomes or “products” of this intervention.

In this unit, we have a similar session called Fit to Submit, which provides students with a clear understanding of the submission deliverables. It equips them with checklists and guidance to ensure they are adequately prepared for submission. Building on this framework, I developed an additional session titled Design Surgery to offer targeted support for lower-achieving students, focusing on helping them advance their work before submission deadlines.

Unlike traditional one-to-one tutorials which, given limited staff and large cohorts, can be insufficient or impractical, Design Surgery offers a more structured group environment. The session functions as an in-person extension of the Make the Grade approach. It enables students to engage with examples representing a range of grades, deepening their understanding of quality expectations and fostering their knowledge. Additionally, it incorporates small, actionable tasks that students complete during a supervised, six-hour Open Access session. This drop-in workshop format makes use of the physical resource, such as the mentioned cards and templates, that were specifically designed to facilitate these interventions.

By combining guided instruction with hands-on practice, Design Surgery provides a dynamic and supportive environment that not only enhances individual student outcomes but also maximizes the efficiency of staff resources.

After running the Fashion Break Intervention twice this week with two of my cohorts in Y2 BA Fashion Design Technology Womenswear at LCF, I gathered valuable insights from my research that informed the next steps and allowed me to reflect on incorporating meaningful change into my teaching practice.

Guided by the research question:

How can a “Fashion Break” intervention embody generous pedagogy to foster inclusivity and social justice in the PPD unit of the BA WW course by alleviating unnecessary stress, addressing power dynamics, and creating an equitable, supportive environment that encourages open collaboration and reflection during the final preparations for project submission?

Some findings highlighted challenges with self-confidence, particularly among students from minority groups or those who perceive themselves as lower achieving. This observation ties directly to my focus on social justice, inclusivity, and a generous pedagogy approach. In alignment with this philosophy, I have devoted significant time—beyond the scope of my contracted hours and often drawn from my personal study time—to developing practical solutions. These solutions are designed to be effective and adaptable for tutors, integrating seamlessly into both one-on-one tutorials and broader sessions or lesson plans.

The aim is to create opportunities for students to catch up earlier, fostering a more equitable and supportive learning environment. This lack of confidence, often rooted in comparisons with peers, reveals systemic barriers and contributes to feelings of inadequacy. Consequently, these students may struggle with attendance, consistency, communication, collaboration, knowledge development, and community building.

The cohort I teach is highly diverse, encompassing a wide range of engagement levels, attendance rates, skills, and interests. This diversity poses challenges in balancing the delivery of complex content that demands deeper study with the need for accessibility and equitable achievement. Furthermore, we face a persistent awarding gap in Year 2 of the course. For context, one of my primary objectives as unit leader is to reduce the number of fails and non-submissions. Last year, 103 students were enrolled in the cohort, of which 21 (20.4%) either failed or did not submit their work (graded E, F, or NS). This year, we aim to lower that number by ensuring fewer than 17 students fall into these categories.

In response to these challenges and the findings from the intervention pilot, my reflections led to the creation of two key outputs from this intervention plan, which have become the intervention’s primary products:

1. A Toolkit with Modular Design Checklists: This toolkit breaks down the design checklist into individual pages or cards. These modular elements help students better understand expectations by allowing them to approach their work in manageable fragments rather than becoming overwhelmed by the larger submission. By emphasizing milestones, the toolkit fosters a more structured and achievable progression.
   
   
2. Enhanced Worksheets for Template Development and Visual Communication: By analysing past submissions from both passing and failing students, I identified areas where students struggle—many of which are beyond the teaching staff’s direct control. To address this, I will develop worksheets to support template creation and improve visual communication. These resources aim to help students quickly visualize their work positively, thus increasing confidence and engagement. Ultimately, this should reduce the likelihood of deferrals or referrals and improve overall pass rates.

These interventions are currently in testing. I have started working directly with at-risk students in personal tutorials and will soon collect evidence to validate these approaches. With final submissions due in mid-December, I expect to gather visual samples, grades, and additional reflections to assess the intervention’s impact.

This approach is currently being tested at the unit level, but I envision its potential to expand and become a resource available across the course, program, and eventually the wider university. By scaling this initiative, it can serve as a tool to enhance students’ positive learning experiences, directly addressing key areas such as inclusivity, engagement, and academic success. Furthermore, it aligns with the university’s broader objectives, including improving outcomes in national surveys such as the National Student Survey (NSS) and achieving institutional targets related to student satisfaction, retention, and success.

As the resource evolves, it has the potential to support not only individual units but also contribute to a more cohesive and impactful approach to teaching and learning. Its implementation could provide measurable benefits across diverse metrics, strengthening the university’s reputation and commitment to delivering high-quality education that meets the needs of its diverse student body. Further updates will follow, and supporting evidence, including documents used in sessions, is available below and/or in the Presentations post.

How can a “Fashion Break” intervention embody generous pedagogy to foster inclusivity and social justice in the PPD unit of the BA WW course by alleviating unnecessary stress, addressing power dynamics, and creating an equitable, supportive environment that encourages open collaboration and reflection during the final preparations for the project submission?

This is what I intend to read in order to plan, unpack, analyze, deliver, and reflect on my intervention. You can find further evidence of the reasons why I’ve chosen this in the reflective posts for this unit.

• Ashwin, P., 2020. Reflective Teaching in Higher Education. London: Bloomsbury Academic.
• Brookfield, S., 2015. The Skillful Teacher: On Technique, Trust, and Responsiveness in the Classroom*. 3rd ed. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
• Bunting, L. and Hill, V. et al. (n.d.) Belonging through Compassion. Available at: https://belongingthroughcompassion.myblog.arts.ac.uk/ (Accessed: 5 November 2024).
• Collins, P.H., 2019. Intersectionality as Critical Social Theory. Durham: Duke University Press.
• Fals-Borda, O., 2018. Participatory Action Research: Theory and Methods for Engaged Inquiry. 2nd ed. New York: Routledge.
• Freire, P., 2018. Pedagogy of the Oppressed. 50th Anniversary ed. New York: Bloomsbury Academic.
• Gauntlett, D., 2018. Making is Connecting: The Social Meaning of Creativity, from DIY and Knitting to YouTube and Web 2.0. 2nd ed. Cambridge: Polity Press.
• Hooks, B., 1994. Teaching to Transgress: Education as the Practice of Freedom. New York: Routledge.
• Leone, L. (ed.) (2020) Craft in Art Therapy: Diverse Approaches to the Transformative Power of Craft Materials and Methods. London: Routledge.
• Marshall, J. and Powell, K., 2020. Art Practice as Research: Inquiry in the Visual Arts*. 3rd ed. Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications.
• Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education (QAA), 2023. QAA’s Inclusive Education Framework. [online] Available at: <https://www.qaa.ac.uk> [Accessed 15 October 2024].
• Tatum, B.D., 2017. Why Are All the Black Kids Sitting Together in the Cafeteria? And Other Conversations About Race. 20th Anniversary ed. New York: Basic Books.
• Universal Design for Learning (UDL), 2024. Universal Design for Learning Guidelines. [online] Available at: <https://udlguidelines.cast.org> [Accessed 15 October 2024].