& MY PGCERT !!

As someone with ADHD and dyslexia, my notes are a beautiful chaos: scribbles, half-formed ideas, and reflections all over the place. For my PGCert, keeping track of everything—from literature and podcasts to my reflections on FE–HE transitions—felt overwhelming. That’s where ChatGPT became my secret superpower.

I’ve used it to help me make sense of my scattered thoughts, organise my notes, and turn my “thinking aloud” points into a coherent narrative that others can understand. By feeding it my messy ideas, ChatGPT helps me structure my work logically, align my reading and listening notes with my project, and even refine my reflections. It’s been invaluable for juggling multiple threads at once—a common ADHD challenge.

Beyond organisation, it’s also helped me explore my positionality. As I wrote about my professional journey in Widening Participation and teaching at CSM, ChatGPT supported me in clarifying my insights and how they connect to my project. Tasks that once took me weeks—writing project reviews or funding bids—can now be completed efficiently and clearly. In short, AI hasn’t just made my workflow manageable; it’s empowered my neurodiverse self to achieve more, reflect more deeply, and feel confident in my work.

Basically it is a game changer when it comes to time ! Something you don’t have a lot of when doing your PGCERT. However ideas and Insights remain mine! Just organising and putting “Ducks in a Row ” is thanks to ChatGPT.

I Know its a Robot – But I love it !

BLUE SKY THINKING

Working on this intervention has been a rewarding and eye-opening journey. One of the biggest changes I noticed was in my own approach—I became more flexible, reflective, and experimental in how I engaged with FE tutors and HE students. I was able to speak directly with students who had progressed into HE (all over 18), which provided valuable first-hand insights into their experiences. For FE students under 18, I couldn’t interview them directly, but speaking with their tutors offered a wealth of information about their challenges, aspirations, and creative potential. This combination of perspectives helped me adapt my methods and develop interventions that were both meaningful and ethically sound.

Time was definitely my biggest challenge—finding enough hours to read, carry out interviews, organise data, and reflect was tricky. I quickly realised I needed to prioritise, so I focused on the key literature that really spoke to my intervention and skipped a lot of the other papers. That decision helped me keep moving and stay grounded in what mattered most.

Several things worked really well. The sessions were insightful and fun, and the tutors were engaging—they really brought the process to life. Group discussions were fascinating, as we don’t usually get the chance to meet colleagues from other courses or colleges, and it was a good leveler. Some students I didn’t fully understand at first, especially in terms of their experiences and terminology, but I was happy to try and learn—it was all part of the process.

Through my AR interviews, listening to tutors talk about their passion and dedication reminded me why this work matters. Their insights, combined with honest HE student reflections, helped me identify subtle barriers like dress codes and unconscious bias—issues that might otherwise be overlooked. Small interventions, like workshops encouraging creative confidence or reflective practice, were well-received and highlighted the power of even minor, thoughtful support.

For the intervention, barriers were mostly logistical and ethical, like navigating tight A Level syllabuses and ensuring sensitive, ethical practices were followed. Overcoming these required careful planning, creative thinking, and close collaboration with tutors. Each challenge became an opportunity to learn and improve my practice and intervention ideas.

Looking ahead, the “blue-sky” thinking from this project has the potential to influence more than just my own work. I can imagine co-creating inclusive, HE-aligned projects with FE colleges, supported by fashion industry partners, giving students richer, more independent experiences. Beyond FE–HE transitions, there’s a real opportunity to bring Knowledge Exchange projects into secondary schools, helping younger learners develop creative thinking and hands-on problem-solving—skills that are increasingly squeezed out by a focus on STEM subjects. By embedding these approaches into both FE and HE curricula, we can help students explore creativity early, while also feeding ideas and inspiration back into our wider CSM Fashion program. This is a team effort: embedding these projects across the program creates scalable, sustainable support models that foster independence, creativity, and equity, and ensures our impact reaches more learners.

In short, this project has been a journey of learning, experimenting, and reflecting. It has celebrated the expertise of FE tutors, the resilience of students, and the creative possibilities that emerge when thoughtful interventions meet real needs. The future feels full of potential—not just for my own practice, but for our whole Fashion program more broadly M School & Knowledge Exchange team—and I’m excited to see how these ideas can grow and evolve collectively.

My intervention began as an idea to work with FE colleges to create projects aligned with, HE expectations, supporting vocational-route Fashion students to understand the pedagogy, independence, and reflective practice required at degree level. As the project progressed, my approach evolved. Initially, I had envisioned broad workshops and questionnaires, but I quickly learned about practical barriers: I could not directly interview students under 18 without additional safeguarding processes, and my workload—running large Knowledge Exchange projects while working three days a week—created bottlenecks at certain times of the year. These constraints required me to be strategic, flexible, and creative in data collection and intervention design.

What inspired me most was the passion and energy of FE tutors and the honesty and drive of students. Hearing tutors reflect on their practice highlighted the complexity of FE teaching: tight, linear syllabi leave little space for experimentation or independent thinking, yet teachers persistently foster creativity and skill development within these constraints. The students’ determination to succeed at CSM despite financial, social, and structural barriers was equally inspiring. Their resilience underlined the importance of interventions that genuinely support transition, confidence, and agency.

Experimentation with the questionnaire and the addition of new questions, such as exploring dress code and perceptions of bias after reading McManus, demonstrated the importance of iterative, responsive research. It reinforced my commitment to keeping the intervention grounded in the lived experiences of students and tutors.

