IP: Intervention Reflective Report

Posted on 13th July 2026 by Joana Pereira

Introduction

This report reflects on the design of an inclusive curriculum intervention within the BA Graphic Branding and Identity course, Year 1. My intervention focuses on redesigning a Visual Grammar session to improve accessibility, engagement and participation for a diverse student cohort.

My positionality as both an academic and practising designer shapes my understanding of learning within design education. My teaching ethos is further informed by my experiences as a neurodivergent learner, a first-in-family graduate and an English as an Additional Language (EAL) speaker. Drawing on Haraway’s (1988) concept of situated knowledges, I recognise that teaching and learning are shaped by social and cultural perspectives rather than neutral or universal viewpoints. These experiences shape how I approach barriers to participation, belonging and success within higher education.

This report explores the intentions, rationale and implications of an intervention designed to make design principles more accessible and widely understood whilst maintaining academic rigour.

Context

As Year 1 Lead for BA Graphic Branding and Identity, I have had the opportunity to reshape the curriculum following the recent course validation and my appointment to the role. This intervention focuses on a Visual Grammar session, which introduces students to foundational design principles that underpin later work in visual identity design.

The cohort comprises students from diverse educational, cultural and creative backgrounds. Students enter higher education with varying levels of design knowledge, technical confidence and familiarity with academic study, which can influence engagement with abstract disciplinary concepts.

This session is significant as it establishes conceptual foundations for subsequent units and projects. Improving accessibility and engagement at this stage has the potential to support students’ confidence, participation and understanding throughout their first year.

Inclusive learning

Inclusive learning is paramount within design education as students engage with abstract concepts, specialist terminology and critique-based pedagogies that can unintentionally privilege specific forms of knowledge and participation. Whilst design disciplines often celebrate creativity and innovation, access to learning is not always equitable.

Although disability remains underreported at UAL (UAL, 2025), the proportion of students declaring a disability (18.4%) is significant and should inform how learning experiences are designed and delivered. Furthermore, neurodivergent individuals appear to be overrepresented within creative professions, with 48% of creative professionals identifying as neurodivergent compared with 31% of the wider workforce (Understood.org, Havas and 4As, 2024). This highlights the importance of designing curricula that anticipate learner variability from the outset rather than relying solely on individual adjustments.

The PGCert readings encouraged me to consider how learning environments and institutional structures shape students’ experiences of higher education. Using an intersectional framework, Hu (2024) highlights how international students’ experiences are shaped by racialised, gendered and class-based inequalities within higher education. Rather than seeing issues around participation, confidence or belonging as individual shortcomings, Hu argues that these experiences are often linked to wider institutional and social structures. This resonated with me and reinforced the idea that barriers to learning are not always located within the student. Similarly, Arday et al. (2021) suggest that universities can be exclusionary spaces, where dominant norms and assumptions create barriers to participation and success. Together, these perspectives encouraged me to think more critically about how curriculum design and learning environments can either support or exclude different groups of students.

In response to these ideas, the redesign of the Visual Grammar session was informed by the principles of Universal Design for Learning (CAST, 2024), which advocate providing multiple ways of engagement, representation, and action and expression. Rather than expecting all students to learn through a traditional lecture format, the revised session incorporates visual examples, practical activities, opportunities for discussion and flexible ways of engaging with content. By offering multiple entry points into learning, the intervention aims to reduce barriers and support diverse learners whilst maintaining academic rigour.

Reflection 

My thinking was initially informed by observations of student engagement within the existing session. Students appeared increasingly passive as the lecture progressed and struggled to connect theory with practical design outcomes. Informal conversations suggested that students valued opportunities to learn through making, discussion and experimentation.

My positionality also influenced how I interpreted these observations. As a neurodivergent learner and EAL speaker, I am aware of how cognitive load, disciplinary language and implicit expectations can affect participation. Whilst my experiences are not representative of all learners, they have encouraged me to question assumptions about what constitutes effective engagement within design education.

Reading Hu (2024) prompted me to reconsider my interpretation of student engagement. Rather than viewing difficulties in participation or understanding as evidence of individual capability, I began to consider how the learning environment itself might create barriers. This perspective resonated with my observations and strengthened my decision to focus on redesigning the curriculum experience. Engagement with the Inclusive Practices unit further reinforced this shift towards viewing inclusion as a curriculum design issue.

Although feedback from my blog groups was limited, student feedback from previous iterations of this session indicated that practical activities and opportunities for discussion were more engaging than extended lecture-based delivery. Further discussions with course colleagues also reinforced the value of creating more active and accessible learning experiences. The consistency between student feedback, colleague discussions and relevant literature increased my confidence that the issues identified warranted intervention.

A key decision was to redesign the session rather than introduce additional support mechanisms, focusing on reducing barriers within the learning experience. I also offered individual student support, through more comfort breaks and extended tutorial provision. However, redesigning the session aligned more closely with the principles of inclusive curriculum design because it sought to address barriers within the learning experience rather than requiring learners to adapt to it.

This led to the decision to break content into smaller segments, integrate practical activities throughout the session, provide contemporary visual examples and offer more flexible opportunities for discussion. I also considered introducing asynchronous elements to allow students to engage with theoretical content at their own pace before applying concepts through workshop-based activities.

A key challenge involved balancing accessibility with academic and disciplinary rigour. Whilst simplifying delivery may improve engagement, there is a risk of oversimplifying important theoretical concepts. Similarly, greater flexibility can create risks around reduced structure, uneven participation and inconsistent engagement with asynchronous materials.

Watermeyer and Swartz (2023) caution against simplistic applications of intersectionality that fail to reflect the complexity of lived experience. This prompted me to avoid making assumptions about particular groups of students and instead focus on creating flexible learning environments that support a broad range of learners.

These challenges reinforced the importance of maintaining academic standards whilst providing multiple entry points for students to engage with and demonstrate learning.

Overall, this process led me to view the redesign of the Visual Grammar session not as a discrete teaching adjustment, but as an opportunity to embed inclusion more intentionally within curriculum design.

Action 

Having gone through this learning cycle, I fully intend to integrate this intervention into the curriculum and apply these inclusion approaches and learning environments to further sessions.

I will also provide familiar points of reference from which students can explore new concepts, helping to establish a more inclusive starting point for learning. Content will be structured into shorter segments, with practical activities embedded throughout to encourage immediate application and reinforce understanding.

