kellyharrisonpgcert

Note: Continued from ARP Blog Post 4a

Activity 4: Participant feedback

In lieu of my second research question: (RQ2: How can collaborative visual mapping of the design process support diverse students’ understanding of, and engagement with, design briefs?) students’ completed a participant feedback form.

Key relevant quotes were:

‘It’s great to look at how others think and see their ideas.’

‘Everybody works and thinks differently.’

‘We should look for everyone’s strengths and make use of them.’

Further findings: Embedding learning into formal GMD1 and GMD2 assessed curriculum

By way of evidencing the extended impact of the Drawing for Design workshops, I share below examples of GMD1 students’ including visual and reflective documentation of the workshops in their formal assessed Introduction to Graphic & Media Design unit submissions (Fig. 8,9,10,11,12).

Reflection: Embedding research into formal GMD1 curriculum design & delivery

Through the Action Research Project it was my intention to create a body of active research that would lead to the development of my teaching practice, and most importantly – be useful and relevant in enhancing diverse students’ learning.

By way of evidencing this intention, I share images below demonstrating my Action Research Project learning and approaches being integrated into the formal teaching setting within the GMD1 studio (Fig. 13, 14, 15 & 16).

Reflection: Final thoughts on my Action Research Project and the PgCert

In my view the Action Research Project evidenced that drawing as a physical, process-led, reflective practice improves students’ confidence, visual literacy, creative thinking skills, and positive engagement with the design process – as part of their wider GMD learning journey.

The Drawing for Design workshop raised awareness of key pedagogic considerations including supportive communities and learning environments, foregrounding process over final product, and modelling self-reflective dialogue. The workshop drawing activities enabled tacit learning and the development of drawing as a key design thinking tool.

Undertaking the PgCert has informed and enriched my teaching practice and has enabled me to explore, understand and clarify my role within the GMD staff team – and wider UAL teaching and learning context.

It is my intention to continue building upon new skills and knowledge gained, to create ongoing effective, inclusive pedagogic practices in design education, thereby improving the student learning experience at LCC – and wider UAL communities.

Thank you for reading.

References

Barone, T. & Eisner, E.W. (2012) Arts Based Research. USA: Sage Publications.

Duff, L. & Sawdon, P. (2008) Drawing-The Purpose. USA: Intellect.

Heller, S. & Landers, R. (2014), Raw Data: Infographic Designers’ Sketchbooks. London: Thames & Hudson.

For my final assessed presentation on 14 January 2026, it is my intention to give the presentation in the GMD design studio where the Drawing for Design workshop took place, and where the large-scale maps were created, the physical maps will be on display.

In my view the learning and outcomes from this workshop are closely intertwined with the space, materials and processes in which it took place. Drawing in this context functioned as a way of exploring ideas, thinking visually, collaborating, working freely and at scale, rather than producing drawings as finished outcomes.

Presenting in the studio will allow my peers and tutors to actively experience the outcomes spatially and collectively as a group. Having the physical maps in situ aligns the presentation with my practice-based, studio-led approach to my Action Research Project and my teaching practice and mirrors how knowledge is produced in design education – and crucially as part of the design process.

Below is the PDF version of my final Drawing for Design presentation.

Barone, T. & Eisner, E.W. (2012) Arts Based Research. USA: Sage Publication

Berger, J. (2005) Berger On Drawing. Co. Cork, Ireland: Occasional Press.

British Educational Research Association (BERA). (2024). Ethical Guidelines for Educational Research (5th ed.). www.bera.ac.uk/publication/ethical-guidelines-for-educational-research-2024 (Accessed: 6 Jan 2026).

Brown, S. (2011) Doodlers Unite!, TED Talks. Available at: https://www.ted.com/talks/sunni_brown_doodlers_unite?language=en (Accessed:1 Dec 2025).

Creswell, J.W. (2015) A Concise Introduction to Mixed Methods Research. USA: Sage Publications.