Looking to the future, blue-sky thinking could see this intervention scaled: FE students could engage in inclusive project work aligned with industry briefs, supported by university and brand partnerships. This could not only prepare students for HE but also strengthen the UK fashion and textiles sector, encouraging domestic production of garments, materials, and yarns. By embedding collaboration, reflection, and independent practice earlier in the FE curriculum, we can bridge the FE–HE divides while supporting social mobility, creative development, and industry innovation.

Ultimately, this project deepened my respect for FE tutors and highlighted the extraordinary achievements of young people from underrepresented backgrounds. It confirmed that targeted, thoughtful inreach and outreach work can make a tangible difference in students’ lives and the wider creative industry.

The literature I’ve drawn on throughout this project has really shaped how I planned and ran my intervention. McNiff (2017) and Kemmis & McTaggart (2005) gave me a solid grounding in action research, which was perfect for keeping the project flexible and responsive. Their ideas about cycles of planning, acting, and reflecting reminded me to keep students’ needs at the centre of everything I did (McNiff, 2017; Kemmis & McTaggart, 2005). I applied this by adjusting group sessions and one-to-one interviews based on students’ confidence and prior experience, which made the sessions feel more personal and effective (Bhagat & O’Neill, 2011).

Ethics were always at the front of my mind, especially with small student cohorts and sensitive topics like financial pressures or imposter syndrome. The BERA (2024) guidelines helped me handle consent, confidentiality, and sensitive conversations the right way (BERA, 2024). In practice, this meant preparing clear consent forms, discussing confidentiality openly, and carefully choosing questions that wouldn’t make students feel uncomfortable, which really helped them open up. When it came to gathering data, Kvale & Brinkmann (2015) and Kara (2015) guided me in framing semi-structured interview questions that were open and approachable (Kvale & Brinkmann, 2015; Kara, 2015). I used Corman (2013) coding prompts to make analysing these interviews straightforward, which allowed me to pull out key insights without getting lost in the detail (Corman, 2013).

Understanding the bigger picture of widening participation was eye-opening, even though I had worked in WP for years, I learnt so much. Reading Bhagat & O’Neill (2011), McManus (2009), and reports like NSEAD (2016) and Warwick Commission (2015) helped me see the social and cultural hurdles FE students face when moving into creative HE courses (Bhagat & O’Neill, 2011; McManus, 2009; NSEAD, 2016; Warwick Commission, 2015). Although I knew allot of this.  It will inform the way I structure sessions and resources to be inclusive and supportive going forward, for example by embedding exercises that built confidence and highlighted transferable skills and embedding this into my KE project work. It made me realise why it’s so important to be aware of how access, teaching practices, and confidence all intersect (Bhagat & O’Neill, 2011; McManus, 2009).

All these pieces of literature have been woven into every stage of my project—from planning and designing sessions to collecting data and reflecting on outcomes. I applied McNiff and Kemmis & McTaggart’s reflective cycles after each interview session, noting what worked, what didn’t, and how to adapt the next session. I also consciously used ethical and participation principles from BERA (2024) and Bhagat & O’Neill (2011) to ensure students felt safe, included, and empowered throughout the intervention. Looking back, I can honestly say that reading and reflecting on this research has made me a better teacher ( I hope ) and how to be more thoughtful when building KE projects (McNiff, 2017; Kemmis & McTaggart, 2005; BERA, 2024; Bhagat & O’Neill, 2011; McManus, 2009).

---

In Brief

Methodology & Action Research

• McNiff (2017): Guided reflection and iterative planning; applied after each interview session
• Kemmis & McTaggart (2005): Encouraged participatory approaches; applied by involving the students in more open discussions during interviews

Ethics & Interviewing

• BERA (2024): Informed consent, safeguarding, sensitive data handling; applied in consent forms and ethical interview practices.
• Kvale & Brinkmann (2015): Practical guidance for semi-structured interviews; applied to design approachable questions.

Data Analysis & Transparency

• Kara (2015): Transparent and replicable qualitative methods; applied to structure coding and analysis.
• Corman (2013): Simple coding prompts; applied to systematically analyse student and FE tutors’ reflections.

Widening Participation & Creative Education

• Bhagat & O’Neill (2011): Understanding access, belonging, and teaching in creative subjects
• McManus (2009): Insight into barriers for vocational-route students; applied to scaffold learning and build confidence.
• NSEAD (2016) & Warwick Commission (2015): Sector-wide context on inequality; applied to frame the intervention within broader HE challenges.

---

References

BERA (2024) Ethical Guidelines for Educational Research. London: British Educational Research Association.

Bhagat, D. and O’Neill, P. (2011) Inclusive Practices, Inclusive Pedagogies: Learning from Widening Participation Research in Art and Design Higher Education. London: CHEAD.

Corman, S. (2013) Coding and Qualitative Analysis. London: Sage.

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

Kemmis, S. and McTaggart, R. (2005) ‘Participatory Action Research’, in Denzin, N. and Lincoln, Y. (eds.) The Sage Handbook of Qualitative Research. London: Sage, pp. 559–603.

Kvale, S. and Brinkmann, S. (2015) InterViews: Learning the Craft of Qualitative Research Interviewing. 3rd edn. London: Sage.

McManus, J. (2009) Becoming a Creative Professional: Exclusion and Inclusion in Art, Design and Media Education. PhD thesis. Institute of Education, University of London.

