Category: Case Study

Introduction 

In my role as a technician and associate lecturer supporting students in digital fashion design and Adobe software, I conduct 1-2-1 sessions where students seek guidance on various software applications, such as Photoshop, Illustrator, InDesign, Premiere Pro, and CLO3D. While students typically select one software per session, many arrive without clear learning goals, or request assistance with multiple programs at once. Additionally, these sessions take place in an open-access area, which can be noisy and disruptive. This lack of focus, overambitious expectations, and distracting environment necessitate a structured approach to ensure effective learning. 

Context and Challenges 

1-2-1 sessions in the open-access space present key challenges: 

• Undefined Learning Goals: Some students struggle to articulate their needs, making session structuring difficult. 

• Overwhelming Expectations: Requests for guidance on multiple Adobe applications within an hour limit depth of learning. 

• Time Constraints: One-hour sessions necessitate focused learning. 

• Noisy Environment: Disruptions reduce concentration and engagement. 

Approach and Strategies 

To enhance structure, I follow up via email where possible, prompting students to specify their focus in advance. At the start of the session, I clarify that in-depth learning is achievable only for one software at a time and encourage follow-ups for broader needs. This aligns with V2 (“Promote engagement in learning and equity of opportunity for all to reach their potential”) by helping students set realistic objectives. 

Setting and Managing Expectations:

Clarifying Learning Goals 

At the beginning of each session, I ask targeted questions such as: 

• “What specific outcome do you want to achieve?” 

• “Are you working on a project requiring a particular skill?” 

• “Do you have visual examples of your goal?” 

This constructivist approach supports V1 (“Respect individual learners and diverse groups of learners”) by tailoring sessions to each student’s needs. Piaget (1971) emphasizes that “students construct knowledge based on prior experience,” which is why guiding them through structured questioning enhances learning. 

Prioritization 

When students request help with multiple applications, I guide them to prioritize foundational skills first, explaining that targeted learning improves retention. Sweller (1988) states that “reducing extraneous cognitive load enhances learning efficiency,” supporting my approach of breaking down content into manageable chunks. 

Scaffolding Learning 

Rather than overwhelming students, I introduce concepts step by step. For instance, if a student needs to create a mood board but is unfamiliar with both Photoshop and InDesign, I begin with layout basics in InDesign before progressing to image editing in Photoshop. Vygotsky (1978) argues that “learning occurs best when support is provided within a student’s zone of proximal development,” reinforcing the importance of structured guidance. 

Flexible Teaching Methods

To accommodate different learning styles, I adapt my methods, using: 

• Live demonstrations with step-by-step explanations. 

• Hands-on exercises where students practice in real time. 

• Digital resources for post-session learning. 

Kolb (1984) states that “learning is most effective when students engage in experience, reflection, and adaptation.” This aligns with A2 (“Teach and/or support learning through appropriate approaches and environments”), ensuring accessibility despite environmental challenges. 

Encouraging Independent Learning 

To foster autonomy, I provide additional resources such as online tutorials, university workshops, and follow-up emails with tailored learning materials. Zimmerman (2002) highlights that “students who regulate their learning develop stronger problem-solving skills,” reinforcing the importance of self-directed study. 

Reflection and Impact 

Implementing these strategies has significantly improved session effectiveness. Students leave with clearer objectives, structured learning approaches, and practical skills applicable to their projects. These methods align with PSF 2023: 

• V1: Tailoring sessions to individual needs ensures inclusivity. 

• V2: Helping students set achievable goals enhances engagement. 

• A2: Flexible teaching methods support diverse learners. 

Moving Forward 

To further refine sessions, I plan to:

• Improve Pre-Session Preparation: Introduce automated reminders prompting students to specify their goals.

• Enhance Learning Materials: Develop structured video tutorials and quick reference guides.

• Optimize the Learning Environment: Advocate for quieter session spaces.

• Gather Continuous Feedback: Implement post-session surveys to assess impact and improvements.

• Develop a Structured Introductory Session: Create a planned session covering key aspects of Photoshop, Illustrator, and InDesign for students who are unsure of their focus or want an overview of multiple applications.

These enhancements will improve both the structure and impact of my sessions. Encouraging students to define their goals in advance will lead to more efficient use of time, while additional learning materials will provide ongoing support beyond our meetings. Addressing environmental distractions will help maintain focus, creating a more productive space for learning. Regular feedback will allow me to refine my approach, ensuring that sessions remain relevant and beneficial. By prioritizing these improvements, I aim to foster a more effective and student-centered learning experience.

Conclusion 

Through my practice, I have developed an adaptive approach that ensures goal-oriented student support. I aim to create an inclusive, engaging, and accessible learning environment. Moving forward, student feedback and additional digital resources will further enhance engagement and learning outcomes. 