Di Giovanni, M. (2024) Challenges and Research Trends for Drawing Ability in Design Education. Available at: https://tinyurl.com/42mj93ww (Accessed: 3 December 2025).

Donnici, G. (2025), Rethinking Sketching: Integrating Hand Drawings, Digital Tools, and AI in Modern Design. Available at: https://tinyurl.com/ykv9j5m6 (Accessed: 7 December 2025).

Duff, L. & Sawdon, P. (2008) Drawing-The Purpose. USA: Intellect.

Fava, M. (2019) A Decline in Drawing Ability?, International Journal of Art & Design Education. Available at: https://tinyurl.com/y5kxe22n (Accessed: 3 November 2025).

Heller, S. & Landers, R. (2014), Raw Data: Infographic Designers’ Sketchbooks. London: Thames & Hudson.

Ive, J. (2019) Jony Ive: The Future of Design, Available at: https://tinyurl.com/mwxar4c8 (Accessed: 8 December 2025)

Ive, J. Mackesy, C. & Marlow, T. (2025) Drawing Dialogues with Sir Jony Ive, Charlie Mackesy & Tim Marlow. Available at: https://royaldrawingschool.org/living-library/drawing-dialogues-jony-and-charlie (Accessed: 10 November 2025).

Kara, H. (2021), Creative Research Methods in Education: Principles and Practices. Bristol: Policy Press.

Kara, H. (2015), Creative Research Methods in the Social Sciences: A Practical Guide, Bristol:Policy Press.

Karaata, E. (2016) Significance of Sketch in Creativity Process related to Graphic Design Education. Available at: https://tinyurl.com/4atnrxs8 (Accessed: 3 November 2025).

Lupi, G. & Posavec, S. (2016) Dear Data. New York: Princeton Architectural Press.

McNiff, J. (2002) Action Research for Professional Development.

McNiff, J. (2013) Action Research: Principles and Practice. London: Routledge.

McNiff, J. & Whitehead, J. (2009) Doing & Writing Action Research. London: Sage Publications Ltd.

McNiff, J. & Whitehead, J. (2011) All You Need to Know About Action Research. London: Sage Publications Ltd.

Meirelles, M. (2013) Design for Information. USA: Pockport Publishers.

Novica et al. (2023) Drawing and Ideation Process in Design, Cogent Arts & Humanities. Available at: https://tinyurl.com/y47tdzvn (Accessed: 3 November 2025).

Perry, G. (2009) Grayson Perry Lassos Thoughts with a Pen, The Guardian. Available at: https://tinyurl.com/udvc7pte (Accessed: 7 December 2025).

Perry, G. (2025) Drawing Dialogues with Grayson Perry RA. Available at: https://tinyurl.com/znmmmauh (Accessed: 10 November 2025).

Purcell, A.T. & Gero, J.S. (1998), Drawings and the design process: A review of protocol studies in design and other disciplines. Available at: https://tinyurl.com/39m4z72b (Accessed: 7 December 2025).

Rajiv, K. (2019) No Doodling Around, Sketching for Better Meetings. Available at: https://tinyurl.com/c93hybv2 (Accessed: 1 December 2025).

Raven, D. (2025) Lecture-Zine. Available at: https://tinyurl.com/acbn7fwd (Accessed: 26 November 2025).

Rashmi, S. (2020) How Can We Teach Inclusivity and Accessibility in Design Schools Better?. Available at: https://tinyurl.com/a32vnjb3 (Accessed: 24 November 2025).

Rhode, M. (2011) Sketching: The Visual Thinking Power Tool, Creativity. Available at: https://tinyurl.com/ec53aw3a (Accessed: 3 November 2025).

Rogers, P.A.,Green, G. & McGown, A. (2000), Using Concept Sketches to Track Design Progress. Available at: https://tinyurl.com/5xvpe9nd (Accessed: 7 December 2025).

Schenk, P. (2016) Drawing in the Design Process. USA: Intellect.