McNiff, J. (2017) Action Research: All You Need to Know. London: Sage.

NSEAD (2016) The Value of Art, Craft and Design Education. London: NSEAD.

Warwick Commission (2015) Enriching Britain: Culture, Creativity and Growth. Coventry: University of Warwick.

Working on my Action Research project, “In-Reach Supports Out-Reach”, has been both an Insights into FE and HE education a learning curve but also fun and engaging!

My intervention aimed to bridge the gap between FE and HE for vocational-route Fashion students, by aligning FE project work with HE expectations and providing ongoing in-course support. Initially, I believed that pre-BA workshops and tutorials alone could help students feel prepared and confident.

The responses from tutors and students highlighted the complexity of the transition. Tutors emphasised that students often struggle with independence, self-directed learning, and financial pressures—many are choosing to study closer to home or explore apprenticeships to avoid debt. Students reflected on imposter syndrome, feeling “behind” their peers, and subtle cultural and class divides, including unspoken expectations around appearance in critiques. These insights made me realise that the transition isn’t just about technical skills—it’s also about confidence, belonging, and navigating the HE environment.

I’ve realised that my intervention is on the right track but needs to be more holistic: blending practical project guidance with emotional support, mentoring, and strategies for managing both academic and personal challenges. For example, smaller workshops, one-to-one mentoring, and explicit guidance on independent research and presentation skills could better address these barriers. The feedback about dress codes and unconscious bias also highlights the importance of inclusive practices alongside technical preparation.

Overall, the findings have strengthened my belief in the intervention while refining its scope. It’s no longer just a bridge for technical skills—it’s a scaffold for confidence, belonging, resilience, and practical awareness. Moving forward, the intervention will be more responsive, inclusive, and reflective of the lived experiences of vocational-route students. It needs the involvement of the entire team – both in the Fashion program at CSM and the broader teams in the FE colleges. In the end I managed to reach out to more tutors than I had hoped, which was great, I got a real feel for how the teachers in FE felt and what they really needed from CSM. I am continued to be amazed at the amount of passion and hard work the FE tutors put into their every day, and the support and love they have for their students.

As a result of this work, it highlighted something I was already aware of, that more work is needed in Secondary Schools, younger ages to help support with the even playing field for retention and achievement at HE level. It is getting harder and harder for secondary and primary art teachers to teach creatively, with many of their classrooms now being in white cube computer rooms with no natural light, most of the lovely purpose built art studios have gone, the introduction of STEM has meant less delivery of art subjects, so by the time the students get to FE colleges ( if they are lucky enough to be able to choose art and design as career, they have very little knowledge of independent thinking. All of this was highlighted in the questionaries I sent out to FE tutors.

On the bright side – my work in Knowledge Exchange can bring in more projects which include schools or Art CICs.

During the interview phase of this project, questions around dress, appearance and presentation emerged repeatedly. As a result, I added two further questions to my questionnaire to explore whether students experienced spoken or unspoken expectations around how they dress, and whether their background or identity felt recognised within their creative practice. This methodological adjustment reflects an important moment of reflexivity, where student narratives prompted a deeper examination of unconscious bias within the fashion education environment.

Student responses reveal a shared perception that, despite the absence of any formal dress code, appearance plays a significant role in shaping confidence, peer relationships and critique experiences. One student articulated this clearly: “There is often a particular ‘CSM look’ that feels more accepted or taken seriously… when my appearance didn’t align with that, it affected my confidence in critiques, as though how I looked influenced how my work was received.” Another described feeling judged in early years for being “unfashionable,” wearing fast fashion, or “trying too hard,” but later experiencing increased respect and belonging once their style became more “effortless” and aligned with institutional norms. These reflections demonstrate how dress functions as a form of cultural signalling, shaping perceptions of taste, legitimacy and value.

This finding can be understood through Bourdieu’s (1984) concepts of habitus and cultural capital. Students arrive with embodied dispositions shaped by class, culture and lived experience, yet within fashion education certain aesthetic codes are implicitly privileged. Those whose habitus aligns with dominant norms may be read as more credible or “naturally” suited to the discipline, while others experience misrecognition. Burke and McManus (2011) identify this dynamic within art and design education, documenting how judgments about dress and appearance — including descriptors such as “unfashionable clothes” — have historically influenced assessments of ability and potential. McManus (2009) further highlights how these assumptions intersect with classed and racialised interpretations of legitimacy.

Importantly, students also described tension between the encouragement of individuality in theory and the reality of normative expectations in practice. One respondent noted that drawing from their own background felt “less understood or subtly discouraged,” leading them to adapt their work in ways that created confusion rather than clarity. Another, reflecting on a white working-class background, described resisting autobiographical work due to discomfort with voyeuristic representations of working-class identity, highlighting the emotional labour involved in negotiating visibility and authenticity.

For my intervention, this represents a crucial finding. It underscores that widening participation and inclusive practice cannot focus solely on skills or access but must also address the hidden curriculum of fashion education. Making implicit norms visible, creating space to critically discuss dress, identity and taste, and acknowledging unconscious bias are essential steps in fostering genuine belonging. Rather than positioning students as needing to “fit” the institution, this work reframes belonging as a pedagogic and institutional responsibility.

The questions I added:

      8.a As a student, do you feel there are spoken or unspoken expectations around how students should dress or present themselves within your course or in critiques?
Have you ever felt judged, supported, or misunderstood because of how you dress or present yourself?