I also intend to redesign presentation materials to reduce cognitive load, prioritising visual communication over text-heavy delivery and supporting learning through contemporary visual examples.

Flexible workshop activities will allow students to work at their own pace through analogue and digital approaches to accommodate different levels of confidence and dexterity. Scheduled breaks will support concentration and wellbeing. I also intend to optimise session timings to ensure space for group critique and reflection. 

Longer-term developments may include delivering selected theoretical content asynchronously, creating more time for discussion, experimentation and feedback during taught sessions.

Collectively, these changes aim to create more accessible, engaging and inclusive learning experiences while maintaining academic rigour. They also represent a shift in my practice towards designing learning environments that proactively reduce barriers to participation rather than responding to them after they emerge.

Evaluation of your process

The intervention process has reinforced my understanding that inclusion should be embedded within curriculum design rather than added retrospectively through individual accommodations.

It also encouraged me to reflect critically on assumptions embedded within my own teaching practice. Whilst personal experience informed my awareness of potential barriers, engagement with educational literature and peer discussion helped me move beyond individual perspectives and consider broader structural issues affecting participation and belonging.

The intervention could be evaluated through mid-unit student feedback, participation levels, application of visual grammar concepts in subsequent projects, unit evaluation and peer observation. Success would not be measured solely through attainment but through evidence of increased confidence, engagement and participation across a diverse range of learners.

Conclusion

My positionality as a practising designer, neurodivergent learner, first-in-family graduate and EAL speaker shaped my awareness of potential barriers within higher education. However, engagement with literature on positionality, intersectionality and inclusive learning strengthened my understanding of how these experiences connect to broader questions of power, participation and equity.

Ultimately, the process has reinforced the importance of designing learning environments that anticipate learner diversity, reduce unnecessary barriers and support meaningful participation for all students.

References

Arday, J., Branchu, C. and Boliver, V. (2021) ‘What do we know about Black and Minority Ethnic (BAME) participation in UK higher education?’, Social Policy and Society, 21(1), pp. 12–25.

Bilgen, A., Nasir, A. and Schöneberg, J. (2021) ‘Why positionalities matter: reflections on power, hierarchy, and knowledges in “development” research’, Canadian Journal of Development Studies / Revue canadienne d’études du développement, 42(4), pp. 519–536. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1080/02255189.2021.1871593.

CAST (2024) Universal Design for Learning Guidelines Version 3.0. Wakefield, MA: CAST. Available at: https://udlguidelines.cast.org (Accessed: 3 June 2026).

Haraway, D. (1988) ‘Situated knowledges: The science question in feminism and the privilege of partial perspective’, Feminist Studies, 14(3), pp. 575–599.

Harpur, P., Szucs, B. and Willox, D. (2023) ‘Strategic and policy responses to intersectionality in higher education’, Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 45(1), pp. 19–35.

Hu, M. (2024) ‘International students’ feeling of shame in the higher education: An intersectional analysis of their racialised, gendered and classed experiences in the UK universities’, Sociology Study, 14(1), pp. 69–89. Available at: https://doi.org/10.17265/2159-5526/2024.01.006.

Nichols, S. and Stahl, G. (2019) ‘Intersectionality in higher education research: a systematic literature review’, Higher Education Research & Development, 38(6), pp. 1255–1268. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2019.1638348.

Understood.org, Havas and American Association of Advertising Agencies (4As) (2025) Unlocking Neurodiversity: A Creative Advantage. New York: Understood.org. Available at: https://www.understood.org/en/press-releases/2025-creativity-research (Accessed: 5 July 2026).

University of the Arts London (2025) UAL EDI Report 2025 [PDF]. London: University of the Arts London. Available at: https://www.arts.ac.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0023/561434/EDI-Report-2025.pdf (Accessed: 5 July 2026).

Watermeyer, B. and Swartz, L. (2023) ‘Disability and the problem of lazy intersectionality’, Disability & Society, 38(2), pp. 362–366.

Posted in Uncategorised | 1 Comment

IP: Blog Tast #3

Posted on 13th July 2026 by Joana Pereira

Race

Sadiq’s TEDx talk really resonated with me, especially when he pointed out that higher education failed him and that he could not identify anyone who looked like him among senior business leaders. Another point from Sadiq’s talk that really struck a chord was when he talked about people having different learning preferences, specifically referring to his neurodivergent son, who responds better to tasks when broken down into small segments. This highlighted the importance of recognising different ways of learning rather than expecting all students to adapt to a single educational model.

Thinking back to what Sadiq discussed about diversity in education, it prompted me to reflect on an uncomfortable contradiction within higher education. At UAL we have undergone extensive anti-racism and diversity training, yet there can be less emphasis on changing the curriculum and pedagogical practices that shape students’ everyday experiences. Bradbury (2020) argues that educational policies and practices can appear neutral while continuing to privilege dominant groups and perspectives, encouraging educators to look beyond individual attitudes and examine how institutional structures reproduce inequality.

Working with such diverse cohorts, I am constantly aware and haunted by the fact that I might have acted with bias because, despite coming from a different country and culture, I still have unconscious bias; we all do. No training will make anyone anti-racist. However, undergoing that training has helped me become more aware of my unconscious bias and more willing to engage with the discomfort that accompanies critical self-reflection. For me, the value of this training lies not in achieving a fixed state of being ‘anti-racist’, but in developing an ongoing practice of questioning how my teaching decisions may privilege some perspectives while marginalising others.

I am not against anti-racist training and think we all need constant reminders to check our bias and be aware of our privilege. More importantly, seeing that no training will eradicate racism, I think more attention and support could be provided for staff to help change what and how we teach. For instance, I have been previously criticised for not placing enough importance on Swiss Style when teaching design history. For context, Swiss Style has historically been constructed around a canon dominated by European male designers, resulting in a narrow conception of design excellence that can marginalise alternative visual traditions, cultural perspectives and forms of knowledge.

One academic who has significantly influenced my teaching practice and helped me to decolonise the graphic design curriculum is Ellen Lupton. Her contribution to the fiftieth-anniversary Beatrice Warde Memorial Lecture, Good Types/Bad Types, at the St Bride Foundation inspired me to contextualise Swiss Style within its particular cultural and historical conditions, rather than presenting it as a neutral or universal model of design excellence. It also encouraged me to widen the curriculum’s graphic design canon by introducing students to a broader range of designers, visual traditions and perspectives (St Bride Foundation, 2021).

