Charlie Lewis PG Cert

Below are my reflections on the intervention which took place during the first year sewing skills workshops, occurring over 3.5 days during the Autumn term. Each technician teaches one pathway (30 students). The form group is split in half and learning sewing skills one week with a technician, pattern cutting with a tutor the other. 

Initially, I introduced the adaptability packs on the second day of the workshop. This wasn’t the best time to do so on reflection as it was only a half day. I was already struggling with student engagement and the amount of content we needed to cover in half a day. The tools were not used at all by the students over the 3.5 day workshop. I concluded I needed to introduce the packs and my intervention at the start of the first workshop day, when students were more engaged and open. This was research practice in action, carrying out research, discovering areas of improvement and adjusting accordingly.

After my reflection on the first attempt, I spoke to two colleagues who were teaching pathways that typically have students who are less experienced in garment construction. They agreed that they would be happy to introduce the packs and surveys to the second half of the group the following week and I briefed them on introducing the project and aims.  

When teaching my second cohort, I introduced the survey at the very beginning of the workshop, after taking the register. I explained my studies, the aim of the intervention and how helpful survey responses would be, whether students used the tools or not.  This allowed me to focus both myself and the students, as when I went on to explain the plan for the next 3.5 days, I could also tie in the relevance of the adaptability packs. In the first ‘run’, by introducing the packs on day 2, I realised this had reduced some chance of the cutting tools being used, as we had already cut out much of the fabric required. 

As I demonstrated the various sewing techniques I had the tools next to me, referring to and demonstrating with them and the wide range of applications of use. I noted that students could use them as they pleased to aid their sewing, not necessarily for the intended purpose. I found that students seemed reluctant to engage with the tools independently, perhaps viewing them as unnecessary. 

I felt some students may not have engaged out of pride. Students may not have wanted to appear as though they needed help, from myself or the tools. I felt this was particular to this half of the group and that there were some students who were very vocal about not needing the tools, vocal of their existing professional experience and were quite dismissive of the sewing demonstrations. Some of the behaviour felt quite disruptive and I believe did have an impact on students ability to be vulnerable and ask for help or feel confident in trying out the tools without judgment. 

 To try and provide encouragement I moved around the studio space, helping students at the machines. When I saw students struggling I then suggested different tools they could use that could aid their sewing, such as the magnetic seam guide, to help them remember where the seam allowances are and also keep stitches in straight, accurate lines. Many of them actually had their own equipment such as pins and unpickers. I didn’t see participants using them as tools when they were sewing, which on reflection, I think I would’ve encouraged them to use to gain more control. I did demonstrate using screwdrivers and clips to help guide the fabric and hold it together rather than using pins.

If I was to repeat this intervention I would do it in an interview format, and introduce the packs during a less stressful time, perhaps on a more one to one basis. Students receive only 3 sewing workshops from technicians during their time on the course, so this often feels very pressured, with lots of information to digest in very little time, with design tutorials, lectures and meetings scheduled at the same time or close to deadlines. We often feel we are competing for students’ focus and attention.

Ahmed, S.K. et al. (2025) ‘Using thematic analysis in qualitative research’, SSRN Electronic Journal, 6. doi:10.2139/ssrn.5222482.

Anon (2023) ‘consent-template-for-surveys ’. Milton Keynes: The Open University.

Home (2024) American Sewing Guild ASG. Available at: https://www.asg.org/sew-comfortably/ (Accessed: 28 September 2025). 

Braun, V. and Clarke, V. (2022) Thematic analysis: A practical guide. Los Angeles: SAGE.

Maloney, M.J. (2025) Fork for Cindy suspended in a silicone cap. London.

Opie, C. (2004) ‘Research procedures’, in Doing Educational Research. London: Sage, pp. 100–101.

Retro Claude (2020) Sewing with a Disability – making sewing more accessible, YouTube. Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RwKI-G-e05E (Accessed: 22 June 2025).

Sotvoldiyevna, J.M. (2024) “TEACHING SEWING TECHNIQUES TO STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES’, Western European Journal of Linguistics and Education, Volume 2(1), pp. 36-39.

Verma, G.K. and Beard, R.M. (1981) What is educational research: Perspectives on techniques of research. Aldershot: Gower.

Last week I introduced the adaptable sewing packs to my first year students on Wednesday morning. It didn’t go as smoothly as planned. I introduced the packs whilst students were at their machines sewing, and it was hard to tell whether the students were focusing on what I was saying or were distracted by the task at hand. 