      8b. Do you feel your background, culture, or personal identity is recognised and valued within your design work and creative practice on the course?
For example, do you feel encouraged to draw from your own experiences, or have you ever felt pressure to adapt your work to fit certain expectations?

Student quotes:

“There is a particular ‘CSM look’ that feels more accepted or taken seriously.”

“There is a particular ‘CSM look’… when my appearance didn’t align with that… it affected my confidence in critiques.”
(Student reflection)

“How I looked influenced how my work was received.”

“I do feel as though your personal style/how you’re dressed does affect the way people view your work and taste level”

“In first year, I struggled to make friends as I dressed (in hindsight) quite crazy but not in a particulary fashionable, chic or effortless way.”

“I do feel as though I was encouraged to draw from my white, merseyside/northern working class background in my work, and when parts of my background and personal identity where included it was valued, however I personally resisted doing so. “

“I also didn’t see a way I could make work that would get them to understand the feeling of growing up poor, so I just didn’t make work about being working class at all after first year”

---

References (Harvard)

Bourdieu, P. (1984) Distinction: A Social Critique of the Judgement of Taste. London: Routledge.

Burke, P.J. and McManus, J. (2011) Art for a Few: Exclusion and Misrecognition in Art and Design Higher Education. London: National Arts Learning Network.

McManus, J. (2009) ‘Becoming a creative professional: Exclusion and inclusion in art, design and media education’. Unpublished PhD thesis. Institute of Education, University of London.

---

Reflection on Learning Outcomes:

• LO1 – Knowledge (Social Justice Focus):
  Critically examines unspoken dress codes and aesthetic norms as a social justice issue within fashion higher education, demonstrating how cultural capital, class and identity shape student confidence, belonging and access to legitimacy.
• LO2 – Enquiry (Research Design):
  Develops a responsive research design that evolved through the inquiry process, with additional questionnaire questions introduced to address emergent themes identified during student interviews.
• LO3 – Process (Methods & Instruments):
  Designs, adapts and reviews qualitative research instruments (interviews and questionnaires) in response to student voice, demonstrating reflexivity and ethical sensitivity within tutor-led research.
• LO4 – Communication (Synthesis & Evaluation):
  Synthesises student data and critical theory (Bourdieu; McManus; Burke) to present a coherent, context-sensitive evaluation of findings and their implications for pedagogic intervention.

---

As background to my intervention and ARP I thought it was important to talk about retention and attainment:

Whenever retention and attainment come up in HE, it can feel like we’re being asked to explain people’s lives using bar charts. I do look at the data — it’s important — but I’m always more interested in what’s happening around it. Who feels comfortable asking questions? Who’s quietly panicking but masking it well? Who’s working twice as hard just to work out what’s expected? Etc…

Looking at the UAL dashboard data, overall retention and attainment is strong, which is good news. But once you break it down by widening participation indicators — ethnicity, disability, first-generation entry, or postcode data like IMD and POLAR — familiar patterns appear. The gaps aren’t huge, but they’re stubborn. And in my experience, those gaps often show up long before the marks do: in confidence, participation, and whether students feel like they belong in the room.

This really matters for students coming into HE from FE or vocational routes. Many arrive with strong creative instincts but less familiarity with the unspoken rules of university — how crits work, what tutors mean when they say, “push it further,” or how to talk about their work without feeling like an imposter. As McManus (2009) points out, this isn’t a lack of ability — it’s a lack of access to the hidden curriculum. Bhagat and O’Neill (2011) also remind us that belonging is not automatic, especially in creative education, and that pedagogy plays a huge role in shaping who stays and who succeeds.

Before teaching in HE, I’ve spent years working in outreach and widening participation — hanging out in community youth centers, CICs, and grassroots organisations supporting young people from marginalised backgrounds. That experience is a constant reminder that students’ lives are complex, and barriers to education aren’t just about academic readiness. They’re about culture, trust, past experiences, and whether students see themselves as “people like us” in this space.

This background shapes how I teach and design new curiculum projects for KE, I’m very aware that I don’t teach students who all come from the same place, culturally, socially or educationally. I try not to assume shared references, confidence levels, or ways of speaking about work. Instead, I spend a lot of time listening, asking questions, and creating space for students to explain where they’re coming from — in their own words, not mine. Humour helps. So does being honest about the fact that HE can be confusing, contradictory, and sometimes unnecessarily opaque.

My intervention, designed to support FE students transitioning into HE, grew directly out of this way of teaching. Using an action research approach (McNiff, 2017; Kemmis & McTaggart, 2005), it was shaped by student feedback and adjusted as issues emerged, rather than sticking rigidly to a pre-set plan. Ethics were central throughout (BERA, 2024), particularly given my dual role as tutor and researcher. Semi-structured interviews (Kvale & Brinkmann, 2015) allowed students to speak openly, and analysis was kept deliberately straightforward (Kara, 2015; Corman, 2013), so the focus stayed on experience rather than academic performance alone.

In the end, retention and attainment aren’t just outcomes — they’re signals. They tell us whether students feel understood, supported, and able to navigate a system that often assumes more than it should. Teaching in a way that recognises cultural difference, avoids assumptions, and treats students like whole people isn’t just “nice practice.” It’s essential if we actually want widening participation to mean something.