The truth is that for many years, as a university, we have been teaching a predominantly Western and white design canon, partly because knowledge of alternative global design histories has been less visible within mainstream design education. I believe that every piece of design and reference has its own place in history, but we do need to move with the times and be more aware that design education often reproduces a narrow Eurocentric canon that excludes Black and other marginalised design histories (Leslie, 2020).

Garrett (2024) argues that universities need to move beyond increasing diversity alone and instead implement cultural and structural changes that value intersectional identities and different forms of knowledge.  This resonates with my own experience, as meaningful inclusion is not simply about representation but about reconsidering whose knowledge, histories and perspectives are legitimised within the curriculum.

This not only should encompass the references and examples we use within the curriculum, but also extend to the guest lecturers we invite, ensuring that we platform a broader range of voices and experiences from the design industry. By doing so, we can create learning environments in which more students are able to recognise themselves, their histories and their future possibilities within the discipline.

References:

Bradbury, A. (2020) ‘A critical race theory framework for education policy analysis: The case of bilingual learners and assessment policy in England’, Race Ethnicity and Education, 23(2), pp. 241–260.

Channel 4 (2020) The School That Tried to End Racism. YouTube video, 30 June. Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1I3wJ7pJUjg (Accessed: 20 June 2026).

Garrett, R. (2024) ‘Racism shapes careers: career trajectories and imagined futures of racialised minority PhDs in UK higher education’, Globalisation, Societies and Education, pp. 1–15.

Orr, J. (2022) ‘Revealed: The charity turning UK universities woke’. YouTube video, 5 August. Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FRM6vOPTjuU (Accessed: 20 June 2026).

Sadiq, A. (2023) ‘Diversity, Equity & Inclusion: Learning how to get it right’. YouTube video, 2 March. Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HR4wz1b54hw (Accessed: 20 June 2026).

St Bride Foundation (2021) Beatrice Warde Memorial Lecture – 50th Anniversary: Good Types/Bad Types. Lecture held at St Bride Foundation, London, 18 November. Available at: https://sbf.org.uk/whats-on/view/beatrice-warde-memorial-lecture-50th-anniversary-good-types-bad-types/ (Accessed: 20 June 2026).

Leslie, A. (ed.) (2020) The Black Experience in Design: Identity, Expression and Reflection. New York: Allworth Press.

Posted in Uncategorised | Leave a comment

IP: Intervention plan

Posted on 17th June 2026 by Joana Pereira

Context

As a Year 1 Lead of BA Graphic Branding and Identity, it is my role to design and deliver the Year 1 curriculum. Following course validation, my appointment to the role provided an opportunity to rethink how the curriculum is delivered and how in-person sessions could be used more effectively.

At Year 1 level, we welcome students with diverse levels of design knowledge, technical ability, and academic experience. Block One therefore serves as a foundation and levelling stage, ensuring students develop a shared understanding of branding, design theory, and practice before progressing to more complex applications.

Aims

I would like to design an intervention around curriculum delivery to make learning more inclusive, accessible, and engaging for the entire cohort. Particular consideration will be given to neurodivergent learners, students entering higher education through non-traditional routes, and students with English as an Additional Language (EAL), who may require additional support when adapting to UK higher education practices and disciplinary language.

The challenge

One session I continually revisit is the Visual Grammar session, where students are introduced to core design principles that underpin the development of effective visual identities.

Whilst this content is fundamental to students’ development as designers, its abstract nature can create barriers to engagement, understanding, and application.

Pain points

Historically, this session has been delivered through a predominantly lecture-based format, with limited opportunities for students to apply concepts through practice. For many students, understanding only emerged once theory was explored through workshop activities.

During previous deliveries, student engagement often declined as the session progressed. The abstract nature of the content proved particularly challenging for students with different learning preferences, varying levels of academic preparation, or EAL needs.

There was also a clear gap between theory and practice. Students frequently struggled to apply design principles intentionally within their work or articulate the reasoning behind their design decisions, resulting in less considered outcomes.

The plan

To address these challenges, I will redesign the session using active learning approaches that prioritise practical application alongside theory.

Rather than assuming prior knowledge, the session will begin by drawing parallels between written and visual grammar, providing an accessible entry point into the subject. Concepts will then be introduced in manageable sections, each followed by short practical exercises and comfort breaks to support concentration and engagement.

To support understanding of abstract ideas, I will incorporate contemporary design examples that demonstrate each principle in practice. These references will help students connect theoretical concepts to real-world design outcomes.

The presentation itself will be streamlined and more visually led, reducing cognitive overload by condensing content and prioritising imagery, examples, humour, and visual storytelling to reinforce key messages.

In response to student feedback regarding the pressure of timed creative tasks, workshop activities will be redesigned to allow for greater flexibility and self-paced learning. Students will be able to revisit materials and complete activities at a pace that supports their learning, followed by a structured pin-up critique in the subsequent session to encourage reflection and consolidation.

To further enhance inclusivity, I would like to explore a blended approach in which selected theoretical content is delivered asynchronously before class. This would create additional studio time for experimentation, discussion, peer learning, and creative practice.

Finally, I would like to introduce alternative methods of participation for students with dexterity challenges or differing access needs. Alongside analogue activities, students will have the option to create outcomes digitally using industry-standard software, reducing barriers associated with manual making processes.

Examples below, show some examples of how lectures could be more visual.

There’s also some examples of creative exercises I have previously curated for students. I would like to create more opportunities for visual experimentation.

Posted in Uncategorised | Leave a comment

IP: Blog task #2

Posted on 9th June 2026 by Joana Pereira

Faith and identity

One of the strongest themes across Jawad (2022) and Rekis (2023) is that faith cannot be separated from a person’s other identities. Jawad (2022) highlights how visible Muslim women in sport often experience barriers that are not solely about religion, but about the intersection of religion, gender and race. While participation in sport is encouraged within Islam, Muslim women who wear the hijab are frequently subject to stereotypes, scrutiny and assumptions about their abilities or freedom of choice. Their experiences demonstrate how multiple aspects of identity combine to create unique challenges.

This idea is further developed by Rekis (2023), who argues that religious identity should be understood intersectionally. Rekis suggests that people can experience “epistemic injustice”, where their perspectives, knowledge and experiences are dismissed because of assumptions attached to their religious identity. In educational and professional settings, this can mean that students of faith are not always heard, understood or valued in the same way as others.

