Month: January 2026

Introduction – Digital Journeys: Supporting Student Workflow in Fashion Education with Design Software

Designing Clarity: The Rationale Behind Digital Journeys

Research Methods

Data Findings and Reflection

Action Research Cycle & Iterative Processes

Ethical Action Plan

Presentation

Bibliography

ARP Extra Notes

AI Log

Expanding on the Rationale

1. Clarifying Digital Goals through Visual Structure

Digital Journeys is informed by goal-setting theory, which emphasises the role of clarity in supporting effective learning. Locke and Latham argue that goals are most effective when they are specific rather than vague, as they direct attention and support persistence (2002).

Within Digital Journeys, this theory is operationalised through visual structure:

• Digital expectations are made explicit at each project stage
• Tasks are clearly linked to appropriate software
• Progression is visualised through a structured roadmap

By translating abstract assessment briefs into visible, sequenced actions, Digital Journeys functions as a goal-clarification tool, reducing uncertainty and helping students decide how to begin their work.

2. Supporting Confidence through Mastery-Oriented Learning

The project also draws on goal orientation theory, particularly the distinction between mastery and performance orientations. Dweck describes mastery-oriented learning as focused on developing competence through process and understanding, rather than demonstrating ability or correctness (1986).

Digital Journeys supports a mastery orientation by:

• Emphasising process over outcome
• Normalising iteration and experimentation
• Framing software learning as developmental rather than evaluative

By shifting attention away from “getting it right” and towards understanding workflows, the resource supports confidence, resilience, and risk-taking, aligning with later work by Dweck on growth-oriented learning environments (2006).

3. Learning through Experience, Reflection and Scaffolding

This process-led approach aligns with experiential learning theory. Kolb defines learning as knowledge created through the transformation of experience (1984), a model that closely reflects how fashion students engage with creative software through project work.

Within Digital Journeys:

• Interaction with software constitutes concrete experience
• The visual roadmap supports reflection by making workflows visible
• Clear explanations of when and why tools are used support abstract conceptualisation

This experiential cycle is reinforced through scaffolding. Wood, Bruner and Ross describe scaffolding as enabling learners to achieve tasks they could not complete independently (1976). Digital Journeys provides:

• Step-by-step visual guidance
• Task-specific software recommendations
• Graduated support that reduces cognitive overload

Together, these features support increasing independence, confidence, and autonomy in digital workflows.

4. Visual and Emotional Design as a Pedagogical Strategy

Beyond functionality, Digital Journeys deliberately foregrounds visual and aesthetic design as a pedagogical strategy. Research in multimedia learning suggests that emotionally engaging and visually considered materials can enhance motivation and comprehension when aligned with learning goals (Mayer and Estrella, 2014; Um et al., 2012).

This aligns with CAST’s assertion that barriers to learning are located in curriculum design rather than in learners themselves (2018), and with UAL guidance that frames inclusive design as central to student engagement.

As a result, Digital Journeys is designed to be:

• Visually clear and intuitive
• Interactive rather than text-heavy
• Engaging without being distracting

Design is treated not as decoration, but as a tool for supporting understanding and motivation.

5. Accessibility, Inclusion and Transparent Learning Pathways

The project is grounded in principles of accessibility and inclusion, recognising that digital literacy is unevenly distributed. Research shows that implicit expectations around digital competence can disadvantage students without prior access to specialist tools (Selwyn, 2010; Helsper and Eynon, 2013; Beetham, 2017).

In line with the Social Model of Disability embedded in the UAL Inclusive Teaching and Learning Framework, this project understands barriers as produced by educational design rather than by individual students.

Digital Journeys responds by:

• Reducing reliance on dense, text-heavy instruction
• Providing visual scaffolding and structured pathways
• Making software expectations transparent and explicit

Text-heavy instructional design is widely recognised as a barrier for diverse learners, including disabled and neurodivergent students, students from non-design backgrounds, and students with English as an additional language (CAST, 2018; University of the Arts London, n.d.).