Schenk, P.M. (2019), The Changing Role of Drawing with Specific Reference to the Graphic Design Process. Available at: https://tinyurl.com/33f26t5y (Accessed: 7 December 2025).

Smith, K. (2011) How to be an Explorer of the World: Portable Life Museum. London: Penguin.

Ye, X., Frens, J. & Jun, H. (2025) Beyond Divergence: Characterizing Co-exploration Patterns in Collaborative Design Processes. Available at: https://tinyurl.com/478a48c2 (Accessed: 3 December 2025).

As part of the formal preparation for my Action Research Project intervention – LAB: Drawing for Design workshop on Wednesday 26th November 2025, I prepared the required documents as shared below:

1. Participant Information Sheet
2. Participant Consent Form
3. Participant Questionnaire
4. Participant Feedback & Reflection Form

On reflection, I believe the required discipline and rigour required in the preparation of the formal participant forms for my Action Research Project will directly benefit my future teaching practice in the following ways:

• Improve my ability to communicate clearly, ethically and professionally with students.
• Encourage me to articulate the purpose, processes, and outcomes of my research in accessible language to diverse audiences.
• In turn this will further sharpen how I explain learning activities and expectations in the studio.
• By anticipating students’ perspectives, questions and answers I am more intentional in my lesson planning.    
• Deepens my understanding of ethical practice, including informed consent, confidentiality, respect for all diverse voices, and reinforcing a reflective – student-centred approach in my teaching.

Note: With careful consideration for students’ diverse needs; differing prior educational experiences, ability, confidence levels and ESL, I designed the Participant Questionnaire to be a brief and accessible activity to be completed at the start of the workshop to include a range of semi-structured, open-ended and closed questions e.g. rating scales 1-5, yes/no, multiple choice, likert scale and also mixed questions as below.

Note: As per standard studio teaching practice I also prepared a Studio Register and Focus Group Sign-Up Form – for students interested in being involved in shaping potential future cyclical iterations of the workshop model as per the Action Research Cycle (McNiff & Whitehead, 2009).

Participant Information Sheet, link below:

Participant Consent Form link below:

Participant Questionnaire, link below:

Participant Feedback & Reflection Form, link below:

References

McNiff, J. & Whitehead, J. (2009) Doing & Writing Action Research. London: Sage Publications Ltd.

In BERA Ethical Guidelines (2024) it is stated that:

‘The Association believes that all educational research should be conducted within an ethic of respect for: people; knowledge; the quality of educational research; the environment; and academic freedom… Trust is a further essential element within the relationship between researcher and researched, as is the expectation that researchers will accept responsibility for their actions.’

This quote highlights the importance of ethical conduct in higher education and educational research, while I am new to this area of study I am struck by the weight of responsibility as an educator and researcher to uphold ethical practice within higher educational settings.

By way of visualising my process of understanding and the evolution of my intervention and ethical action plan, I share the following two diagrams as below. In my experience and as stated on the the ethics form this was a useful way for me to:

‘Begin shaping your project while thinking through its ethical considerations, implications, and responsibilities.’  

In V1 (Fig.1) my initial project proposal was to undertake an intervention entitled Drawing for Design: Mapping Diversity. I received tutor feedback as below:

‘A well thought out plan… but it may end up being a massive project with too many threads of conversation.’

In response to this feedback and further conversations with my PgCert peers and GMD colleagues, I chose to adapt and align the intervention more closely to my area of drawing expertise and core GMD subject areas and relevant GMD student skillsets e.g.drawing and visual thinking as an integral part of the design process.

In V2 my confirmed project proposal was to undertake an intervention entitled Drawing for Design: Mapping the Design Process. I received tutor feedback as below:

‘If possible add a brief note about your own specialism in drawing, and how the school actively promotes the sharing of staff expertise with students.’

In response to the feedback this reminded me of the importance of sharing my wider contextual positionality as educator, researcher and creative practitioner – with students especially within the setting of my Action Research Project.    