Both texts resonated strongly with my teaching practice and professional experience, and have helped me draw parallels with the creative industries. In these industries, the intersection of religion, gender and race can become an invisible yet significant barrier to entry. This is particularly striking because these same industries often celebrate diversity publicly, while individuals who visibly express their faith can still encounter exclusion, bias or limited opportunities.

In my own teaching context at UAL, faith considerations include timetabling around major religious observances, creating spaces where students feel comfortable discussing their beliefs, being mindful of dress and cultural practices, and recognising that faith can influence students’ experiences of belonging and progression. However, inclusive practice must extend beyond accommodation. As an educational institution helping to shape the future creative workforce, we also have a responsibility to challenge simplistic narratives about faith communities and recognise the diversity of experiences that exist within them.

This is particularly important because we are preparing students to enter an industry that often presents itself as progressive and inclusive, yet does not always embrace inclusive practices in recruitment and career progression. I have taught some brilliant designers, thinkers and doers who have gone on to win industry awards but have struggled to secure employment. Women, especially Muslim women, have found it particularly difficult and are often passed over for opportunities because they are perceived as not being the right fit for a company’s “culture”.

Although the branding, design and advertising sectors have made significant strides in representing women and diverse communities in their creative output, this progress is not always reflected within their own workforce. Too often, the stories of underrepresented groups are being told without those same groups being adequately represented in the rooms where decisions are made.

Reflecting on these resources has reminded me that inclusion is not simply about representation. It is about recognising how different aspects of identity interact and ensuring that students are not disadvantaged because of the way their faith intersects with other parts of who they are. As teaching practitioners, we can create inclusive learning environments, but we must also prepare students to navigate industries that still have significant work to do in making inclusion a reality rather than an aspiration.

References:

Jawad, H. (2022) Islam, Women and Sport: The Case of Visible Muslim Women. London School of Economics and Political Science. 

Rekis, J. (2023) Religious Identity and Epistemic Injustice: An Intersectional Account. Hypatia, 38(4), pp. 779–800. 

Posted in Uncategorised | 2 Comments

IP: Blog task #1

Posted on 18th May 2026 by Joana Pereira

Intersectionality

Kimberlé Crenshaw’s (Crenshaw, 2016) concept of intersectionality argues that identities cannot be separated into neat categories because experiences are shaped through overlapping systems of power. This theory exposes how disability is interpreted too narrowly by society and institutions who continuously perpetuate ableism. Intersectionality provides a framework for recognising diversity and questioning whether current ideas of inclusion are genuinely equitable. Rather than simply adding accommodations, institutions need to rethink whose needs are prioritised in the design of education, work and public life.

Christine Sun Kim’s film offers a refreshing perspective on disability, intersectionality and ableism, as well as society’s expectations around gender, race and culture, which really spoke to me. Kim sits at the intersection of being Korean-American, deaf and also a mother, navigating the very exclusive and ableist contemporary art scene, where spoken language carries enormous cultural capital, often placing Kim at the margins of the sector. This piece explores how disability is shaped not only by physical or mental impairments but also by social attitudes, institutional barriers and unequal access to opportunities.

Kim’s positionality not only resists exclusion but also challenges the meaning of sound and communication through her work, using creativity and humour to communicate powerful messages. A recurring theme of this piece is the distinction between accessibility and inclusion, with disabled people expected to adapt themselves to dominant social norms. 

Another recurring theme in Adepitan (ParalympicsGB 2020) and Kim’s films is that institutional ideas of “accessibility” can be reductive and superficial placing more importance on accommodations and policy adjustments than on changing perceptions and attitudes towards disability and intersectionality, thereby creating areas of social exclusion.

Watching these two pieces made me reflect on the institution I work for and my teaching practice, where I have observed mostly physical accommodations being made. However, more must be done to address the impact of disability and intersectionality towards students whose intersectional identities are often overlooked or disregarded. Accessibility in education should move beyond reactive support models and towards inclusive design from the beginning. In art and design education especially, students may face barriers linked not only to disability but also to finance, confidence, language or cultural expectations. UAL data highlights awarding and continuation gaps affecting disabled students, particularly where disability overlaps with race and class. From my teaching experience, students engage more confidently when flexibility and accessibility are normalised rather than treated as exceptional support.

The interviews also challenged the idea that disability automatically defines a person’s entire identity. There were also contrasting perspectives around disclosure and adaptation. Some individuals viewed accommodations positively because they created equal opportunities, while others expressed frustration that they constantly needed to negotiate access or explain themselves. This tension suggests that inclusion often places responsibility on disabled individuals rather than institutions.

One particularly striking experience I became aware of during my teaching practice involved a Black British student with a neurodivergent diagnosis who did not receive appropriate academic support due to discriminatory attitudes from another lecturer. The student’s reduced engagement was misattributed to race, rather than being understood through the intersectional lens of their lived experience. Intersectionality helps explain why simplified representations are harmful: they erase differences within disabled communities and flatten people’s experiences into stereotypes. This episode has since defined my own approach to teaching, strengthening my commitment to ensuring that similar oversights are recognised and addressed in my practice going forward.

Bibliography

Art21 (2023) Christine Sun Kim in “Friends & Strangers” – Season 11 | Art21 [YouTube video]. Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2NpRaEDlLsI (Accessed: 17 May 2026).

Crenshaw, K. (2016) The urgency of intersectionality. TED Talk, TEDWomen 2016. Available at: TED Talk (Accessed: 17 May 2026)

ParalympicsGB (2020) ParalympicsGB Legends – Ade Adepitan [YouTube video]. Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bnRjdol_j0c (Accessed: 17 May 2026)

University of the Arts London (2025) UAL EDI Report 2025 [PDF]. London: University of the Arts London. Available at: https://www.arts.ac.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0023/561434/EDI-Report-2025.pdf?utm_source=chatgpt.com [Accessed: 5 July 2026].

Posted in Inclusive Practices | 4 Comments

TPP: Reflective Post 4

Posted on 18th March 2026 by Joana Pereira

Embracing GenAI in art and design teaching

The rise of GenAI has significantly disrupted the creative industry and art and design higher education. As a dual professional, I have observed and experienced the implications of GenAI both in the industry and within the course where I teach. The panic is palpable in academia and has plunged educators into a period of uncertainty and rapid pedagogical change, where responses often oscillate between optimism and concern. There is also broader discourse in the creative sector about whether AI might turn aspects of creativity into a luxury good, privileging those with access and understanding of these tools whilst marginalising others (Alagiah, 2024). Ultimately, we cannot stop GenAI and automation in the creative fields, but we can reframe how we think, create, and operate in collaboration with AI.