By making workflows visible and navigable, Digital Journeys aims to reduce cognitive overload, support equitable access to digital knowledge, and enable students to engage more confidently with creative software.

A more detailed discussion of the theoretical and pedagogical foundations underpinning Digital Journeys is explored in a separate blog post. (click here)

Bibliography

Beetham, H. (2017) Developing digital literacies. London: Jisc.

CAST (2018) Universal Design for Learning Guidelines version 2.2. Wakefield, MA: CAST.

Dweck, C.S. (1986) ‘Motivational processes affecting learning’, American Psychologist, 41(10), pp. 1040–1048.

Dweck, C.S. (2006) Mindset: The new psychology of success. New York: Random House.

Helsper, E.J. and Eynon, R. (2013) ‘Distinct skill pathways to digital engagement’, European Journal of Communication, 28(6), pp. 696–713.

Kolb, D.A. (1984) Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and development. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Locke, E.A. and Latham, G.P. (2002) ‘Building a practically useful theory of goal setting and task motivation’, American Psychologist, 57(9), pp. 705–717.

Mayer, R.E. and Estrella, G. (2014) ‘Benefits of emotional design in multimedia instruction’, Learning and Instruction, 33, pp. 12–18.

Selwyn, N. (2010) ‘Degrees of digital division’, Learning, Media and Technology, 35(4), pp. 491–507.

Um, E., Plass, J.L., Hayward, E.O. and Homer, B.D. (2012) ‘Emotional design in multimedia learning’, Journal of Educational Psychology, 104(2), pp. 485–498.

University of the Arts London (n.d.) Inclusive Teaching and Learning Framework. London: University of the Arts London.

Wood, D., Bruner, J.S. and Ross, G. (1976) ‘The role of tutoring in problem solving’, Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 17(2), pp. 89–100.

Beetham, H. (2017) Rethinking Pedagogy for a Digital Age: Designing for 21st Century Learning. 2nd edn. London: Routledge.

Bell, J., Bryman, A. and Harley, B. (2018) Doing Your Research Project: A Guide for First-Time Researchers. 7th edn. Maidenhead: Open University Press.

Braun, V. and Clarke, V. (2021) Thematic Analysis: A Practical Guide. London: SAGE.

Color Oracle (n.d.) Color Oracle: A free colour blindness simulator for Windows, Mac and Linux. Available at: https://colororacle.org (Accessed: 1 November).

Dweck, C.S. (1986) ‘Motivational processes affecting learning’, American Psychologist, 41(10), pp. 1040–1048.

Dweck, C.S. (2006) Mindset: The New Psychology of Success. New York: Random House.

Exploding Topics (2024) Graphic design software statistics. Available at: https://explodingtopics.com/blog/graphic-design-stats (Accessed: 12 December 2025).

Gray, C. and Malins, J. (2004) Visualizing Research: A Guide to the Research Process in Art and Design. Aldershot: Ashgate.

Helsper, E.J. and Eynon, R. (2013) ‘Distinct skill pathways to digital engagement’, European Journal of Communication, 28(6), pp. 696–713.

hooks, b. (1994) Teaching to Transgress: Education as the Practice of Freedom. New York: Routledge.

Kolb, D.A. (1984) Experiential Learning: Experience as the Source of Learning and Development. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Locke, E.A. and Latham, G.P. (2002) ‘Building a practically useful theory of goal setting and task motivation’, American Psychologist, 57(9), pp. 705–717.

Lupton, E. (2017) Graphic Design: The New Basics. 2nd edn. New York: Princeton Architectural Press.

Mayer, R.E. and Estrella, G. (2014) ‘Benefits of emotional design in multimedia instruction’, Learning and Instruction, 33, pp. 12–18.

McNiff, J. and Whitehead, J. (2011) All You Need to Know About Action Research. 2nd edn. London: SAGE.

McNiff, J. and Whitehead, J. (2011) You and Your Action Research Project. 3rd edn. London: Routledge.