---

---

This work has been grounded in a mix of research and practice. Key sources helped design my approach to widening participation, outreach, and supporting students through FE–HE transition: from theoretical frameworks on cultural capital and inequality (Bourdieu, 1986; McManus, 2009; Reay, 2017), (like I said before, I was lucky enough to work with Jackie for many years in WP, it was a fabulous learning curve), to practical guides on community engagement and participatory pedagogy (Ainsworth, 2015; Hannon & Silver, 2020; UKStronger HE, 2021), and finally methodology and ethics guidance for doing research alongside students (BERA, 2024; Kemmis & McTaggart, 2005; Kvale & Brinkmann, 2015).As I stated in my ARP

These references are not just “academic decoration” — they helped me think critically about my own positionality, informed the design of my intervention, and reminded me why understanding students’ cultural, social, and educational backgrounds matters when aiming to improve retention, belonging, and attainment in fashion HE.

What this course gave me was time ( not a lot ! ) but some time to really read up about WP and teaching in art & design education – I don’t see myself as an ‘academic’ as such – and it hasnt been easy to digest some of the information lists provided by the course – but I have managed to navigate myself through and finds writings that resonate with me to help with my future time as an educator !

Dashboards:

References (Harvard)

BERA (2024) Ethical Guidelines for Educational Research. London: British Educational Research Association.

Bhagat, D. and O’Neill, P. (2011) Inclusive Practices, Inclusive Pedagogies: Learning from Widening Participation Research in Art and Design Higher Education. London: CHEAD.

Corman, S. (2013) Coding and Qualitative Analysis. London: Sage.

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

Kemmis, S. and McTaggart, R. (2005) ‘Participatory Action Research’, in Denzin, N. and Lincoln, Y. (eds.) The Sage Handbook of Qualitative Research. London: Sage, pp. 559–603.

Kvale, S. and Brinkmann, S. (2015) InterViews: Learning the Craft of Qualitative Research Interviewing. 3rd edn. London: Sage.

McManus, J. (2009) Becoming a Creative Professional: Exclusion and Inclusion in Art, Design and Media Education. PhD thesis. Institute of Education, University of London.

McNiff, J. (2017) Action Research: All You Need to Know. London: Sage.

NSEAD (2016) The Value of Art, Craft and Design Education. London: NSEAD.

Warwick Commission (2015) Enriching Britain: Culture, Creativity and Growth. Coventry: University of Warwick.

In-Reach supports Out-reach:  Bridging the Attainment Gap for underrepresented students in Fashion Higher Education

Name: Berni Yates

Tutor: r.marsden@arts.ac.uk

Date: 02.10.25

In-Reach supports Out-reach:   Bridging the Attainment Gap for underrepresented students in Fashion Higher Education Project Focus: This project is based on the idea I worked on for my Intervention last term: It stems directly from my own professional journey. I spent over a decade working in Outreach and Widening Participation (WP) before moving into my current role as Knowledge Exchange Lead in Fashion at Central Saint Martins (CSM). Through this, I’ve seen first-hand the challenges that WP students face—not just in gaining access to higher education, but in adjusting and staying once they get there. Fashion at CSM is a high-pressure, competitive environment where many students arrive with cultural capital, confidence, and familiarity with creative institutions. For those from marginalised or working-class backgrounds, this can feel daunting and isolating. Imposter syndrome, academic culture shock, and a lack of visible representation are just some of the barriers WP students face. This Action Research Project grew out of my own reflections and conversations with students, FE tutors, and CSM colleagues. While we’ve made good progress in widening access, retention and progression support often sit separately. I want to connect the dots between access and belonging—ensuring that support doesn’t end when students arrive, but continues in meaningful, targeted ways. My intervention focuses on students studying vocational Fashion BTECs in Further Education—an often-overlooked route into HE. I’ll pilot the project with two FE college: New City College in London (in person) and Carmel College in the Northeast (online), both of which already have WP students progressing into CSM. I am also interested in any differences between inner London College and an FE college outside of London, hence looking at these two colleges. The first phase of the intervention includes group sessions introducing the Fashion course at CSM—offering insight into curriculum, expectations, and creative process. I’ll work collaboratively with FE tutors to align their project briefs with HE-level thinking and run three one-to-one tutorials to support student portfolios and confidence. I will visit New City College in person – but will do an online talk at Carmel College   The second phase is “Inreach”—ongoing academic and emotional support for those same students once they’re on course at CSM. I’ll check in at three key points in their first year (start, mid-point, and end), while also gathering reflections on how the intervention helped them transition and settle in. The long-term goal is to create a scalable, sustainable model that bridges the gap between FE and HE, making fashion education more transparent, inclusive, and genuinely supportive for all students, also looking at recruitment outside of London, PAN UK.   This is my overall intervention plan, for my AR I intend to interview 2 tutors, one from the London FE college and 1 from the PAN UK FE college. I will also interview 2 students, if possible 1 from the London FE college and 1 from the PAN UK college. I will ask the tutors from teg colleges if any students have progressed over the past 3 years and ask for suggested students to interview. I cant do this work alone – as part of my intervention it is important to talk to my colleagues – other tutors on the program for their input and support, it is all about team work, working together to shape a better future for ALL !