Watching the recorded guest lecture and workshop with Chris Rowell (2026) has prompted me to critically reflect on my own position regarding the use of GenAI, more specifically in the studio-based practice where I teach. At the BA of Graphic Branding and Identity, we teach students to develop verbal and visual identities for organisations that are meaningful and unexpected, based on societal and audience-led contexts. GenAI can, and has been used to develop such brand identities by students, albeit with varying degrees of criticality and success.

As technology evolves, taste and discernment become increasingly central to creative value, as these are human capacities that cannot be fully delegated to machines (Goodspeed, 2024). Furthermore, recent studies suggest that GenAI can enhance creative processes by supporting ideation, iteration, and experimentation, particularly when students actively engage with prompt development and critical evaluation of outputs (Lee, 2025), yet this critical engagement is not currently embedded within the curriculum, which could contribute to the widening of the gap in terms of industry readiness.

In my view, it is our role as educators to guide students on where their input starts and stops and when to allow GenAI in. This shifts the focus from restricting AI use to developing “AI literacy,” where students critically assess outputs, understand limitations, and maintain authorship over their work, positioning them as active agents rather than passive users of technology.

I will most certainly use the Value Spark Cards (Rowell, 2026) to structure and inform our teaching in relation to GenAI, and to help navigate both staff and students through the perils and opportunities of using GenAI in their practice. Like the inevitability of self-driving cars, the use of GenAI is looming, and we must face its reckoning head-on to best support students on how to embrace AI in their practices, creatively, ethically and sustainably. In this sense, GenAI should be approached not simply as a tool, but as a potential creative collaborator that requires critical oversight.

In the words of David Lee, CCO of Squarespace, “Creativity might be the only job left in the future, full stop”. This aligns with industry forecasts, such as the World Economic Forum’s Future of Jobs Report (2020), which emphasises that creativity, critical thinking, and problem-solving are projected to become the most in-demand human skills as automation and AI take over routine tasks (World Economic Forum, 2020).

AI is reshaping the role of design and creative practitioners to become more ideas-led and craft focused, taking away menial and repetitive tasks. Some might see this as a risk, however, I increasingly believe that GenAI can accelerate workflows and support rapid prototyping, allowing designers to focus more on higher-level creative decision-making and conceptual thinking.

Although my knowledge is still limited, I am beginning to actively experiment with and integrate GenAI within my teaching practice. For example, I have challenged students to design automated brand identities using AI tools, as well as introducing rapid prototyping through prompt writing, which has opened up new discussions around authorship, originality, and creative control. I believe the role of the designer is not in danger, but rather it has been reconfigured and, in some cases, “moved upstream” (Alagiah, 2024) – from maker to critical orchestrator of tools, processes, and meaning.

References

Alagiah, M. (2024) ‘Will AI turn human creativity into a luxury good?’, It’s Nice That, 31 July. Available at: https://www.itsnicethat.com/articles/pov-will-ai-turn-human-creativity-into-a-luxury-good-creative‑industry‑310724 [Accessed: 18 March 2026].

Art, Design & Artificial Intelligence: An educator’s toolkit (2024). Available at: https://figshare.com/articles/online_resource/Art_Design_Artificial_Intelligence_An_Educator_s_Toolkit/30374065 [Accessed: 18 March 2026].

Goodspeed, E. (2024) ‘Taste, technology and the future of art’, It’s Nice That, 28 February. Available at: https://www.itsnicethat.com/articles/elizabeth-goodspeed-column-taste-technology-art‑280224  [Accessed: 18 March 2026].

Lee, C.-W. (2025) ‘Application of generative artificial intelligence in design education’, Engineering Proceedings, 98(1), p. 29. Available at: https://www.mdpi.com/2673-4591/98/1/29 [Accessed: 18 March 2026].

Rowell, C. (2026) Introduction to Art, Design & Artificial Intelligence. Guest lecture delivered at University of the Arts London, 11 March.

World Economic Forum (2020) The Future of Jobs Report 2020. Geneva: World Economic Forum. Available at: https://www.weforum.org/reports/the-future-of-jobs-report-2020 [Accessed: 18 March 2026].

Posted in Theories, Policies and Practices | Leave a comment

TPP: Case study 3

Posted on 12th March 2026 by Joana Pereira

Assess and/or give feedback for learning

Contextual Background

Throughout my time working with different colleagues across the course team over several years, it became evident that approaches to assessment and written summative feedback varied inconsistently between tutors. This highlighted the need for a shared framework that could introduce greater rigour and consistency in marking, provide clearer guidance on the tone of feedback, and more effectively unpack the learning outcomes in relation to assessment outputs.

Evaluation

In an effort to improve alignment and reduce irregularities in assessing and giving feedback practices, I developed an assessment matrix that mapped unit learning outcomes against the required assessment outputs and the types of evidence students were expected to demonstrate within their submissions. The matrix aimed to make explicit where and how evidence for each learning outcome could be identified, supporting greater transparency and consistency in assessment and feedback. In addition, it provided guidance on tone of voice and included sentence starters to help standardise and contextualise written assessment feedback across the teaching team, whilst allowing for tutor-specific feedback too. Although the rigour of this matrix was certainly a step in the right direction, it highlighted the need to provide more structure in earlier stages of the unit – i.e. at unit briefing and mid-point/formative assessment – and more clarity in the leaning outcomes.

Moving forwards 

Feedback and feedforward: Reflecting on the assessment matrix and feedback from colleagues highlighted the value of focusing feedback forward, not just backwards. Wiliam (2011) points out that feedback is most useful when it helps students understand next steps and improve their work, rather than simply explaining a grade. Biggs (1999, 2007) also notes that learning works best when students are actively involved with the criteria, outcomes and expectations before completing a task. Incorporating this approach encourages a more proactive learning mindset, where students see feedback as an ongoing dialogue rather than a final judgment. By engaging with feedback early, students can identify gaps, refine techniques, and build confidence in their work progressively. Using these ideas, I now see feedback as part of a continuous cycle that links briefings, formative checkpoints, and summative assessment. This cycle fosters a sense of ownership over learning, helping students internalise standards and better anticipate the requirements of final submissions.

