As an Associate Lecturer and digital support technician, I frequently assist students working in Adobe Creative Cloud and CLO3D. Many of these learners are international students or speak English as an additional language. They often struggle with specific digital terminology, which can lead to confusion and hesitation in practical tasks.
To improve inclusivity in my teaching, I propose developing a Visual Glossary for Digital Fashion Technical Drawing. This would present essential digital design terms with simplified English definitions and clear visual examples in video format/animations and as well as non-moving image form from software interfaces. It would be accessible in PDF format which is a universal file type. Where relevant, visual examples will feature different cultures in order to provide diverse points of view and inclusivity. Later, the glossary can also include translations in key student languages (e.g. Mandarin, Arabic, Spanish).
This intervention is grounded in three educational theories:
- Bruner’s Constructivist Theory (Scaffolding and Spiral Curriculum) – By providing linguistic scaffolding through translations and visuals, learners can gradually build knowledge over time and gain independence in using technical vocabulary.
- Piaget’s Cognitive Development Theory – Students assimilate new information by linking it with existing knowledge. The glossary supports this by connecting familiar linguistic or visual cues to unfamiliar digital terms.
- Universal Design for Learning (UDL) – The glossary presents content through multiple means: written text, images, and language options. This helps ensure that students with different learning preferences and language backgrounds can all access the material.
This is a low-cost, scalable resource that could start with 20–30 core terms. Over time, it could expand or be integrated into induction materials.
The aim is to improve comprehension, reduce language-based anxiety as well as inclusivity for neurodivergent learners, and promote equitable access to digital creative education.
Bibliography
Bruner, J.S., 1960. The process of education. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
CAST, 2018. Universal Design for Learning Guidelines Version 2.2. [online] Available at: https://udlguidelines.cast.org/ [Accessed 27 May 2025].
Piaget, J., 1952. The origins of intelligence in children. New York: International Universities Press.
Images
CAST (2024). Universal Design for Learning Guidelines version 3.0. Retrieved from https://udlguidelines.cast.org [Accessed 24 May 2025].
One reply on “Visual Glossary for Inclusive Digital Learning ”
Formative feeback on intervention design. Hope it works this time as the comment hasn’t stuck in previous atempts 🙂
Hi Andrada
Lovely to meet you the other day. Thank you for sharing your intervention design ideas. I think this is a well-considered and practical response to a particular issue that you’ve identified (LO2), so it’s good that your intervention is grounded in your observations/experience. Your Visual Glossary for Digital Fashion Technical Drawing goes beyond a technical aid – it’s a relevant act of inclusion by addressing linguistic and cultural barriers often present in learning environments (LO4). Through a multimodal presentation (text, image, video) and planning for multilingual expansion, you’re drawing on principles of Universal Design for Learning (UDL). It’d also be good to think in terms of sustainability and intersectionality. For example, could students contribute terms, translations or examples, perhaps as part of their induction or as a peer-learning activity? Could the resource also be used to discuss existing professional conventions/assumptions/cultural norms embedded in design that underpin current practices (e.g. a task where they use the software to produce an artefact that represents diversity or visual examples of what is possible to do with it that include global fashion practices.
In terms of your positionality (LO3), it’d be good to foreground this a bit more, considering how your observations, experiences, discussions, readings, insights gained through IP, have influenced your choice of intervention and the way you’re approaching it. For example, your technical knowledge and your background have probably influenced your focus on visual rather textual ways of presenting information; as an educator and technician probably influence your awareness of barriers because you see what students struggle with and how a glossary may be useful. For LO1, It’d be good to also situate the intervention within the wider context, considering institutional guidance/policies/ frameworks along with, sector ones (Advance HE’s principles of inclusive pedagogy) or industry ones (professional bodies).
I hope you find this useful, I’m including some resources that you may find useful and this would also help align your intervention with LO2.
Regards, Victor
Possibly useful resources.
Shen, M. & Sanders, S. (2023) – On small-scale inclusive interventions and their potential to improve the student experience.
Rekis, J. (2023) – For exploring how epistemic injustice affects students’ ability to express knowledge in ways that may not conform to academic/Wester/Eurocentric standards, e.g. when dealing unfamiliar language or software.
Ahmed, S. (2012) On Being Included – how institutions ‘do’ diversity.
Gravett (2022) – on student–staff partnership models that could support a co-creation process for expanding the glossary over time.
Below, just a reminder of the learning outcomes.
LO1: Critically evaluate institutional, national and global perspectives of equality and diversity in relation to your academic practice context. [Enquiry]
LO2: Manifest your understanding of practices of inequity, their impact, and the implications for your professional context. [Knowledge]
LO3: Articulate the development of your positionality and identity through the lens of inclusive practices. [Communication]
LO4: Enact a sustainable transformation that applies intersectional social justice within your practice. [Realisation]