Resources & Research Plan To support the development of my Action Research project—focusing on strengthening the transition and belonging of vocational-route, working-class and racially minoritised students entering Fashion HE—I will work with a combination of literature relating to action research methodology, qualitative interviewing, data analysis, and inclusive pedagogy/WP in creative arts. These sources will guide not only the design of my intervention but also my approach to interviewing tutors and students, ensuring that my methods remain ethical, coherent, and aligned with the core aims of my project.   Workshop 3A really helped me understand why we are doing AR but more importantly how it can help with the development and design of our intervention. Reflection being paramount, I was inspired by the simplicity of Corman’s (Corman (2013:1324) bullet-pointed analytic prompts. This will help me develop a similarly clear and systematic approach when analysing interview transcripts, especially as a new researcher. See below other methods I am analysing to support with the design of my AR:   1. Action Research and Methodology • McNiff, J. (2017). Action Research: All You Need to Know. This text provides a clear grounding in how to plan, document, and reflect within an action research cycle. It will help me maintain focus on the purpose of my intervention and ensure that iteration, reflection, and responsiveness remain central. • Kemmis, S. & McTaggart, R. (2005). Participatory Action Research. Useful for understanding how action research can empower participants—important when working with underrepresented FE students whose voices are often marginalised. • BERA (2024). Ethical Guidelines for Educational Research. I will use this to guide informed consent, safeguarding, and the ethical handling of interview data, particularly given the small student cohorts and potential sensitivities around class and identity. 2. Data Collection and Interviewing • Kvale, S. & Brinkmann, S. (2015). InterViews: Learning the Craft of Qualitative Research Interviewing. A key resource for structuring semi-structured interviews. It will help ensure that my questions remain purposeful, open, and accessible supporting my intention not to “lose sight of the intervention” while keeping questions simple, relevant, and sensitive. • Kara, H. (2015). Creative Research Methods in the Social Sciences. Kara’s discussion of qualitative data analysis and transparency (e.g., Odena 2013) offers strategies for explaining my analytic decisions clearly and replicably—particularly important given the small scale of my study. • Corman (2013:1324) I was inspired by the simplicity of Corman’s bullet-pointed analytic prompts. This will help me develop a similarly clear and systematic approach when analysing interview transcripts, especially as a new researcher. 3. Qualitative Data Analysis • Braun, V. & Clarke, V. (2006). Using Thematic Analysis in Psychology. I intend to use thematic analysis to identify patterns across tutor and student interviews. Their step-by-step framework offers a robust, accessible structure suited to small-scale action research. • Nicol & Macfarlane-Dick (2006). Formative Assessment and Self-Regulated Learning. Their seven principles of effective feedback will inform both the design of my intervention (particularly the tutorial support element) and my analysis of tutor reflections on preparation for HE. • Evans, C. (2013). Making Sense of Assessment Feedback in Higher Education. This helps me critically reflect on feedback cultures—useful when exploring how my intervention may support confidence, belonging, and self-efficacy for FE students. 4. Widening Participation, Inclusion, and Creative Education • Bhagat, D. & O’Neill, P. (2011). Inclusive Teaching in Art and Design. Key to understanding how access, belonging, and pedagogic practices intersect in creative subjects. This will help frame the FE–HE transition in fashion as a pedagogical—not just administrative—challenge. • McManus, J. (2009). The Class Ceiling in Art and Design Education. Provides context on classed disadvantage in art school admissions and transitions, supporting the rationale for focusing on vocational-route students. • NSEAD & the Warwick Commission Reports These national documents offer wider sector data on inequality in arts education, helping situate my intervention within a broader UK landscape of underrepresentation. Additional media and practitioner-informed sources To complement academic texts, I will also use podcasts and online resources such as: • The Colour of Fashion and Widening Participation Podcast—to capture lived experience narratives. • UAL’s Belonging Through Compassion blog—offering insight into current institutional belonging initiatives. These will support my reflexivity as a practitioner-researcher and help ensure that my interview questions resonate with both student experience and sector-wide concerns. How these sources will shape my project Collectively, these texts and media sources will help me to: design interviews that are ethical, inclusive, and methodologically sound;remain aware of power dynamics (e.g., recipient feedback structures);develop transparent, replicable methods for analysing qualitative data;situate my work within existing research on access, transition, and belonging in creative HE; IMPORTANT! keep my intervention focused, simple, and meaningful for FE students navigating the FE–HE bridge.