Peer review and formative feedback: To support learning ahead of summative assessment, I plan to build in more structured formative tasks and peer review sessions, especially through pin-up crits. Biggs (1999, 2007) stresses that students learn more effectively when they interact with criteria and outcomes throughout the process, not just at the end. By including regular formative checkpoints, students can practice judging their own work and planning improvements independently with more ease. In addition, structured peer review encourages collaborative learning, allowing students to articulate their understanding and evaluate alternative approaches critically, thereby deepening comprehension and analytical skills.

Blair (2007) and Blythman et al. (2007) note that studio crits can be useful for learning but sometimes feel inconsistent or intimidating if students are unprepared. Peer review provides students a valuable opportunity to practise giving and receiving feedback in a lower-stakes environment. Wiliam (2011) highlights that feedback works best when it is actionable, helping students know exactly how to improve. To support this, peer review should be structured with talking cards and prompts, ensuring all students can contribute confidently and meaningfully, promoting reflective and inclusive feedback practices.

Formative and peer review feedback opportunities have the potential to increase students’ confidence in crits and provide multiple opportunities to “feed forward” into their final projects. Ultimately, these strategies aim to develop independent learners who can assess their own progress critically, adjust their work, and approach feedback and assessment with resilience. It is of upmost importance to ensure peer feedback is constructive at all times, and connected to learning outcomes, which may require further guidance and support. When embedded consistently, these activities could help students understand assessment criteria, use feedback to guide improvements, and approach summative assessment with greater independence and confidence.

References:

Biggs, J., 1999. What the student does: Teaching for enhanced learning. Higher Education Research & Development, 18 (1), pp.57‑75.

Biggs, J. (2007) Constructive Alignment, in Biggs, J. & Tang, C. Teaching for Quality Learning at University. 3rd edn. Maidenhead: McGraw-Hill/Open University Press, pp. 11–33.

Blair, B. (2007) Design Studio Crit: Move from Judgement to Dialogue. London: University College London, Institute of Education.

Blythman, M., Orr, S. and Blair, B., 2007. Critiquing the crit. Project report. Brighton: Higher Education Academy, Art, Design and Media Subject Centre.

Wiliam, D. (2011) Embedded Formative Assessment. Bloomington, IN: Solution Tree Press.

UAL (2024) Supporting Inclusive and Developmental Crits. London: University of the Arts London.

Danvers, J., 2010. Making marks: Assessment in arts education. Networks Magazine, Issue 10, Summer.

Orr, S. (2010) Assessment in Art & Design. London: Routledge.

Posted in Theories, Policies and Practices | Leave a comment

TPP: Reflective post 3

Posted on 28th February 2026 by Joana Pereira

Writing effective learning outcomes for art and design higher education

This reflection responds to Theories, Policies and Practices Workshop 2b, which focused on the purpose and language of learning outcomes. Drawing on my experience revising learning outcomes during course revalidation, I argue that prescriptive and hierarchical frameworks – particularly Bloom’s Taxonomy (Bloom, 1956) – can constrain curriculum design in studio-based disciplines, limiting early engagement with practice and creating tensions between institutional policy, student expectations, and employability goals.

As Davies (2012) observes, the use of “measurable” verbs such as identify, explain, or analyse often generates more difficulties than it resolves. These terms are highly discipline-specific and can remain opaque for students who have not yet been immersed in the language and conventions of the industry. In the context of our course, their strict application offered limited guidance for staff designing curriculum or assessing project-based work, oversimplifying complex design practices into discrete cognitive levels and narrowing the scope of learning, particularly regarding assessment and employability.

The hierarchical structuring of learning outcomes across all three years further constrained curriculum pacing and project ambition. In Year 1, which I lead, outcomes focused almost exclusively on remembering and understanding, prioritising knowledge recall over engagement with design processes. While intended to scaffold learning, this underestimated students’ capacity for meaningful creative work early in the programme. Dare (2018) critiques this approach in art and design education, noting that traditional cognitive frameworks may inadequately support curiosity, critical thinking, imagination, and the creative risk-taking essential to studio-based practice.

Student feedback confirmed these limitations, highlighting dissatisfaction with the predominance of theory over design-led, hands-on activities. In response, I introduced additional opportunities for ideation, design, and development. Although these initially felt somewhat surface-level and late in the schedule, they improved alignment with student expectations and professional practice. However, these adjustments also revealed that learning outcomes themselves require upstream revision to better reflect iterative and practice-led creative processes.

To address this, I have explored the Design Council’s Double Diamond framework (Fallin, 2022) as a tool for curriculum and assessment design. By emphasising divergent and convergent thinking, iterative prototyping, and problem framing, the framework provides a transferable model for structuring outcomes that support both creativity and assessment coherence. It demonstrates potential for reframing learning outcomes in ways that encourage embodied, iterative learning while remaining measurable for evaluation purposes.

While these refinements have enhanced engagement, challenges remain in aligning intended outcomes, teaching activities, and assessment criteria. This experience underscores the need for greater flexibility in interpreting and applying learning outcome frameworks within studio-based disciplines. Effective outcomes should support iterative, creative, and embodied learning, enable students to produce portfolio-ready work, and maintain coherence with assessment, employability, and professional practice expectations.

References

Bloom’s Taxonomy (n.d.) Bloom’s Taxonomy | Center for Teaching Innovation, Cornell University. Available at: https://teaching.cornell.edu/resource/blooms-taxonomy (Accessed: 28 February 2026) 

Dare, E. (2018) ‘Out of the humanist matrix: Learning taxonomies beyond Bloom’, Spark: UAL Creative Teaching and Learning Journal, 3(1), pp. 44–51. Available at: https://sparkjournal.arts.ac.uk/index.php/spark/article/view/79 (Accessed: 28 February 2026)

Davies, A. (2012) ‘Learning outcomes and assessment criteria in art and design. What’s the recurring problem?’, Networks, Issue 18, July 2012. Available at: http://arts.brighton.ac.uk/projects/networks/issue-18-july-2012/learning-outcomes-and-assessment-criteria-in-art-and-design.-whats-the-recurring-problem(Accessed: 28 February 2026)

Design Council (n.d.) Framework for Innovation. Available at: https://www.designcouncil.org.uk/our-resources/framework-for-innovation/ (Accessed: 28 February 2026)

Fallin, L. (2022) The Double Diamond: Fixing higher education challenges with human‑centered design. Available at: https://leefallin.co.uk/2022/08/the-double-diamond-fixing-higher-education-challenges-with-human-centered-design/ (Accessed: 28 February 2026)

Theories, Policies and Practices (2026/2027) Workshop 2b, 26/27 PgCert Academic Practice in Art, Design and Communication, online workshop, 18 February 2026, University of the Arts London.

