Category: Case Study

Case Study 3: Assessing Learning and Exchanging Feedback

Connecting Feedback, Peer Review, and Digital Tools for Learning

Contextual Background

As a Specialist Technician at London College of Fashion, I deliver technical workshops across various courses within the School of Media and Communication. These workshops have defined learning outcomes but do not directly impact on students’ grades. This can affect engagement, with some students fully committed, while others see less value in participating. In addition, the limited insight into students’ prior work and course requirements makes it difficult to provide meaningful and targeted feedback. A key concern is to ensure that formative feedback is recognised as an essential part of student learning while bridging the gap between technical and academic development.

I currently provide real-time, hands-on guidance during workshops to support skill refinement and experimentation. This aligns with Nicol and Macfarlane-Dick’s (2006) principles of good feedback practice, particularly in fostering self-regulation. However, this feedback lacks structure and reflection, making it difficult for students to link their technical progress to broader academic goals. Furthermore, the absence of technical staff in formal assessment creates a disconnect between practical learning and its academic recognition. While students value the informal workshop environment, structured feedback mechanisms could help them to articulate their technical development more effectively (Addison, 2014).

Moving Forward

Strengthening structured feedback frameworks – Providing structured feedback rubrics within workshops could ensure that feedback is clear, consistent with unit learning outcomes and promotes self-reflection (Nicol & Macfarlane-Dick, 2006). By explicitly linking technical learning to academic progression, students can better understand how their skills contribute to their overall development.

Increasing collaboration with academic staff – Closer collaboration with course tutors could improve the integration of technical and theoretical learning. Nicol and Macfarlane-Dick (2006) emphasise the importance of clarifying learning expectations, which could be achieved by aligning workshop feedback with academic assessment criteria. Addison (2014) also criticises rigid learning outcomes in creative education and suggests that a more negotiated approach to assessment could improve student learning.

Promoting peer review and collaborative learning – Encouraging students to engage in structured peer feedback could help them to critically reflect on their progress, gain diverse perspectives and develop self-assessment skills. The ‘Make the Grade’ strategy (Finnigan, n.d.) suggests that increasing student engagement with assessment criteria could reduce repetition and improve performance. Incorporating peer feedback into workshops may also help students to better understand the assessment criteria in an interactive way.

Maximising blended learning and digital feedback – Blended learning and asynchronous resources are already available, but their role in supporting formative feedback could be enhanced. Regular updates, structured prompts for reflection and interactive elements such as self-assessment checklists can improve student engagement (Nicol & Macfarlane-Dick, 2006). Digital feedback should encourage dialogue rather than serve as one-way communication to ensure that students actively engage with feedback rather than passively receive it.

Creating a reflective culture – Encouraging students to document their technical progress in journals, visual blogs, or process logs such as Miro Boards and Padlet can help them connect experimentation to conceptual development. Reflection is a key principle in formative assessment (Nicol & Macfarlane-Dick, 2006) and could provide a more flexible approach that acknowledges the iterative nature of creative practice (Addison, 2014).

Advocating for inclusion in assessment conversations – Technical learning plays a crucial role in creative disciplines, yet technical staff are excluded from assessment discussions. Working with academic teams to include technical learning in assessment processes could create a more holistic approach to student assessment. Addison (2014) argues for a move beyond performative learning outcomes towards a model that values emergent and situated knowledge. Furthermore, Nicol and Macfarlane-Dick (2006) emphasise the role of feedback in clarifying performance expectations — an area that technical staff could contribute to by providing insights into students’ engagement with practical learning.

References

Addison, N. (2014) Doubting Learning Outcomes in Higher Education Contexts: From Performativity Towards Emergence and Negotiation. International Journal of Art & Design Education, 33(3), pp. 313–325.

Finnigan, T. (n.d.) Make the Grade. University of Derby PReSS Pack.

Nicol, D.J. and Macfarlane-Dick, D. (2006) Formative Assessment and Self-Regulated Learning: A Model and Seven Principles of Good Feedback Practice. Studies in Higher Education, 31(2), pp. 199–218.

Case Study 2: Planning and Teaching for Effective Learning

Bridging Theory and Practice in Student Learning

Contextual Background

As a Specialist Technician in Photography at London College of Fashion, I design and deliver technical workshops that support BA and MA students in developing both conceptual understanding and technical proficiency. A key challenge in my teaching practice is ensuring that students effectively integrate technical skills with creative decision-making. Some students excel in hands-on tasks but struggle to articulate their choices conceptually, while others grasp theoretical concepts but lack confidence in executing practical work. To address this, I am refining my workshop structure, feedback mechanisms, and reflective exercises to create a more balanced learning experience and improve student outcomes.

I currently deliver technical workshops as part of the course units and unit learning outcomes, but there is often a disconnect between practical learning and the wider course objectives, limiting students’ ability to develop transferable skills. While I have already introduced reflective discussions and project-based learning, I plan to refine these methods to ensure deeper engagement and better professional preparation.

Moving Forward

Refining teaching practices for impactful learning 

To improve student learning outcomes, I am further exploring the following strategies:

Integrated workshop design – Working closely with academic staff, I will improve workshops to better align with course learning outcomes and allow students to immediately apply technical knowledge in meaningful ways. This will strengthen the link between technical skills development and creative intentions.

Structured reflection and critical evaluation – I will further integrate structured journaling and guided peer critiques to help students articulate their technical decisions and reflect on their creative processes. Drawing from the creative process model (Bremmer, Heijnen & Haanstra, 2024), this approach emphasises reflection at every stageof orientation, research, execution and evaluation, supporting iterative learning.

Project-based and inquiry-led learning – Revising project assignments with explicit problem-solving elements will encourage students to consider how technical skills support artistic and industry-specific outcomes. This refinement fosters deeper engagement by mirroring professional workflows and encouraging students to take ownership of their learning.

