Introduction
My research focussed on the primary collection method, a focus group, collecting a large amount of qualitative information. This information is then further supplemented by a very simple three-question follow-up survey intended to quantify the core aims of the project. The focus group took up a total time of one and a half hours and consisted of 6 participants out of 11 who were invited to participate. These students represented a range of courses and levels, but were primarily MA-level students with a higher range of students from one particular course – this spread covers my typical range of termly students. Although the number of students in attendance was lower than many of the other groups on the pgcert course, it is in line with the small amount of students I work with, that being said I am aware that from the small sample size I am unable to make definite conclusions.
As stated within the participant information form, the “…responses will be analysed thematically alongside phenomenological analysis.” The aim here is to be able to recognise patterns and themes to address systematically, but, equally important to me here is how these themes are experienced and perceived by the students, attempting to focus on their lived experience within the lab setting for a greater understanding and enhancement of my self-awareness. Through this exploration and analysis I aim to uncover ‘Blind Spots’ as referred to in the Johari Window Model (Communication Theory, 2025) (see Figure 1). These blind spots are knowledge that is accessible to me through the collective of the group but is unknown to me without integration. In addition to revealing my blind spots, it is equally important that I can identify ‘Hidden Areas’, these hidden areas are categorised as information that is known by me and is unknown to others (ibid). Within the context of my ARP, this is critical as it allows me to see areas that are lacking in obvious communication – crucial in the production of intended learning/teaching materials.
Figure 1. Skill Packs (2025) Johari Window Model.
Initial Perspectives
To first tackle the hidden areas, when beginning my focus group I gave out a copy of my proposed learning pathway document to each of my students and gave them 10 minutes to independently or as a collective to review the material given to them. The reasoning here was to see if this flow felt natural and made intrinsic sense – rather than being led by prompting. The use case for this document is always to be supplemented by an explanation, but this initial exploration would allow me to identify areas of restriction, or poor flow, similar to a wind tunnel (see Figure 2). Within wind tunnels, we can visualise how an intended design allows either for a smooth linear flow or areas that spark turbulence, resistance or difficulty.
Figure 2. Paul Singh Selhi (2014) Linear / Smooth Flow vs. Turbulent Flow.
During the ten minutes, I encouraged students to view the document and to interact with it as if they had just begun their technical journey, followed by prompts to ask, circle or highlight any areas of confusion. To my delight the students made it known that the document made a lot of sense within the flow, but did highlight some other issues that jumped out to them immediately – such as initial questions that felt reparative, for example, questions 4 & 5: “Why is this project important to you?” and “What inspired you to start this project?”, followed by suggestions to condense the potential overlap into one question or to provide more short-form specific individual questions. Regardless, the main flow and construction of the document were clear, or at least I missed any of what Morris (2018) would consider as ‘warning lights’; comments that often act as indicators highlighting areas where effective learning or practice may not be taking place.
In contrast to the document flow, one of the main general concerns raised that came up time and time in different forms, or ‘warning lights’ (ibid), was comments on the accessibility of the dense amount of text. This was less about the text written as prompts, such as questions and structure but instead for students to respond, as highlighted through responses such as: “I’m really dyslexic and I find writing my ideas really difficult but I can draw my ideas really well… so it’s really nice that there’s one page with drawing. Drawing. I would say that for me is like key.”
The clear response here was the need for alternative responses such as more options for tick boxes along with being able to draw: “I love the tick boxes, but I think the one thing where I look at it and it scares me a bit is that it does involve a lot of writing.”. A clear example of this was in response to questions 1 and 3: “What is your project about?” or “What will your project look like or do when it’s finished?” In hindsight, it’s clear that a question asking what a project will look like is screaming for a drawn response, as said by one student: “Yeah… I wan’t to draw that.” The group suggested taking this a step further and allowing many if not nearly all the questions to be answered in this way, or further to be supplemented with research imagery, sketches and technical diagrams – and I couldn’t agree more.
I found it very easy to be able to consider each of these questions to be answered within a written response, however in hindsight believe that it would be a lot richer to have a myriad of responses and media – especially when considering the background of the students, as UAL is a creative institution and not an engineering school, something that is easily lost when I compare teaching materials within this area at other sources. With this in mind, I would like the document in future to be much more like an apiary frame, something that acts as a structure to be built into, and not a rigid instructional guide that allows for only one method of success. That being said I am really happy that students identified areas they liked such as the visual flowchart and tick boxes, and so aim to amplify this throughout the document.
