Limitations with collecting data
- Small sample size- 28 respondents. A larger student response would have provided a more comprehensive and representative view of the student experience.
- Students were asked about their experience with making technical notes, despite having had only one prior opportunity to use the technical note sheets during a hand embroidery workshop which requires a different set of technical terms and language to describe the process. As a result, their limited experience with the process may have made it challenging for them to provide informed reflections.
- Students will have also been required to take notes in other specialist workshops, however, I am not familiar with the expectations or the recommended practice of technical note taking in those contexts. When completing the initial survey, students’ responses will have been influenced by their experiences in these other workshops, particularly given their limited exposure to technical note-taking within the Stitch context. This presents a challenge in accurately assessing their feedback and identifying specific areas for improvement.
- Survey questions presented in rating scale format were not as clearly labelled as they could have been. Boundaries on the scale should have been clearly explained as below: 1 = Very Easy, 2 = Easy, 3 = Neutral, 4 = Difficult, 5 = Very Difficult.
This would help students feel more confident about what they’re selecting, reducing potential confusion or variability in how different students interpret the scale.
- Potentially broad questions- Could have broken down the questions into smaller concepts. For example:
- “How difficult is it for you to organise your notes?”
- “How challenging do you find summarising technical processes?
- “How easy is it for you to include diagrams or visuals in your technical notes?”
- “How difficult is it for you to organise your notes?”
This approach could have helped to give a clearer idea of which specific note-taking aspects students find challenging.
- 5 options on the scales can allow for central tendency bias, giving 6 options would help to ‘force choice’. (Soegaard, 2025)
Lack of open ended questions- Incorporating More open ended questions to collect more qualitative data and gain richer insight into why students chose the rating. Open-ended questions would also provide a greater opportunity for students to express their perspectives and experiences in their own words, serving as a more meaningful introduction into co-creation practices.
Limitations with intervention
Lack of parity across technical workshops in how students are encouraged to create technical notes. As I am only responsible for technical teaching in the stitch specialism, my influence is limited to that pathway. I feel it would be beneficial for BA1 students in particular to be introduced to a methodology for technical note taking that is adopted across all specialisms.
If we adopted a shared visual language ( font style, presentation style, style of icons/ images used, structure, format etc) I feel students would be better equipped to process, record, and retain technical information especially as they move between workshops in different specialism areas (particularly during the induction period).
This would align with universal design for learning (UDL) principles and would be particularly helpful for students who struggle with inconsistent formats or expectations.
DocReader requires document links to end with “.PDF” in order to integrate properly with Moodle. However, this function is currently not supported on the UAL Moodle platform. As a result, integrating DocReader limits the accessibility of course documents as students are redirected to multiple external links in order to customise their accessibility settings, which adds unnecessary barriers to inclusive access.
References:
Gernsbacher, M.A., Stevenson, J.L. and Dern, S. (2020) ‘Autistic people do enhance their selves’, Social Psychological and Personality Science, 11(5), pp. 605–615. doi: 10.1177/1948550619865057. (Accessed: 10th June 2025)
Kwak, D.-H., Ma, X. and Kim, S. (2021) ‘When does social desirability become a problem? Detection and reduction of social desirability bias in information systems research’, Information & Management, 58(7), p. 103500. doi: 10.1016/j.im.2021.103500. (Accessed: 6th June 2025)
Pew Research Center (2018) How do you write survey questions that accurately measure public opinion? Methods 101 series. Pew Research Center, 21 March. Available at: https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2018/03/21/how-do-you-write-survey-questions-that-accurately-measure-public-opinion/ (Accessed: 12th June 2025)
Soegaard, M. (2025, March 2). Rating Scales in UX Research: The Ultimate Guide. Interaction Design Foundation Available at: https://www.interaction-design.org/literature/article/rating-scales-for-ux-research
Taylor, C.A. and Bovill, C. (2018) ‘Towards an ecology of participation: Process philosophy and co‑creation of higher education curricula’, European Educational Research Journal, 17(1), pp. 112–128. doi: 10.1177/14740222211050572. (Accessed: 6th June 2025)