Posted in Theories, Policies and Practices | Leave a comment

TPP: Peer review 3

Posted on 28th February 2026 by Joana Pereira

Review of Teaching Practice  

Session/artefact to be observed/reviewed: Reapproval documentation
Size of student group: N/A
Reviewee: Eric Fanghanel Santibanez
Reviewer: Joana Pereira

Part One

Reviewee to complete in brief and send to reviewer prior to the review

What is the context of this session/artefact within the curriculum?
This is the material we have created so far for the reapproval of the course.

How long have you been working with this group and in what capacity?
N/A

What are the intended or expected learning outcomes?
N/A

What are the anticipated outputs (anything students will make/do)?
N/A

Are there potential difficulties or specific areas of concern?
We are particularly concerned with the move to one year and whether or not we are on the right track for that goal.

How will students be informed of the observation/review?
N/A

What would you particularly like feedback on?
Suggestions and potential points of failure 

How will feedback be exchanged?
Written or orally either should be fine

Part Two

Reviewer to note down observations, suggestions and questions.

The course aims are ver well articulated with clarity and vision, while the outcomes are accessible and free from overly academic language, making them easy for students to understand.

I would suggest enhancing the course outcomes related to process and communication. The process could be framed to encompass the full student journey, starting from the initial inquiry and development of the research question. While communication already includes visual aspects, it could continue to be emphasised as a key component of student work.

The overall structure of the course and units is very cohesive and strong. The pace of units 1 and 2 appears slower compared to units 3–5. Accelerating the early units could help students select their research question in a more timely manner. 

Incorporating the Double Diamond framework with divergent and convergent thinking may also support students in exploring broadly before committing, ultimately allowing more time for refined final outcomes.

Regarding project-based work, I recommend aligning the mini-projects with the various contexts outlined in the course aims. This approach would guide students towards their main research question. There may also be an opportunity to involve industry professionals in delivering mini-project briefs, providing early exposure to professional practice and helping students identify potential internship opportunities.

Finally, introducing more informal opportunities for collaboration earlier in the course would allow students to cross-pollinate ideas and practice teamwork in a lower-stakes setting before reaching unit 3.

Part Three

Reviewee to reflect on the reviewer’s comments and describe how they will act on the feedback exchanged. Reviewee should return this to the reviewer once complete.

Thank you for the thoughtful and constructive feedback. It is reassuring that the course aims are perceived as clear and accessible, particularly in avoiding unnecessarily academic language. That clarity is important given the diversity of backgrounds students bring to the programme.

1. Strengthening Process and Communication

I agree that the learning outcomes around process and communication can be more robust. I will revise the outcomes to frame process as the full arc of enquiry: from identifying and refining a research question, through experimentation and iteration, to testing and reflection. Communication will be expanded to foreground not only visual articulation but also critical positioning, documentation, and the ability to translate work across audiences (academic, industry, public). This will ensure both are visible threads running across all units rather than implied qualities.

2. Rebalancing the Pace of Early Units

The observation that Units 1 and 2 feel slower is helpful. I will review the sequencing to ensure students are encouraged to identify and articulate their research direction earlier, without sacrificing exploratory breadth. Introducing clearer interim decision points may help maintain momentum.

Embedding a more explicit Double Diamond structure (divergent exploration followed by convergent definition) could provide a shared framework for this pacing. This would support students in expanding their field of enquiry early on, before committing to a refined trajectory with sufficient time for development in later units.

3. Aligning Mini-Projects with Course Contexts

The suggestion to align mini-projects more explicitly with the thematic contexts outlined in the course aims is strong. I will explore how early briefs can act as structured probes into those contexts, helping students surface their interests and move towards a coherent research question. There is also real value in inviting industry practitioners to set or co-deliver selected mini-briefs. This would strengthen professional integration early in the year and potentially scaffold internship pathways.

4. Earlier Informal Collaboration

Introducing lower-stakes collaborative opportunities earlier in the course feels particularly important in a one-year format. I will consider embedding short, informal collaborative exercises in Units 1 and 2 to encourage cross-pollination of ideas and develop teamwork skills before the more formalised collaboration or internship pathways in Unit 3.

Note: I have not uploaded Eric’s materials in case he would like these to be confidential. You can visit his blog for details.

Review of teaching practice form Joana.pagesDownload
Posted in Theories, Policies and Practices | Leave a comment

TPP: Peer Review 2

Posted on 20th February 2026 by Joana Pereira

Carys Kennedy’s review of my teaching practice

Session/artefact to be observed/reviewed: Brand culture seminar
Size of student group: 60 students
Reviewee: Joana Pereira
Reviewer: Carys Kennedy

Part One

What is the context of this session/artefact within the curriculum? This session is part of a series of branding seminars, designed to contextualise branding in society, culture, competitive landscape and purpose. This series was delivered as part of the Major Project unit (Year 3), where students were asked to design two brand identities, each to respond and align to the United Nations Sustainable development Goals.

This session unpacks the meanings of culture signaling as individuals, ascribed and subscribed culture and finally how culture defines branding and vice versa. The session is punctuated by an initial exercise of assumptions and reality and ends with a group empathy mapping workshop, to help culture mapping brands and audiences.

How long have you been working with this group and in what capacity? I have worked with this cohort as a lecturer during Year 1 and Year 3.

What are the intended or expected learning outcomes? The session prepares students for the empathy mapping workshop, which is designed to encourage them to look beyond rigid brand audience demographics and produce a qualitative study of people subscribing to brands.  

What are the anticipated outputs (anything students will make/do)? The main output is an empathy map, to help students understand their audiences more deeply.

Are there potential difficulties or specific areas of concern? The intention is to mitigate students from defining audiences by generation (Z, Millennials, etc.), which can be quite reductive and lead to generic brand identities. It’s about understanding aspiration, social ‘tribes’ and tastes to help predict audience and brand behaviour.

How will students be informed of the observation/review? This session has been previously delivered and I will be sharing the slides, materials and session plan.

What would you particularly like feedback on? General feedback on the content, the style (which I tried to make quite informal) and how designing thinking was used to help defined brands rather than using traditional market research. 

How will feedback be exchanged? We have arranged for an online discussion.

Part Two

Thanks Joana for sharing the session plan and slide deck, which were developed for the Year 3 Major Project Unit. You asked for general feedback on the content, style, and how designing thinking was used to help defined brands rather than traditional market research.

We talked about the formality and structure of your session. You explained that you try to keep your sessions ‘informal’ but ‘meaty’, with thoughtful content, and lots of punctuation activities. You contrasted this to a more traditional 90-minute lecture model, with less interaction. We talked about how content can be robust and accessible at the same time, and that active learning techniques can support student learning. My impression is ver much that your approach is likely to be effective, and I asked you what tools you have to know if the approach is working. You explained that you already get ‘snap feedback’ from students, which is providing an evidence base that this is working.

Prompt question: Could you consider using Brookfields Four Lenses (Brookfield, 1995) to evaluate and reflect on your approach? And what literature might you draw upon to evidence the need for engaging, active learning approaches?

You also talked about the importance of your design practice in your teaching. You explained that your industry experience informs who you are as a lecturer. As such, you ensure that your lectures reflect developments in industry and seek to foster a ‘studio’ vibe where all perspectives are valued. 

For me, this connected with a few key concepts in the wider literature: 

  • How being a dual-professional or practitioner-teacher informs your practice (see Beaton, 2022; WonkHE, 2018)
  • The role of constructive alignment (see Biggs, 2003) and how your lectures are designed to align with the intended learning outcomes.
  • In Chapter 8, Orr and Shreeve (2017) write about studio culture, live briefs, and other ‘signature pedagogies’ which seem to relate to your practice and aims.

Prompt question: Do any of these concepts resonate with you? How does this inform your practice.

You asked for feedback about how designing thinking was used to help defined brands rather than using traditional market research. When we spoke, I sought clarification about this as I am not a subject specialist. You explained your decision to move away from quantitative, market research approaches to tapping into culture, emotion, and qualitative approaches. My impression is that this is highly appropriate given your industry knowledge, and also likely to be more relatable, playful, and interesting for students. With this in mind, it seems like a win-win – students learn about key concepts like empathy mapping and subcultures, moving away from designing solely for themselves – and this is approached with humour (the “London Fields” example) and care (cautioning against stereotyping).

We also spoke briefly about diversifying the brands you refer to, drawing upon international/non-Western materials, and considering decolonial approaches. This is something you’re very aware of and working towards in other units – and we also acknowledged the challenge of Western/Global North dominance. 

Prompt question: You commented that some educators take the view that students choose to study in the UK, and so should expect a ‘Western’ education. What are your thoughts on this?

I hope these notes are helpful, and give you an opportunity to reflect on the resources you shared with me. I have included some prompt questions (in bold) for you to reflect on. You don’t have to answer all the questions – just respond in Part 3 to what feels of interest following our discussion (up to 500 words).

Part Three

During our teaching practice review discussion, Carys introduced me to the concept of dual professionals, which strongly resonated with me and prompted me to reflect more critically on my academic identity. I recognise myself as a dual professional, bringing industry experience directly into the studio. This has become a defining aspect of my teaching approach.

Beaton (2021) argues that practitioners entering higher education often experience tensions between their established professional identities and emerging roles as educators. Whilst I have not experienced significant emotional challenges in my transition to academia, I recognise that such tensions are not unfamiliar to me; they are embedded within professional practice itself, particularly within the creative industries. This awareness has allowed me to reframe these tensions more productively, using my industry experience to inform teaching in a way that is purpose- and practice-driven, rather than purely academic.

However, reflecting on Beaton’s (2021) argument, I find myself questioning whether the emphasis should be placed solely on dual professionals adapting to academic culture. Instead, I would argue that the increasing focus on graduate employability within higher education highlights the need for a mindset shift in the opposite direction. Rather than positioning practitioner-teachers as needing to assimilate into traditional academic norms, there is a growing need for institutions to more fully embrace practice-informed approaches that respond to the realities of the contemporary employment landscape.

Having joined the course staff team post-pandemic, I became acutely aware of students’ lack of industry preparedness. This prompted me to restructure aspects of the curriculum with the intention to better prepare students for professional practice. Similarly, in my role as co-host of the Ladies, Wine & Design London chapter, where I bring together design agencies and practitioners for professional development and networking, I frequently hear industry leaders express concerns about graduates’ readiness for practice. These conversations have reinforced my commitment to aligning teaching with professional expectations, ensuring that students are equipped with the skills, confidence, and understanding required for industry.

The GuildHE (2018) report on practice-informed learning also supports this approach, highlighting that dual professionals can enhance the authenticity of learning by embedding real-world contexts into teaching, enabling students to develop both disciplinary knowledge and industry-relevant skills.

In addition to this, the positionality of my design practice has also shaped my academic approach. I primarily collaborate with organisations that facilitate social change and further culture, informing a teaching philosophy that foregrounds purpose, sustainability, and critical engagement with industry norms.

Reflecting more broadly, I find that I have managed to carve a niche where I combine design thinking and graphic design principles that bring about meaningful verbal and visual identities in branding. Though Beaton (2021) argues that dual professionals lack academic training, I do believe that a growth mindset can bridge the gap between academic- and industry-centric staff, and create opportunities for more productive exchange between both communities.

References

Beaton, F. (2021) How do I know who I am? Academic professional development, peer support, and identity for practitioners who teach. International Journal for Academic Development, 27(3), pp. 234–248. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1080/1360144X.2021.1910953 [Accessed on 18 March 2026]

GuildHE (2018) Practice-informed learning: The rise of the dual professional. London: GuildHE. Available at: https://www.improvingthestudentexperience.com/library/UG_documents/Practice-Informed_Learning-_Final_Nov_18.pdf [Accessed: 18 March 2026].

Materials provided for Carys to review:

  • Session plan
  • Session slides
GBI 2023_24 YR3 FMP WK7 SEMINAR CULTUREDownload
Review of teaching practice – Joana x CarysDownload
Posted in Theories, Policies and Practices | Leave a comment