Overall the response from the students regarding the general concept of the document was very positive along with the flow of the structure (initial information, consultation, project log). One student even proposed the concept for the second part of the document before we’d completed talking about the first section, this was a great indicator of success for me as it highlighted the need and wanting for a greater support structure and plan as shown here:
“Student: I wonder if, because I would feel maybe like this is like an amazing thing to us to get our ideas like out as well (refering to part 1 of the show document). But then I would wonder if like to save you time, having to like repeat yourself.
Whether, like, having a plan of action afterwards, like, written in a similar way, would be quite good in terms of, like, what you need to do now is you need to sign up for these, this, this, this, read this, this, this guide.
Elliott: A hundred per cent. So, thats it, that’s the aim for the part two. So, when we go through the skills, because that’s going to be a conversation, it’ll be like, we’ll identify the skills there and then.
If that’s the case, the next one is literally, what equipment do you need? What workshops do you need? And you’ll see there [are] tick boxes and orders for them. So the idea is that if we identify the workshops, we can book them there and then, and then it’s done.
Student: We know that that’s organized, we know it’s in our diaries, we know we’re going to hit our deadlines.”
There were some concerns, however, of the length of the document being potentially intimidating, however, the students in the focus group themselves were not phased but did indicate other students may have difficulty, something I foreshadowed myself and would like to tackle with future iterations as written in my post titled: “My Learning Pathway Document | ARP”. Students from one particular course stated this was a great opportunity for them to tackle elements that their course required them to submit anyway – which allowed them to tackle these aspects early but also receive a technical perspective, which they suggested would speed up the process of getting started on their projects: “This is our plan for our portfolio basically.”
When asked “Does the document feel approachable and student-friendly?”, the same issues regarding writing were raised, but did highlight how they liked the use of checkboxes, and other visual ways of conveying information, again an element I agree with and something that aligns with my inclusivity aims – again elements covered in my post titled: “My Learning Pathway Document | ARP”.
Organisation, Tracking and Accountability
One of the core aims of the project was to create more student accountability and to create a supportive structure and environment for students to be able to tackle the project themselves without feeling lost or overwhelmed by the huge amount of options and starting points available to them – which in turn frees up my time to produce better teaching materials. To do this I focused on refining a universal workflow through a range of created and curated tutorials/guides along with an entire curriculum of specialised workshops – With the development of this document acting as a modular and customisable learning pathway, highlighting a route to success through the resources already available, but equally supporting experimentation and exploration. To measure the success of the implementation of these aims and or highlight areas for improvement I asked the following questions:
- Does the document provide tools or structure that would help you stay organised and accountable?
- The project log is designed to help you break tasks into manageable steps and track progress. Would this work for you? Why or why not?
- Do you think the flowchart planning section would make it easier to visualise and plan your project’s functionality or user journey?
In response to the first question, I received a resoundingly positive response, that created a dialogue around how students felt this was a great way into a project, even if that meant they didn’t have something in mind to begin with. For example, one student spoke about how they found themselves starting their project by attending the workshops, which allowed them to discover the technical space and ultimately led to them coming back with an idea for a project: “…I did all the workshops last year before I even started this project, and I felt like the order was that I found out about the DLL, then I did all the workshops I could physically get my hands on, and then that inspired me later to come back to this project.” I believe that this document has the potential to act as a catalyst for idea creation, by providing structure to the resources available – or with informed consent showing future students the projects that have been made, along with the journey that ultimately led them to the outcome, providing a history but also an acknowledgement to the many diverse ways of coming to an outcome, which could potentially instil a greater sense of confidence at early stages of consultations and enquiries.
This was followed up by suggestions to hold a sort of opening day event that would allow students to discover the area as a whole, then to be able to use the document as a first step into coming up with or supporting the idea creation process – this was followed up by a separate discussion on how even just having all the resources available in one document was powerful and useful in of itself. One difficulty they mentioned about their BA is that all the resources are online. With universal agreement that these online resources are hard to find and navigate. This document was seen as a way to circumnavigate those issues, providing a clear and structured alternative. This is a poignant issue that I know both staff and students often face but are limited to using. The students further suggested that to make this even more useful, the implementation of small QR codes could be added for quick navigation.
