Reflecting on the recent delivery of the “Fashion Break” workshop to two groups of students, several thoughts have emerged regarding potential changes and next steps. The session itself provided valuable insights into student well-being and stress levels, and the use of theoretical frameworks helped unpack some key findings.
Understanding the impact of stress and well-being in higher education has been central to this research. Ashwin (2020) discusses reflective teaching as an effective way to address student needs, while Brookfield (2015) emphasizes the importance of responsive teaching practices. Additionally, Creswell & Plano Clark (2017) offer valuable insights into mixed-methods research, combining both quantitative and qualitative approaches – something that mirrors the surveys and feedback collected in this project.
The findings from the workshop confirmed what existing research on student well-being suggests: reducing stress through reflective and responsive teaching practices can help mitigate anxiety and improve academic performance. The positive effect of the “Fashion Break” session on students’ stress levels further supports this connection.
Building on this reflection, the next workshop I developed, called “Design Surgery,” draws from sessions I’ve delivered in the past. It felt necessary to extend the support for students, offering more focused, individualized attention without losing the benefits of a larger class dynamic. This workshop also allowed me to test the toolkit I had been developing – designed as a resource for both tutors and students to use independently.
To ensure the toolkit was effective, I analysed a wide range of student portfolio pages, spanning from A to E grades (including fails). The goal was to understand how students approach visual layouts and how they can effectively communicate their work while meeting the unit’s learning outcomes in a visually engaging and narrative-driven way. This analysis informed the development of tools that could guide students toward stronger visual and conceptual presentations.
The visual tools within the toolkit connect to the principles of co-design and creative exploration in learning. Gauntlett’s (2011) work on creativity and the social meaning of making highlights how design, particularly when tied to personal identity and collective experiences, can foster deeper engagement and understanding. Co-creation (Sanders & Stappers, 2008) in design emphasizes collaboration and shared knowledge-building, which the toolkit embodies by involving students in both its creation and testing.
The toolkit itself serves as a visual methodology, offering students a hands-on way to engage with course content. It aligns with the principles of Universal Design for Learning (UDL), ensuring accessibility and engagement for a diverse group of learners. The iterative nature of the project, which involves ongoing testing and refinement, echoes the approach of design experiments (Brown, 1992), where tools are continuously developed through real-world application.