Bibliography

Advance HE. (2023). Professional Standards Framework for Teaching and Supporting Learning in Higher Education (PSF 2023). Available at: https://www.advance-he.ac.uk/knowledge-hub/professional-standards-framework-teaching-and-supporting-learning-higher-education-0

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

Piaget, J. (1971). Psychology and Epistemology: Towards a Theory of Knowledge. Viking Press. 

Sweller, J. (1988). Cognitive Load During Problem Solving: Effects on Learning. Cognitive Science, 12(2), 257–285. 

Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in Society: The Development of Higher Psychological Processes. Harvard University Press. 

Zimmerman, B. J. (2002). Becoming a Self-Regulated Learner: An Overview. Theory into Practice, 41(2), 64–70. 

Image Bibliography

Bodea, A. (2025). Learning Goals & Teaching Strategies Diagram [Infographic].

While formal assessment is not part of my role, I regularly assess students’ work during classes and one-to-one sessions to provide constructive feedback that helps them improve their skills. To evaluate students’ understanding during lessons, I use practical tasks that encourage hands-on learning and problem-solving. For example, after a Premiere Pro session, I assign students the task of creating a 30-second social media advertisement using provided assets. This helps them engage with the software, navigate creative constraints, and apply theoretical knowledge in practice. By working within set limitations, students develop problem-solving skills and adaptability while learning how to use digital tools effectively. 

Assessment

I implement formative assessments through structured tasks which are strongly based on brief learning outcomes and industry standards, such as creating a social media advert in Premiere Pro or refining magazine layouts in InDesign. These tasks encourage practical application while allowing me to assess comprehension in real time. I ensure that the assessment of students’ work addresses the key aspects of enquiry, knowledge, process, communication, and realisation providing opportunities for critical analysis, and encouraging the application of industry-relevant concepts.

Feedback

Instead of simply pointing out issues, I encourage them to critically evaluate their work, fostering deeper engagement with the subject and encourage research and experimentation. Encouraging independent research further develops critical thinking by guiding students to seek solutions beyond immediate feedback. If a student struggles with typography or layout in InDesign, I might suggest they analyze professional editorial layouts to identify best practices. This aligns with Kolb’s Experiential Learning Cycle (1984), where students move from observation to experimentation, refining their skills through iteration. By engaging in this reflective process, they take ownership of their learning and build the ability to problem-solve independently. 

Reflect, Review, improve: Combining Digital Tools and Peer Input

Moving forward I would like to build on my current strategies, I aim to refine my feedback approach by integrating peer review sessions and student personal reflection on their work. I would try this for one of the units and would not use it constantly for variety purposes. 

I would like to implement digital assessment tools to track student progress over time. Platforms such as Padlet or Miro could allow students to document their design process, enabling more in-depth discussions and iterative improvements. By incorporating these tools, students can view and reflect, assess, and provide feedback on their own progress. According to Schön (1983) there are two types of reflections: 

• Reflection-in-action – happens during an activity – making real-time adjustments based on immediate feedback. 

• Reflection-on-action – happens after an activity – analyzing past experiences to improve future performance. 

Schön (1983) argues that “reflection-in-action is the capacity to reshape what we are doing while we are doing it, allowing practitioners to respond to unique situations as they unfold.” which provides an excellent way of improving students’ work before their hand in. Encouraging students to document and review their design process using digital platforms supports this model, helping them refine their approach in real time.  

Additionally, reflection-on-action enables students to look back on their completed projects, evaluate their strengths and weaknesses, and develop strategies for improvement in future work. 

Peer feedback fosters collaboration, helping students learn from each other while developing their analytical skills as mentioned by Bandura (1986), “The modeling process allows students to develop new skills by observing others, processing feedback, and applying what they have learned in their own work”. By engaging in peer review, students observe the decision-making processes of others and refine their own work based on shared insights. This interactive learning process not only enhances technical proficiency but also fosters a sense of community and confidence in their creative abilities. 

Conclusion 

To enhance student learning, I focus on practical tasks that align with industry standards and encourage real-time problem-solving. Incorporating digital tools like Padlet or Miro will allow students to track and reflect on their progress, leading to a more structured and self-reflective learning experience. Peer feedback will further encourage collaboration and self-improvement, helping students refine their skills and develop a deeper understanding of their work. These strategies aim to create a dynamic and supportive learning environment that promotes growth and independence.

Effective assessment and feedback strategies are essential for fostering student engagement and skill development. I aim to create an environment where students can take ownership of their learning. The incorporation of Schön’s Reflective Practice (1983) and Bandura’s Social Learning Theory (1986) further supports this approach, emphasizing the importance of reflection and peer interaction in the learning process.  

Bibliography

Bandura, A. (1986) Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. 

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

Schön, D. A. (1983) The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. New York: Basic Books. 