All preparation — literature review, designing interview questions, arranging participants, and collecting FE project materials. 3rd–19th Dec: Data collection window → tutor interviews, student interviews, reflective notes. 20–31 Dec: Early thematic analysis + drafting findings for your January hand-in. To Do: Allocate diary time for reviewing literature on HE transitions, FE-to-HE alignment, and widening participation in creative arts. Design and pilot my semi-structured interview questions (for FE tutors and progressed students). Conduct four 1:1 interviews: two FE tutors (London + PAN UK) and two students who progressed into Fashion HE. Collect supplementary data from FE tutors (e.g., any examples of student progression, relevant project briefs, or reflections). Document each stage in reflective logs to ensure I stay aligned with the Action Research cycle. My actions clearly map onto the classic Action Research spiral: 1. Identify / Refine the Problem Review literature on FE–HE transitions and WP barriers.Reflect on your previous intervention ideas and professional context. 2. Plan an Action Develop interview questions.Arrange interviews with FE tutors and progressed students.Plan how to co-write or align project briefs with FE tutors. 3. Take Action Conduct tutor and student interviews.Observe existing FE projects and discuss where alignment with HE pedagogy may help.Test small-scale collaborative actions (e.g., reviewing an FE brief). 4. Collect Data Interview transcripts.Notes from meetings with FE tutors.Any materials shared by FE tutors (briefs, reflections). 5. Analyse Data Identify themes around transition barriers, curriculum alignment, confidence, belonging, feedback cultures, etc. 6. Reflect and Modify Use findings to refine the next stage of the intervention (your “Inreach/Outreach” model).Record this in reflective blogs for your PGCERT. Semi-structured interviews (two FE tutors, two HE students).( Interview questions  on blog) Document analysis (FE project briefs, tutor notes). Reflective journalling after each interview and meeting. Why this method? Semi-structured interviews suit action research because they allow depth, flexibility, and co-construction of understanding—important when asking tutors and students what they think will help. Where My Data Will Come From Interviews with FE tutors → curriculum, needs, barriers, recommendations Interviews with progressed students → lived experience of HE transition Documentary data → FE project briefs, tutorial processes, progression notes Reflective notes → your own reflections as practitioner-researcher Existing institutional data (if accessible ethically) → student progression patterns: UAL dashboards: time permitting ! Optional Additional Method (If Time Allows) A short questionnaire to widen insight (optional if interviews are sufficient).Student reflective prompts (e.g., “describe one moment when you feel confident in HE”).

Who will be involved, and in what way?  (e.g. colleagues, students, local community…   X2 Current WP (Contextual Admissions) students who have progressed on to the CSM BA Fashion courses. X2 Teacher from each FE college.( If I have time I will interview more – or just send the questionnaires for filling out ) I have asked the tutors from the FE colleges to recommend students to talk to – this can be over the past 3 years – as they will still be at CSM. One of the students is on DPS year, but I have managed to get a contact email.

What are the health & safety concerns, and how will you prepare for them?   I have an ongoing relationship with both of the FE colleges and have been in to do talks a few times both IRL and online. So the staff are aware of me. I have a DBS check, however I will only be in contact with a tutor in the FE college for this project – so it is not needed. The FE tutors have offered to also email their alumni to tell them about the research project.

How will you manage and protect any physical and / or digital data you collect, including the data of people involved? I will use a participant consent form and a Participant information sheet. I will keep the identities anonymous of all participants and always ask for consent. Creating an information sheet about the project, Confidentiality assurance for all participants, data protection, allowing permission to use information.  ( this will be on my blog ) There will be details about the research so students and staff will feel reassured so the interviews will meet their expectations.

How will you take ethics into account in your project for participants and / or yourself?  All data will be anonymised, with identifying details removed to protect confidentiality, especially given the small FE–HE cohorts. I will obtain informed consent from all participants, making clear the purpose of the research, their rights, and that they can withdraw at any point without consequence. I will follow the BERA (2024) guidance by ensuring participants can review and approve any quotes used in my submission. Because interviews may touch on sensitive issues (e.g., class, confidence, belonging, inequality), I will be prepared for emotional disclosures and will pause, redirect, or stop interviews if distress arises. If students disclose wellbeing concerns, I will not intervene directly but will signpost to appropriate institutional support services. I will be mindful of power dynamics, making interviews collaborative rather than evaluative—especially important when interviewing students and FE tutors as a university practitioner. I will keep reflexive notes to monitor my own emotional labour and positionality, acknowledging that some topics may be emotionally demanding for me as a tutor. All data will be stored securely on password-protected systems in line with institutional ethics and GDPR requirements. The project will be kept proportionate and non-intrusive, ensuring interviews are scheduled sensitively and participation does not burden students or tutors. I will keep a transparent record of decisions (audit trail) about what data I collect, how I analyse it, and how I interpret it, in line with ethical standards for trustworthy research.I will actively reflect on how my own positionality—shaped by my WP background, class background, and role at CSM—may influence what I notice, interpret, and prioritise. Institutional Ethics Culture UAL takes ethics very seriously, and I will fully follow internal processes even when the institutional approach feels overly cautious. I recognise that this structure helps ensure participant protection, data security, and researcher accountability.

 

Participant Consent Form: FE Tutor

Project Title:

In-Reach supports Out-reach: Bridging the gap for underrepresented students in Fashion Higher Education

You are being invited to take part in a research project.  Before you decide to take part it is important for you to understand why the research is being done and what it will involve.  Please take time to read the attached information sheet carefully and discuss it with others if you wish.  Ask if anything is unclear or if you would like more information.

• I understand that I have given my consent to be interviewed about my thoughts on access and progression from FE to HE: pedagogy alignment.

• I fully give my consent to take part.

• I understand that I have given approval for my opinions to be included in the research outputs. Anything I say may be used in academic papers relating to the project, although these quotations will be anonymous.

• I have read the information sheet about the research project, which I have been asked to take part in and have been given a copy of this information to keep. 

• What is going to happen and why it is being done has been explained to me, and I have had the opportunity to discuss the details and ask questions. 

• Having given this consent, I understand that I have the right to withdraw from the research programme at any time without disadvantage to myself and without having to give any reason.

• I hereby fully and freely consent to participation in the study, which has been fully explained to me.