In my view undertaking the process of creating an ethics form for my Action Research Project has enhanced my teaching as follows:

• Consider my (new) dual role as educator and researcher
• Embedding ethical reflection and awareness into my practice
• Identify the power dynamic between myself (as tutor) and my students
• Ensure that I promote transparency and autonomy to participating students
• Encouraged intentional, relevant planning e.g. clearly defining the role of the workshop activities beyond routine core studio sessions
• Fostering an inclusive environment where students can engage with drawing at varying confidence and ability levels

The ethics form also raised my awareness of handling written and physical visual data produced during the workshops e.g. completed questionnaires, photographs of students at work, annotated drawings and diagrams, completed feedback and reflection forms.

To conclude, I took all required steps to ensure any student work featured in my project was anonymised. Engaging with ethics approval supported my ongoing reflective practice helping me to further respect and protect student work – especially if shared outside of the studio. I now feel better equipped to respond sensitively to student needs as the ethics form served as a valuable tool to enhance the overall quality, inclusivity and responsibility to diverse groups within my teaching.  

Note: My ethics forms V1 and V2 are available to view below: 

Reference

British Educational Research Association (BERA). (2024). Ethical Guidelines for Educational Research (5th ed.). www.bera.ac.uk/publication/ethical-guidelines-for-educational-research-2024 (Accessed: 6 Jan 2026)

‘Arts-based research expands the ways in which meaning can be made and communicated.’ Barone & Eisner, 2012.

In line the principles of arts-based research per the statement above, my Action Research Project explored the impact of the Drawing for Design workshop on GMD1 student engagement, confidence in drawing and visual thinking skills – within a practice-based learning context.

The project aim was to change students’ preconceptions that drawing is a specialist skill rather than a flexible creative tool for experimentation, concept development and visual communication. As per the statements below:

‘Drawing is a way of thinking, a form of visual intelligence.’ (Duff & Sawdon, 2008)

‘Sketchbooks reveal the messy, non-linear reality of the design process.’ (Heller & Landers, 2014).

During the workshop students’ undertook the structured drawing activities; the visual outcomes of which I was able to evidence and analyse as learning artefacts.

I share and evidence the key written and visual findings and reflections from each stage of the workshop as below:

Actitivity 1: Participant questionnaire

In lieu of my first research question (Q1: In what ways do Y1 GMD students engage with drawing, and how do their prior educational experiences influence their attitudes and approaches?) students completed a brief questionnaire about their experiences of drawing prior to study on GMD at LCC.

Key relevant quotes were:

‘I’ve never really done any creative drawing exercises.’

‘I have usually been hesitant to draw, as I’m not used to experimenting and being okay with things initially being rough.’

‘I sometimes feel imposter syndrome with no formal academic art backgound.’

Activity 2: Individual timelines mapping early personal experiences of drawing since childhood

Students’ drew timelines (A3 format) as below (Fig.1,2 & 3). Via a comparative analysis lens, I noted that while some students’ worked ‘safely’ or figuratively, some students’ evidenced immediate learning and quickly followed instruction and encouragement to explore diagrammatic and abstract ways of working as below:

Activity 3: Exploring materials and mark-making processes to create collaborative large-scale maps

To ‘loosen up’ the process students worked at larger scale (A2) and experimented with a range of wet and dry mark-making materials and processes, in response to/and to communicate each stage of the design process. Then, allocated into groups/teams they worked together to cut up and collage their visual experiments to create large-scale ‘Design Process’ maps (AO+ format), (Fig.4, 5, 6 & 7).

Via a participant observation lens, once students were working in groups, I noted the atmosphere in the studio became less apprehensive; they became more engaged and energised, discussing and sharing ideas and moving more freely around their physical workspaces.

Via a thematic observation lens, I noted recurring patterns in the maps including visual references to: timelines, journeys, informal flexible placement of elements to communicate the non-linear nature of the design process – thereby mirroring the circular and iterative nature of the Action Research Cycle.