Introduction & Background 

Teaching design software online presents unique challenges, particularly in engaging students and fostering inclusivity. In my experience teaching Adobe software, I observed a lack of participation, reluctance to ask questions, and hesitation in exploring new tools. Many students demonstrated passive learning behaviors, often avoiding verbal contributions or direct interaction. This disengagement can stem from discomfort with digital tools, language barriers, or fear of making mistakes in a virtual setting. 

Evaluation 

Vygotsky’s ZPD highlights the gap between what students can do independently and what they can achieve with guidance. Many of my students were in this zone, where they had some familiarity with digital tools but lacked confidence to apply them effectively. Without structured support, students often remain in their actual development level, unable to progress beyond basic functions and tools. 

A key challenge was shifting students’ focus from outcome-driven learning where their main focus was on the result to embracing the learning process. Many students were hesitant at the beginning of sessions, requiring time to warm up to the environment. Since online workshops were often short (e.g., two hours, with no follow-up), it was difficult to build trust and confidence within a limited timeframe. 

Language barriers, cultural differences, and varying educational backgrounds shape how students engage with new concepts. Some may struggle with confidence, while others approach learning from entirely different perspectives. Recognizing these diverse needs within the ZPD framework means creating spaces where all students, regardless of background, feel supported in their learning journey. By acknowledging and embracing this diversity, I can better guide students in developing their skills, ensuring that no one is left behind due to structural or communicative barriers.

Moreover, online learning reduces opportunities for real-time intervention, making it harder to tackle the learning curve effectively. Without immediate feedback, students may struggle without realizing areas for improvement, leading to limited engagement and slow progression. Since the learning curve is essential in supporting learners within their ZPD, I need to integrate strategies that promote active participation and allow students to gradually bridge the gap between their current skills and potential mastery. 

A key challenge is shifting students’ focus from outcome-driven learning … to embracing the learning process

Moving forward – Applying Vygotsky’s ZPD in Online Learning 

To better support students in their ZPD, I will implement strategies based on scaffolding (Wood, Bruner, & Ross, 1976) and collaborative learning which are key aspects of Vygotsky’s theory. Scaffolding is a concept developed by Wood, Bruner, and Ross (1976), that provides temporary support to help students progress in their learning. 

• Building Trust with Structured Engagement: Starting sessions with interactive polls, warm-up exercises or ice-breakers to encourage participation. This reduces anxiety and provides an entry point into the lesson.

• Providing Multiple Participation Avenues: Some students struggle with verbal interaction. Instead of forcing discussion, I will encourage engagement through chat functions, collaborative documents/projects, or email follow-ups. Additionally, I will explore using NVivo, a program that enables students to ask questions and participate in polls anonymously, fostering a more inclusive learning experience. This will allow students to participate at their comfort level while still staying engaged in the learning process.

• Encouraging Peer Learning & Collaboration: Vygotsky emphasized the role of social learning, where students benefit from working with more knowledgeable peers. I will introduce small collaborative projects, such as group moodboard exercises using Adobe Project Concept (a collaborative tool). To reduce student anxiety, I will also implement anonymous participation methods, allowing students to share ideas or ask questions without revealing their identity. Studies suggest that anonymity in learning environments can increase confidence and reduce fear of judgment (Joinson, 2001).

• Gradual Release of Responsibility (Scaffolding): Initially, I will provide detailed step-by-step guidance (high support). As students gain confidence, I will reduce assistance, encouraging them to apply skills independently. This follows the scaffolding model, where students move from guided practice to autonomy.

By implementing these strategies, I aim to bridge the gap between students’ current knowledge and their potential skills, helping them progress within their ZPD and tackle inclusivity issues of those who are more reserved. 

Conclusion

Vygotsky’s ZPD and scaffolding theory provide valuable insights into addressing student disengagement in online learning. By creating structured scaffolding opportunities, offering multiple engagement methods, and fostering collaborative learning, I will support students in their learning journey. Moving forward, I plan to refine these strategies by incorporating more interactive and adaptive teaching techniques, ensuring that students feel supported, motivated, and empowered to explore digital tools with confidence. Ensuring an inclusive approach that meets students’ diverse needs allows all learners, regardless of background, language proficiency, or prior experience, to access learning equitably, fostering a supportive and engaging environment where they can thrive.

Bibliography

Joinson, A. N. (2001) ‘Self-disclosure in computer-mediated communication: The role of self-awareness and visual anonymity’, European Journal of Social Psychology, 31(2), pp. 177-192. 

Vygotsky, L. S. (1978) Mind in Society: The Development of Higher Psychological Processes. Harvard University Press. Available at: https://www-vlebooks-com.arts.idm.oclc.org/Product/Index/353559?page=0&startBookmarkId=-1 (Accessed: 10 February 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.