Norman, D.A. (2013) The Design of Everyday Things. Revised and expanded edn. New York: Basic Books.

Selwyn, N. (2010) ‘Degrees of digital division: Reconsidering digital inequalities and contemporary higher education’, in Rethinking Learning for a Digital Age. London: Routledge, pp. 67–82.

Statista (2024) Worldwide graphics software market share. Available at: https://www.statista.com/statistics/1369176/worldwide-graphics-market-share/ (Accessed: 5 January 2026).

Straits Research (2025) Creative software market report. Available at: https://straitsresearch.com/report/creative-software-market (Accessed: 12 December 2025).

Um, E., Plass, J.L., Hayward, E.O. and Homer, B.D. (2012) ‘Emotional design in multimedia learning’, Journal of Educational Psychology, 104(2), pp. 485–498.

University of the Arts London (n.d.) Inclusive Teaching and Learning Framework. Available at: https://www.arts.ac.uk/about-ual/learning-and-teaching/teaching-and-learning-exchange/inclusive-teaching-and-learning (Accessed: 12 December 2025).

Wood, D., Bruner, J.S. and Ross, G. (1976) ‘The role of tutoring in problem solving’, Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 17(2), pp. 89–100.

Visual and Media Bibliography

Bodea, A. (2026) Demographic Profile of Student Survey Participants.

Bodea, A. (2025) Digital Journeys 1.2 – QUICK SEARCH & ROADMAP (Dark Mode): Working Prototype with Interactive Elements.

Bodea, A. (2025) Digital Journeys 1.2 – QUICK SEARCH: Working Prototype with Interactive Elements.

Bodea, A. (2025) Digital Journeys 1.2 – ROADMAP: Working Prototype with Interactive Elements.

Bodea, A. (2025) Digital Journeys ARP Cycle. Original visual composition developed by the author, based on an adapted Adobe Stock infographic template: Infographic design template with place for your data (Adobe Stock ID: 438815703). Available at: https://stock.adobe.com/uk/images/infographic-design-template-with-place-for-your-data-vector-illustration/438815703 (Accessed: 2025).

Bodea, A. (2025) Digital Journeys Introduction Video (04:45).

Bodea, A. (2025) Digital Journeys QUICK SEARCH 1.0 – Mock-up.

Bodea, A. (2025) Digital Journeys ROADMAP – Original Colour Version.

Bodea, A. (2025) Digital Journeys ROADMAP – Simulated View for Red–Green Colour Vision Deficiency (Protanopia). Simulated using Color Oracle.

Bodea, A. (2025) Digital Journeys ROADMAP 1.0 – Mock-up.

Bodea, A. (2025) Digital Journeys: Design and Interaction Assets Plan.

Bodea, A. (2026) Distribution of Staff Digital Expertise and Roles.

Bodea, A. (2026) Staff Perceptions of Digital Journeys (Likert-Scale Findings).

Bodea, A. (2026) Staff Word Cloud: Language Patterns in Open-Ended Responses.

Bodea, A. (2026) Student Confidence, Perceived Usefulness, and Intended Use of Digital Journeys.

Bodea, A. (2026) Student Word Cloud: Language Patterns in Open-Ended Responses.

Bodea, A. (2026) Thematic Analysis Heatmap: Comparative Theme Prominence Across Student and Staff Data.

This section discusses the key patterns identified across the student and staff survey data, drawing connections between quantitative trends, qualitative themes, and visual analysis. Both students and staff received a video demonstration of Digital Journeys (which can be watched here) and were asked to complete a survey (which can be viewed here – student – staff)

Student nr: 16

Staff nr: 15

Student Demographics: Contextualising the Findings (fig. 1)

The student demographic shows a majority of respondents from the Fashion Business School and earlier years of study. This helps explain the strong emphasis on software literacy and workflow clarity: many respondents are not design specialists and are encountering creative software as part of broader project requirements.

fig. 1 Demographic Profile of Student Survey Participants

Student Confidence, Usefulness, and Use Intent (fig. 2)

The confidence–usefulness–use intent chart also allows comparison between students with English as a first language (1st) and those with English as a second language (2nd), revealing an accessibility-related pattern.