Participant’s name (BLOCK CAPITALS):
Participant’s signature:		Date:
Investigator’s name (BLOCK CAPITALS):
Investigator’s signature:		Date:

Contact

Investigator: Berni Yates

Tel:07713503482 Email: b.yates@csm.arts.ac.uk

 

Participant Consent Form: CSM Fashion/ Textiles HE student

Project Title:

In-Reach supports Out-reach: Bridging the attainment gap  for underrepresented students in Fashion Higher Education

You are being invited to take part in a research project.  Before you decide to take part it is important for you to understand why the research is being done and what it will involve.  Please take time to read the attached information sheet carefully and discuss it with others if you wish.  Ask if anything is unclear or if you would like more information.

• I understand that I have given my consent to be interviewed about my thoughts on progression from FE to HE Fashion education at CSM

• I fully give my consent to take part.

• I understand that I have given approval for my opinions to be included in the research outputs. Anything I say may be used in academic papers relating to the project, although these quotations will be anonymous.

• I have read the information sheet about the research project, which I have been asked to take part in and have been given a copy of this information to keep. 

• What is going to happen and why it is being done has been explained to me, and I have had the opportunity to discuss the details and ask questions. 

• Having given this consent, I understand that I have the right to withdraw from the research programme at any time without disadvantage to myself and without having to give any reason.

• I hereby fully and freely consent to participation in the study, which has been fully explained to me.

Participant’s name (BLOCK CAPITALS):
Participant’s signature:		Date:
Investigator’s name (BLOCK CAPITALS):
Investigator’s signature:		Date:

Contact

Investigator: Berni Yates

Tel:07713503482 Email: b.yates@csm.arts.ac.uk

---

Participant Information Sheet

About this study

This study is part of my research on the PgCert Academic Practice in Art, Design and Communication at UAL.

I am conducting some research to help with an intervention I am designing

 “In-Reach supports Out-reach”: Bridging the attainment Gap for underrepresented students in Fashion Higher Education. I am interested in hearing from staff and students who are working in, or studied at Further education colleges, to hear and learn about experiences and reflections on learning and teaching in both Further education and Higher education.

My research will document, evaluate, reflect and analyse differences and barriers to Higher education from further education.

The methodology will be qualitative: taking a responsive evaluation approach.

This will consist of a bespoke questionnaire (no more than 6 questions) designed by me, which I will conduct with you, the tutors teaching on FE and students who progressed from FE and are now studying in HE. We will do this on a 121 basis in an informal setting.

Responses will be analysed thematically, and will go towards the designing of my intervention, which I can’t wait to talk to you about.

What does it mean to take part?

If you take part you are consenting to taking part in this research project, with a 121 meeting, which may take between 30 – 60 minutes (could be longer if you are interested to hear more about the intervention!) .

With your consent I would like to audio record the meeting as we talk through the questionaries, to make it easier for me to transcribe it and create the findings.

Data will be used as the basis for academic analysis.

If you choose to take part, you will be free to withdraw your participation at any point. You will not be obliged to give any reason for deciding not to take part.

I will share questions with you before we meet.

Will my participation be kept confidential?

Your anonymity is very important. The information about you will be confidential to me, as the researcher. You will not be identified individually anywhere in the research. If I quote anything you have said in an interview, it will be anonymous. An example might be: ‘Tutor A said ‘The project is…’.’

What will happen to the results of the research project?

Analysis from the questionnaire – including quotations from you – will contribute to an academic intervention that I am developing, which will be presented to university colleagues. Your words may also be used in academic reports, papers or conference presentations. These may appear online. Obviously, I will let you know if it does go further than just my initial presentation.

I would be delighted to have you involved in my research, your opinions would mean so much to me and really support this important work!

Thanks in advance for your contribution and participation in this study.

I look forward to talking with you and hearing your answers to the questions.

Contact for further information:

Name: Berni Yates

Email address: b.yates@csm.arts.ac.uk

---

Questionnaires:

Questions for FE Tutors:

1. From your perspective, what are the biggest challenges your students face when transitioning from a vocational FE Fashion course into HE?

• In what areas do you feel your students are least prepared for HE-level expectations, financial? Pedagogy? Independent learning?

• What changes or additions to the FE curriculum do you think could better prepare students for HE studies in Fashion?

• How could collaboration with university staff or students support your learners’ confidence or understanding of HE pedagogy? 121 visits, talks, students or tutors, more knowledge on courses?

• What kinds of pre-BA sessions, resources, or experiences would you find most valuable for your students?

Is there anything you would like universities (such as CSM) to understand about vocational-route students and their strengths/needs?

Questionnaire for FE students progressed to HE

1. What felt most challenging when you first arrived in, HE after your FE course?

• Were there any aspects of the HE curriculum, projects that felt unfamiliar?  or teaching style that surprising or different to FE?

• Did you experience any feelings of being “behind,” out of place, or unsure of what was expected? If so, can you give examples?

• Do you know what Imposter syndrome is? At any point did you feel this? would you like to give examples?

• What types of support (from FE or university) would have helped you feel more confident starting your BA?

• Are there any skills, knowledge areas, or experiences you wish you had been introduced to earlier in FE, that might have helped you prepare for HE?

• Do you feel there is a class divide or cultural divide within HE/CSM? If so, how does it affect you or your peers?

      8.a  As a student, do you feel there are spoken or unspoken expectations around how students should dress or present themselves within your course or in critiques?
Have you ever felt judged, supported, or misunderstood because of how you dress or present yourself?

      8b.  Do you feel your background, culture, or personal identity is recognised and valued within your design work and creative practice on the course?
For example, do you feel encouraged to draw from your own experiences, or have you ever felt pressure to adapt your work to fit certain expectations?

Time line fort ARP: