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.