• Students report lower confidence in Adobe software, particularly those with English as a second language.
• Despite this difference, both groups rate the usefulness of Digital Journeys highly and show similarly strong intent to use the resource.
• This suggests that language-related barriers affect confidence with software, but do not reduce perceived value or willingness to engage with the resource.

This pattern indicates that Digital Journeys may function as an inclusive support tool, helping to mitigate linguistic and technical barriers rather than reinforcing them. As one student commented:

“Sometimes you do not know what you don’t know even exists.”

The visual contrast between confidence levels and use intent reinforces the importance of clear, visual, and structured guidance in supporting diverse student cohorts.

fig. 2 Student Confidence, Perceived Usefulness, and Intended Use of Digital Journeys

Staff Expertise and Institutional Perspective (fig. 3)

The staff expertise infographic shows a wide range of digital specialisms across the team.

• Despite this expertise, staff report that students frequently use unsuitable software.
• This suggests the issue lies in fragmented communication, not lack of staff knowledge.

fig. 3 Distribution of Staff Digital Expertise and Roles information

Staff perceptions of Digital Journeys – Likert-scale responses (fig. 4)

The staff Likert-scale responses indicate a broadly shared perception of Digital Journeys as a useful and practical response to recurring digital workflow issues encountered in teaching and technical support.

Several patterns are visible when the responses are considered together:

• High agreement around clarity and usefulness suggests alignment with staff experiences of supporting students who struggle with software choice and process understanding.
• Responses indicating that unsuitable software use occurance point to a persistent, structural issue rather than isolated cases.
• Strong likelihood of future use suggests that staff perceive Digital Journeys as compatible with existing teaching and support practices.
• Taken together, these responses position the resource as a preventative intervention that clarifies expectations earlier and reduces reliance on repetitive, reactive support.

fig. 4 Staff Perceptions of Digital Journeys (Likert-Scale Findings)

Comparative Heatmap: Shared Value, Different Priorities (fig. 5)

The comparative heatmap synthesises the themes generated through coding open ended responses and visualises their relative prominence across student and staff datasets. As Braun and Clarke emphasise, themes are not summaries of topics but “patterns of shared meaning, underpinned by a central organising concept” constructed through interpretation (Braun and Clarke, 2021).

fig. 5 Thematic Analysis Heatmap: Comparative Theme Prominence Across Student and Staff Data

Areas of strong alignment

Both students and staff strongly align around Clarifying Digital Workflows and Affirming the Value of the Resource.

• Clarifying Digital Workflows is constructed from codes such as:
  • workflow clarity
  • roadmap usefulness
  • workflow clarification
  • step-by-step guidance
  • software purpose clarity

This shared emphasis reflects a common recognition that uncertainty around digital process is structural rather than individual.

• Affirming the Value of the Resource appears prominently in both datasets, drawing on codes such as:
  • positive validation
  • clarity confirmed
  • confidence building
  • validation of existing design

This is supported by student and staff comments, for example:

• Student: “… all very clear and easy to understand!”
• Staff: “The map is super clear, direct & effectively illustrates how a project workflow can be conducted to complete a design/creative project”

This cross-group validation suggests that Digital Journeys is perceived as a legitimate pedagogical tool rather than a remedial support.

Productive divergences between groups

Differences in thematic prominence reveal contrasting priorities rather than disagreement.

• Students place greater emphasis on Aligning Digital Skills with Assessment, informed by codes such as:
  • assessment transparencylack of workflow visibility in briefs, skill validation and progression

One student noted that design skills felt “optional” within their course, highlighting misalignment between assessment structures and digital expectations:

‘In my course, I wasn’t really aware of where I needed design skills in the assignments and so it wasn’t clear what I should try to learn. The design side felt optional/not a priority which is a pity’

• Staff, by contrast, foreground Embedding Digital Guidance Institutionally, drawing on codes including:
  • institutional embedding
  • scalability
• Suggestions to integrate Digital Journeys into Moodle, handbooks, or onboarding processes frame the resource as infrastructure rather than optional support.