I had the packs on the tables they were using, but no students engaged, despite it being a full group. I did find that the class I was teaching were the most capable sewers I have ever taught, and are also on a pathway that tends to have more experienced first years than others. This being said, it is difficult to oversee a class of 14 students and tend to their varied needs, whilst keeping a good pace and ensuring we cover all aspects of the workshop. I myself also forgot to keep reiterating the availability of the tools and their uses.

As no students engaged with the packs I had no responses on my survey which is concerning.  Luckily I am also teaching the second half of the form group this week. To improve chances of engagement I will be introducing the packs on the very first day and I will do some demonstrations with them. I have also reached out to 2 colleagues to request if they will participate by distributing the packs to their groups. 

The initial teaching week is usually quite overwhelming and exhausting, and we are very restricted by time. I hope that the second week of teaching will feel less chaotic and I will have time to introduce the tools in a more formal and consistent manner, to produce some survey responses. I will also look at requesting the surveys are completed on Friday morning to ensure students don’t leave before completing them.

I have been drafting and redrafting my survey after sending it out to both colleagues, fellow PGCert students and tutors. To draft the initial survey I researched government guidance around gender and disability in the context of data collection, lifting the categorisations of disability and gender into my survey.

Below is my initial survey which you can see is weighted towards longer, written responses and includes questions around gender identity and trans history. 

After attending Monday’s workshop with Carys and Federico, we discussed the collection of data and only collecting that which is necessary. I had initially felt it was best to collect as much information as possible to help inform my study, but realised that this can be invasive and unnecessary for participants, so removed my questions around trans history. 

I also wasn’t aware of the need for an additional consent form. I decided to incorporate this into my survey by adding it to the front page as I don’t want participants to feel overwhelmed by paperwork. I have used a statement with a check box to consent, as I want my responses to be as anonymous as possible, and used some statements around disability from the Open University resource ‘Consent template for surveys’ (2023).

I went on to edit the survey further, sharing with peers and tutors. I received some really helpful and differing feedback, from which I have ‘cherrypicked’ and moulded into my  survey. The survey takes a ‘funnel approach’ where I have left ‘more structured or pre-coded questions to a later stage’ (Opie, 2004). It was highlighted that many of the questions require written answers, rather than tick boxes, which may decrease student participation due to a range of factors, such as language differences, dyslexia, time constraints, engagement/focus. It was also highlighted that limiting some questions to checkboxes can also help improve clarity when analysing data.

I have now incorporated more tick-box responses, but retained some of the written answers, as I want students to have chance to express opinions by being less prescriptive or boundaried around their thoughts. Below is my final survey.

Anon (2023) ‘consent-template-for-surveys ’. Milton Keynes: The Open University.
Opie, C. (2004) ‘Research procedures’, in Doing Educational Research. London: Sage, pp. 100–101.

I spent today sewing the adaptable sewing packs with my colleague. They will contain the adaptable tools so with accessibility in mind we used a velcro fastening for the main bag, and then for the smaller pack (which contains the fabric clips, thimble and threader) we used a drawstring. I recognise that a drawstring is not the most accessible fastening, however we needed something that would close firmly without leaving gaps that these smaller items could escape from. I will reflect on ways to improve this for future students.

My intervention will likely produce data which is open to the ethnographic research approach, where I will be analysing both qualitative and quantitive data produced by the surveys, along with personal observations which can be analysed through descriptive research and thematic analysis. “Descriptive research involves a certain amount of interpretation of the meaning or significance of what is described. This process is often criticised on the grounds of bias towards the investigators subjective judgements and superficial impressions of phenomena.”(Page 58, Verma, Beard 1981). When producing resources and analysing data it is important that I consider my positionality as an able-bodied, female-identifying technician, my personal experience and external factors, which will influence both students experience and response to the surveys and tools, as well as my interpretation of the data.

I will use reflexive thematic analysis to interpret the data garnered through surveys and observations, as outlined by Braun and Clarke in ‘Thematic Analysis: A Practical Guide (2022)’ who offer up the analytic process below:

1. Dataset familiarisation
2. Data coding
3. Initial theme generation
4. Theme development and review
5. Theme refining, defining and naming
6. Writing up

…although I acknowledge that some elements of the process such as defining and naming themes may require further cycles of research before they can be affirmed.