Note: ARP Blog Post 4a continues into ARP Blog Post 4b

Action Research Cycle: project planning

I share the diagram below (Fig.1) to share my exploration and understanding of the Action Research Cycle (McNiff & Whitehead, 2009), in line with my overall project planning.

Being new to action research, this provided me with a helpful framework on which to scaffold my project planning and the development of my ideas.

I positioned my project as first-person practitioner research, my understanding being that I research my own teaching practice through a designed intervention – Drawing for Design workshop.

Action Research Cycle: Drawing for Design workshop planning

I share the diagram below (Fig.2) to evidence further understanding and iterative development of my Drawing for Design workshop, and how this aligns to the Action Research Cycle.

This exercise was invaluable, as it ensured that I kept the intentions for each stage of the workshop, focussed and aligned with the overall Action Research Project aims.

On reflection, I see how I will re-purpose these methodologies and approaches as I plan design education activities and schemes of work in the future – in line with the cyclical, ongoing nature of the Action Research Cycle.

Using mixed methods, arts-based research approaches I describe the key data collection methods for my project as below.

To include:

• Questionnaires
• Comparative analysis
• Participant observation
• Thematic observation

Participant questionnaires

‘Questionnaires provide a numeric description of trends, attitudes or opinions of a population by studying a sample of that population.’ (Creswell, 2015)

I devised a brief questionnaire for each student to complete at the start of the workshop. This was effective at gathering information about students’ preconceived ideas and previous experiences of drawing.

Comparative analysis

‘Comparative analysis of drawings reveals how different representational strategies influence the design process.’(Purcell & Gero,1998)

I was able to compare and contrast students’ approaches to drawing e.g. figurative vs abstract before and after each stage of the workshop. I also drew comparisons between students approaches to drawing; as an individual solo task vs a collaborative group drawing task.

Participant observation

‘Participant observation allows researchers to generate knowledge through direct involvement in creative and educational practices.’ (Kara, 2021)

I was able to embody the role of teacher-researcher and build upon my prior experience (of observing students in my core teaching), as I observed students undertaking drawing tasks in an intentional, designed studio research context. This was invaluable as I became more conscious and mindful of both obvious and subtle shifts in processes, behaviours, responses and interactions across the group.

Thematic observation

‘Arts-based research seeks meaning through the identification of patterns and themes that are aesthetically and educationally significant.’ (Barone & Eisner, 2012)  

I undertook thematic observation of students’ drawings and I noted recurring visual patterns, motifs, approaches and methods; including choice and use of materials, mark-making and pictorial and abstract visual allusions to communicate message and meaning e.g. journey, travel, fluidity, organic, spirals etc (as evidenced in Blog Post 3: Findings & Reflections).  

Participant feedback & reflections

‘Action research is a form of enquiry that enable practitioners to reflect systematically on their practice and to generate evidence from that reflection.’ (McNiff & Whitehead, 2011)

Through the process of analysing each student’s written responses in the feedback and reflection forms (completed at the end of the workshop), student participants’ were valued as co-researchers and their views and reflections as data – which can inform change e.g. via sign-up to Drawing for Design Focus Group to help evolve potential iterations of the Drawing for Design workshop model for inclusion into core GMD curriculum in the future.

References

Barone, T. & Eisner, E.W. (2012) Arts Based Research. USA: Sage Publications.

Creswell, J.W. (2015) A Concise Introduction to Mixed Methods Research. USA: Sage Publications.

Kara, H. (2021), Creative Research Methods in Education: Principles and Practices. Bristol: Policy Press.

McNiff, J. & Whitehead, J. (2009) Doing & Writing Action Research. London: Sage Publications Ltd.

McNiff, J. & Whitehead, J. (2011) All You Need to Know About Action Research. London: Sage Publications Ltd.

Purcell, A.T. & Gero, J.S. (1998), Drawings and the design process: A review of protocol studies in design and other disciplines.