Collaborative and peer-led learning –Refining peer review sessions with structured prompts will help students engage more critically with their own work and that of others. This fosters a more inclusive learning environment where students build confidence in their technical and conceptual skills (Ross & Leewis, 2022).

Real World Contextualisation –– Integrating live case studies and professional project deconstructions into workshops will expose students to industry-level decision-making processes. By analysing professional works step-by-step—examining the conceptual development, technical choices, and problem-solving strategies—students can gain a deeper understanding of how technical skills translate into creative and professional outcomes. 

References

Bremmer, M., Heijnen, E. & Haanstra, F. (2024) ‘Wicked Arts Education—Designing Creative Programmes‘. Amsterdam: Valiz.


Ross, S. L. & Leewis, L. (2022) ‘Home Sweet Home: Achieving Belonging and Engagement in Online Learning Spaces’, Spark: UAL Creative Teaching and Learning Journal, 5(1), pp. 71-79.

Additional Reading

Sams, C. (2016) ‘How Do Art and Design Technicians Conceive of Their Role in Higher Education?’, Spark: UAL Creative Teaching and Learning Journal, 1(2), pp. 62-69.

Boud, D., Keogh, R. and Walker, D. (2013) Reflection: Turning Experience into Learning, pp. 91-99

Case Study 1: Knowing and Responding to Your Students’ Diverse Needs

Contextual Background

As a photography specialist at LCF, I teach and support students in a variety of courses with different levels of experience, learning styles and technical abilities. My current teaching approach is to offer standardised technical workshops in multiple courses that are consistent but do not always address the unique needs of each course. The emphasis is on hands-on experience with the equipment, but there is limited structured support for students who need additional help.

A technical workshop run in collaboration with a fashion styling technician needs significant revision. Originally designed as a full-day masterclass for MA Fashion Photography students, the workshop introduced composition techniques, the rule of thirds, the history and principles of still life, and techniques for photographing and lighting different surfaces and textures. The practical outcome was achieved through collaborative experimentation. The workshop has since been adopted by some courses in the School of Media and Communication and shortened to two hours, with no change in learning outcomes despite the drastically reduced timeframe. The students come with different levels of knowledge—many lack basic camera and lighting skills. The workshop has become a play space rather than an opportunity to engage in ‘desirable difficulties’—the process of learning through strenuous challenges that improve retention (Bjork & Bjork, 2011). Even if student engagement is high, refining the structure will deepen learning and improve the acquisition of technical skills.

Moving Forward

The limitations of the shortened still-life styling workshop have highlighted the need for a more structured learning process. To improve skill acquisition, retention and engagement, I would like to use strategies that align with the instructional hierarchy (Haring et al., 1978) and stages of learning.

Revise the workshop structure for progressive learning – Following scaffolded instruction, I would like to restructure the workshop into sequential phases. By providing basic online resources, the principles of composition and lighting will be introduced prior to the event so that participants can engage with the core concepts in advance. This allows participants to get to grips with the key concepts in advance. This pre-learning phase helps to manage cognitive load and ensures that time in the lesson is focused on application rather than fundamentals. The only challenge that may arise is that students often show up for class without having done their homework.

Differentiated instruction and gradual skill development – Based on peer observations and pedagogical research, I will try to incorporate graduated activities geared toward different levels of experience. For example, beginners could focus on basic camera operations and lighting setups, while more experienced students could explore more advanced composition and styling techniques through guided experimentation.

Incorporate ‘desirable difficulties’ for deeper learning – Rather than simplifying tasks, I could incorporate ‘retrieval practice’ (Roediger & Butler, 2011) and problem-solving tasks. For example, students could recreate an existing still-life image under different lighting conditions to promote critical thinking and adaptive learning.

Extended learning through post-workshop engagement – To consolidate knowledge, I could also introduce a structured follow-up. I could ask students to submit a reflection assignment or guide them to further develop these skills in their personal work. This corresponds to the fluency and generalisation stages (Haring et al., 1978) and ensures that students review and internalise the key techniques beyond the first lesson.

Introduce structured feedback loops – To test these improvements in the future, I will seek qualitative and quantitative feedback from students to assess engagement, understanding and confidence. Iterative adjustments based on this feedback could refine the delivery of the workshops and lead to wider improvements in the technical workshops.

By introducing these evidence-based strategies, I aim to move beyond a one-size-fits-all approach and create a more responsive, structured and engaging workshop environment. These improvements will improve both students’ confidence and technical skills, ensuring that they retain and develop their skills in a variety of learning contexts over the long term.

References

Groshell, Z. (2024) ‘S4E3: Brendan Lee and Zach Groshell on the nuances of teaching effectively’, Progressively Incorrect, 20 September. Available at: https://educationrickshaw.com/2024/09/20/s4e3-brendan-lee-and-zach-groshell-on-the-nuances-of-teaching-effectively/ (Accessed:  9 February 2025).

Bjork, R. A., & Bjork, E. L. (2011) ‘Making Things Hard on Yourself, But in a Good Way: Creating Desirable Difficulties to Enhance Learning’, in Gernsbacher, M. A., Pew, R. W., Hough, L. M., & Pomerantz, J. R. (eds) Psychology and the Real World: Essays Illustrating Fundamental Contributions to Society. New York: Worth Publishers, pp. 56-64.

Haring, N. G., Lovitt, T. C., Eaton, M. D., & Hansen, C. L. (1978) The Fourth R: Research in the Classroom. Columbus, OH: Merrill.

Roediger, H. L., & Butler, A. C. (2011) ‘The Critical Role of Retrieval Practice in Long-Term Retention’, Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 15(1), pp. 20-27.