In August 2025 I attended the Design and Disability exhibition at V&A South Kensington as part of my research. The exhibition offered new insight into assistive technology and ideas of how to introduce the adaptable tools to students, and gave context as to how disability has shaped design and innovation, for both disabled and able-bodied people.

I was curious about other research around sewing and disability, and found
Jamoliddinova Makhbuba Sotvoldiyevna’s article ‘Teaching Sewing Techniques to Students with Disabilities’. The article presents the research as guidance, born from their observational research. It offers up advice to the reader of effective methods of teaching sewing to disabled students many of which I have already considered for my research or use in my practice. “It is important for teachers to be patient and understanding, and to adapt their teaching methods to meet the specific needs of each student. This may involve using different types of sewing equipment, such as adaptive scissors, sewing aids, or modified sewing machines. It may also involve breaking down the sewing process into smaller, more manageable steps, and providing additional support and assistance as needed.” (Sotvoldiyevna 2024)

A colleague visited the Fashion department at Ravensbourne University, and was shown the adapted sewing machines for students who are unable to operate the sewing machine pedal by using their feet. The machine is modified to enable the user to operate using their upper body by moving the pedal to the top of the machine. This has pushed my outlook on the studio space further and highlighted that our department should advocate further for prospective disabled students needs.

For my ARP I referred back to my intervention exploring gender and disability and have narrowed down the aims by focusing upon whether adaptable tools can assist students in their learning.

The tools were initially used to teach and assist a colleague’s return to sewing after experiencing limb loss and physical injury. After my colleague engaged so positively with the pack I put together, I felt these tools could be utilised in the studios and offered up to first year students in their sewing skills workshops at Central Saint Martins. This led me to question, “Can adaptable sewing tool packs improve student development of sewing skills and foster a sense of inclusion?”

The purpose of the study is to analyse attempts at creating a more inclusive student experience and development of skills, and whether this has a positive impact. If not, why? What could be improved? Can adaptable sewing tool packs improve student development of sewing skills and foster a sense of inclusion? In the journal article ‘Teaching Sewing Techniques to Students with Disabilities’ by Jamoliddinova, Makhbuba and Sotvoldiyevna, they state: “Students with disabilities encompass a wide spectrum of abilities and challenges. Some may face physical limitations, while others may experience cognitive or sensory impairments. Recognizing these differences is crucial for designing effective teaching strategies that address individual needs. In the context of sewing, educators must be attuned to the unique challenges students may encounter, such as difficulties with hand-eye coordination, sensory sensitivities, or challenges in following sequential instructions.”

The action will occur during the first technical sewing workshops the students attend at university. I will be trying to create more accessibility to the sewing machines and other technical equipment, by creating packs with adaptive tools to aid in sewing clothing for differently abled students. These tools will be open to all students to access as they are of benefit to everyone. I want to see if this improves accessibility and engagement with sewing skills by disabled and neurodivergent students as well as the wider student body.

I feel these tools would be useful to all students in encouraging them to use aids. There can be a discourse amongst sample machinists that using tools to assist in sewing is unprofessional and a ‘proper’ machinist does not use such tools. I want to question that narrative and give students of all abilities the option to try new, perhaps non-traditional, approaches to garment construction. I find that many students are deterred by the sewing/technical element of the course and leave tasks they deem ‘difficult’ to the technicians, as the garment construction is not graded and can therefore be deemed as not important.

I will gather qualitative data through surveys and I will interpret it through thematic analysis. I must be wary of my own biases and position of power as a specialist technician, white, able-bodied, cisgender woman and how this can impact the generation and interpretation of data. As stated by Ahmed et al (2025) “researchers may present themes as “emerging” from the data without acknowledging their role in constructing them, which risks obscuring the interpretative process.” I will try to reduce the impact of my positionality by introducing the survey to students in a deferential way, emphasising the help it will provide me, encouraging honesty and emphasising the anonymity of the surveys. I need to remain conscious of my own potential biases when analysing the data.

Ahmed, S.K. (2025) Steps of Thematic Analysis, Journal of Medicine, Surgery, and Public Health. Science Direct. Available at: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2949916X25000222#tb10010 (Accessed: 22 Sept 2025)

My project question should be open, and not trying to create an outcome I desire. When writing my survey I will be wary of asking leading questions and offer up an open space for critique and discussion. The aim is to test whether these packs actually have any impact and how students engage and interact with them. I am conscious that the studio environment and its lack of accessibility/adaptability could be deterring students who are differently abled and I believe we as technicians can make changes to create a more inclusive teaching environment.