Below I share a selection of images to visually communicate my approaches to the planning and evolution of my Action Research Project (Fig.1 , 2, 3, 4 & 5):

Below I share my planned actions and tasks as completed, listed in date order detailing the process of preparing for, carrying out and completing my Action Research Project:

2025

26 May

• Submit completed IP Unit/Intervention Outline: ideas for re-launch of UAL Drawing Club and/or EDI workshop

13 June

• Conversation with Trudi Esberger (Engagement & Progression Director/Lime Grove) re: UAL Drawing Club and/or EDI workshop

15 July

• Submit completed IP Unit/Reflective Report: exploring two-part intervention: EDI workshop (Drawing for Design: Mapping Diversity) as potential case study for future funding application for UAL Drawing Club re-launch in Spring 2026

30 July

• Conversation with Berekhet Berkhy (EDI Officer, LCC). Discuss key UAL/LCC EDI themes,objectives for 2025/26, funding opportunities and external contacts/speakers

24 Sept

• Attend workshop: Action Research Scoping & Planning, methods, question writing and goal setting

26 Sept

• Start draft V1 Ethics Form

8 Oct

• Attend workshop: Ethics sign-off and action plan reviews

9 Oct

• Explore ideas linking GMD curriculum
• Draft research questions x 2

14 Oct

• Email Joe Le (Course Timetabling Lead, Design School): book studio D110
• Confirm budget code: Ian Carr (Course Leader, GMD)
• Check GMD materials
• Order materials
• Library books at LCC

15 Oct

• Plan blog posts x 8
• Confirm research questions

16 Oct

• Collect library books (LCC)
• Collate materials in D110
• Draft participant forms x 4

20 Oct

• Map out initial ideas TBC

22 Oct

• Workshop: Testing and piloting
• Print questionnaire
• Prepare pilot idea for Drawing for Design: Mapping the Design Process microtask

23 Oct

• Conversations re: workshop alignment with GMD curriculum: Ian Carr (GMD Course Leader), Craig Burston (GMD Y1 Co-ordinator) and Alex Cooper (GMD Y2 Co-ordinator)
• Email Joe, confirm D110 booked

25 Oct

• Draft workshop copy for Craig for Y1GMD weekly newsletter

28 Oct

• Email final copy to Craig for 7 Nov 2025

1 Nov

• Complete draft V2 Ethics Form

4 Nov

• Email sign-up link to Craig

5 Nov

• Attend tutorial: Progress and feedback

6 Nov

• Select references

7 Nov

• Check sign-up link is live
• Thank you Craig

8 Nov

• Update V2 Ethics Form

10 Nov

• Check student sign-ups
• Email V2 Ethics Form to tutor
• Draft workshop plan
• Print refs for workshop
• Start samples on A2 paper x 3

12 Nov

• Complete samples

19 Nov

• Email student group
• Check final materials
• Finalise lesson plan
• Check D110 use before 2pm with GMD tutors
• Contact/confirm Taylor Hall (UAL graduate/studio assistant)

24 Nov

• Final workshop planning
• Check blog requirements and start planning

25 Nov

• Print participant forms and design process prompts

26 Nov

• Drawing for Design workshop 2-6pm

28 Nov

• Visual data: photos received via Taylor

2 Dec

• Photograph visual data: physical artefacts e.g. timelines, drawings and large-scale maps

3 Dec

• Plan presentation slides

10 Dec

• Tutorial: formative assessment/share presentation WIP

12 Dec

• Email tutor re: presentation in studio with physical maps

16 Dec

• Room booking D110 confirmed for presentation

17 Dec

Presentation slides

18 Dec

Presentation slides

2026

1-13 Jan

• Complete blog posts x 8
• Check all uploads complete
• Check and test presentation script

14 Jan

• Final assessed in-person presentations to peers and tutors at LCC.

Image references

Fig.1 Clark, B. (2014), Describing who listens to Chicago Public Radio (Raw Data as below)

Fig.2 Katz, J. (2014), Designing tableware as data platform (Raw Data as below)

Heller, S. & Landers, R. (2014), Raw Data: Infographic Designers’ Sketchbooks. London: Thames & Hudson.

Rationale

This Action Research Project has emerged from my dual role as both a practicing artist and lecturer in Communication Design on the BA (Hons) Graphic Media Design programme at London College of Communication. My teaching practice is rooted in physical studio-based learning and visual thinking through drawing. I teach primarily into first year (Y1) Graphic Media Design (GMD) and I have consistently observed a broad spectrum of confidence, resistance and anxiety around drawing amongst the large diverse cohort of students – many of whom are International/ESLs.  

Within contemporary graphic communication design education while digital technologies offer impressive speed, efficiency and expanded creative opportunities, research indicates that an over-reliance on digital processes suggests students’ physical drawing skills are increasingly marginalised, and there is a decline in their ability and confidence to use drawing as a primary method of thinking and ideation (Di Giovanni, 2024). I have noted students’ unwillingness and discomfort in studio sessions when I have asked them to put their screens aside and use pens and paper instead – to record and visualise initial thoughts, ideas and early-stage iterative design concepts.

Drawing is long-recognised as a key activity within the creative process; Berger (2005) cites drawing as a means of discovery, and practitioners such as Grayson Perry and Sir Jony Ive cite drawing as being central in recording initial thoughts and exploring developing ideas – prior to digital precision and production methods (Perry, 2009; Ive et al.,2025). Through this study I will question the need to reassert physical drawing skills within design education; repositioning drawing as an accessible, inclusive and reflective practice.

In line with Action Research principles; I aim to improve my own teaching practice while enhancing diverse students’ engagement with drawing as an essential component within the design process (McNiff, 2013).

Research Questions

RQ1: In what ways do Y1 GMD students engage with drawing, and how do their prior educational experiences influence their attitudes and approaches?

RQ1: I have observed that many students arrive with a preconceived idea of physical drawing as a measure of technical skill and ability, and secondary to their preferred digital methods and outputs – rooted perhaps in secondary education models and future professional aspirations. This directed me to explore how students’ current approaches to drawing were shaped by prior learning experiences, and to reframe drawing not as ‘how well students’ draw, but ‘how and why’ they draw. As a result, I could foreground a drawing activity whereby each student would visualise and map their personal history of drawing since childhood, aligning the enquiry with inclusive and process-led pedagogies for diverse groups.

RQ2: How can collaborative visual mapping of the design process support diverse students’ understanding of, and engagement with, design briefs?

RQ2: The second question builds on RQ1 (so no longer drawing as a solo activity) but drawing as a collaborative visual mapping process and a shared language for visual thinking. GMD students’ understanding of the design process is integral to their studies and the collective mapping would allow them to externalise shared thinking, make exploration visible, and recognise, acknowledge and act upon multiple voices and viewpoints – as entry to a design brief. This approach reduced reliance on verbal explanation and so would be of value to students with diverse cultural, educational and neurodiverse backgrounds.

To conclude, my two research questions would create a solid foundation for my project as below:

• Reinforcing drawing as a way to think, connect, navigate and visualise meaning.
• Ensuring the project remained critically reflective, student-focussed and relevant to the GMD curriculum.
• Informing and evolving my reflective teaching practice via students’ learning experiences and outcomes.

References

Berger, J. (2005) Berger On Drawing. Co. Cork, Ireland: Occasional Press.

Di Giovanni, M. (2024) Challenges and Research Trends for Drawing Ability in Design Education. Available at: https://tinyurl.com/42mj93ww (Accessed: 3 December 2025).

Ive, J. Mackesy, C. & Marlow, T. (2025) Drawing Dialogues with Sir Jony Ive, Charlie Mackesy & Tim Marlow. Available at: https://royaldrawingschool.org/living-library/drawing-dialogues-jony-and-charlie (Accessed: 10 November 2025).

McNiff, J. (2013) Action Research: Principles and Practice. London: Routledge.

Perry, G. (2025) Drawing Dialogues with Grayson Perry RA. Available at: https://tinyurl.com/znmmmauh (Accessed: 10 November 2025).