Interpreting the pattern

• Students prioritise immediacy: confidence, clarity, and assessment relevance.
• Staff prioritise sustainability: access, equity, and system-level integration.
• Together, these patterns show Digital Journeys operating as a connective layer between student experience and institutional practice.

Student and Staff Word Clouds: Language as Evidence (fig. 6 & fig. 7)

The side-by-side word clouds visualise the most frequently used terms (top 20) in student and staff open-ended responses, offering a language-based view of how each group frames Digital Journeys and the challenges it addresses.

fig. 6 Staff Word Cloud and fig 7 Student Word Cloud: Language Patterns in Open-Ended Responses

Shared Language Across Groups

Both word clouds prominently feature terms such as software, workflow, Adobe, tool, tutorial, and visual.

• This shared vocabulary suggests that students and staff are broadly aligned in how they understand the core problem: navigating digital workflows and choosing appropriate software.

Student Word Cloud: Orientation and Action

The student word cloud is characterised by terms linked to task break-down (Roadmap resource), clarity, and task execution.

• High-frequency words such as roadmap, search, clear, helpful, task, and workflow suggest that students experience Digital Journeys primarily as a wayfinding and decision-support tool.
• The prominence of tutorial, example, overview, and understand indicates a strong demand for step-by-step guidance and accessible explanations.

Overall, students’ language foregrounds immediacy and usability, progression emphasising how the resource supports action and confidence within live projects.

Staff Word Cloud: Support and Structure

In contrast, the staff word cloud places greater emphasis on pedagogical and institutional concerns.

• Terms such as student, access, guide, learning, integrate, handbook, and app suggest that staff conceptualise Digital Journeys as a support infrastructure rather than a standalone learning aid.
• The appearance of access and integrate aligns with staff concerns around equity, onboarding, and embedding guidance consistently across courses.

Interpreting the Contrast

Viewed together, the word clouds highlight a productive distinction:

• Students frame Digital Journeys in terms of clarity, navigation, and task completion.
• Staff frame it in terms of support, access, and integration within existing educational systems.

This contrast does not indicate disagreement, but rather reflects different roles within the learning environment. The word clouds therefore act as a visual synthesis of the findings, reinforcing how Digital Journeys bridges student experience and staff pedagogical intent.

Designing for Understanding

This project demonstrates how visual thinking can operate as a form of pedagogy. By redesigning creative software learning as a navigable, visual journey, Digital Journeys makes decision-making visible, confidence teachable, and complexity manageable. It positions design not as surface treatment, but as a strategic tool for shaping understanding, equity, and agency within fashion education’s increasingly digital landscape.

Bibliography

Braun, V. and Clarke, V. (2021) Thematic analysis: A practical guide. London: SAGE.

Visual Bibliography

Fig. 1
Bodea, A. (2026) Demographic Profile of Student Survey Participants

Fig. 2
Bodea, A. (2026) Student Confidence, Perceived Usefulness, and Intended Use of Digital Journeys

Fig. 3
Bodea, A. (2026) Distribution of Staff Digital Expertise and Roles. Author’s original visualisation.

Fig. 4
Bodea, A. (2026) Staff Perceptions of Digital Journeys (Likert-Scale Findings). Author’s original visualisation.

Fig. 5
Bodea, A. (2026) Thematic Analysis Heatmap: Comparative Theme Prominence Across Student and Staff Data.

Fig. 6
Bodea, A. (2026) Staff Word Cloud: Language Patterns in Open-Ended Responses. Author’s original visualisation.

Fig. 7
Bodea, A. (2026) Student Word Cloud: Language Patterns in Open-Ended Responses. Author’s original visualisation.