It was incredibly positive to hear that, as I did worry that I was trying to do too much in one document and that I should focus perhaps on a separate guide or way of presenting things available. I do think that regardless as a technical department the feedback received does indicate that a printed or tactile guide would be useful for new students and as one student pointed out this could then lead them to come back with an idea and feel it was within reach to achieve it.
One of the more disappointing things I’ve heard from staff since working at LCF is stuff like “Oh that would be too complicated for our students”, I can’t help but feel that if academics and students knew more clearly the resources and support available to them, that ambitious projects might not be killed off so early on, but instead refined to a more approachable manner – which brings to mind questions on how failure is considered, something in a technical space that is supposed to be embraced. Nonetheless, thematically I think this alone highlights how students value a clear and centralised structure that the document provides, along with the potential benefits of acting as an entry point for idea development and that it could even provide a level of confidence, and feasibility. I think if this document can help reduce feelings of being lost or reduce the overwhelm of available resources then that can only have a positive effect, as one student highlighted, even having a copy of what it was you’re trying to do and the steps taken and knowing that a technician has gone through it and confirming that it is achievable, would be a massive relief as students highlighted many moments of self-doubt especially when explaining the project to academics who did not have the subject-specific knowledge, however, it is worth noting that it became clear that depending on the course you were on, the outlook and technical understanding from tutors deviated from one course to the next.
Regarding the use of the log, I was worried that some students would be against everything being so controlled or structured, however, I was surprised to get responses such “No, good. Good. We need it, we need it, we all need it. [The group vocally agreed in support]”. Further, my intended use of the log, and the primary benefit for students to engage with it, was to be able to capture and highlight failure as a positive thing, so it was really rewarding to hear students give direct examples of this: “when I was doing my portfolio (submission), I had no memory of how many times I went back[wards]. And, um, in my initial like draft portfolio, one of the feedbacks I got was ‘add failures’. I’m like, I sure did have a lot of them, but I don’t remember them.”
However, this did highlight multiple paths as spoken about in a previous post, regarding the level of support sought after as some students had worked very independently and with external support/tutors, who of course noted that the project log for example would be very useful for students who have engaged with the entire process but would be less useful for when seeking a quick resolution to an issue they are trying to resolve. I completely agree with this, and have no issues with these types of interactions, as they have no overlap with the issues I face day to day – such as not taking responsibility for their projects. I still think it is positive to have a record of what is covered within these types of interactions and that there is scope for these interactions to be more applicable to both parties.
Supporting Diverse Learning Styles
Drawing on my own lived experiences with ADHD, I recognised the gaps in educational resources, particularly in supporting organisation and accountability. This situated perspective enabled me to create tools that address these challenges in a way that feels intuitive and empowering for students who may share similar struggles. While my own experiences provided a starting point, the iterative development of this document has been shaped by the voices of people like Anne Betterige, author, SpLD mentor and assessor (Betteridge, 2024). Along with the huge amount of resources available and the perspectives of others. Their feedback has been invaluable in refining the balance between structured guidance and flexibility. This document is my attempt to challenge traditional academic structures that I came into contact with that I found was rigid, linear approaches to learning, offering instead a flexible, student-centered framework that acknowledges diverse ways of processing information and achieving success. This resulted in the document, especially the second and third sections, that focus on practical progression and knowledge building through a very structured approach (compared to the first section which is primarily about declaring the scope of the project). Through the use of tick boxes, list building, documentation of important elements to aid in memory, visual aids, smaller broken down deadlines and equally if not most importantly accountability to a technician through the use of negotiated milestones, goals and opportunities for regular reviews; along with being known supportive tools for students with ADHD (Betteridge, 2024; Advance HE, 2025; CAST, 2024; Zelenka, 2017) all of these were highly supported by the students during my focus group: “Well yeah, it is good because this gives us the framework to then do our creative process.”
This is an element of the project I am very proud of and aligns with the goal I set for myself when I started the job: Creating a technical space that I would have loved to have worked in as a student. As part of my focus group, I shared my own situated knowledge:
“Before we dive into the discussion, I’d like to share a bit about why I created this document. As someone who has personal experience with ADHD, I understand how challenging it can be to manage projects, track progress, and stay accountable. This document is designed not only to provide structure but also to adapt to individual needs, offering a balance of guidance and flexibility. I’d love to hear how you feel this might work for you, especially if you identify as neurodiverse or have specific learning preferences. [clarification provided explicitly clarifying that no one is in any means expected to out themselves] I am also aware that as the number of students accessing wearable tech increases, the time dedicated to individual student support and learning will decrease.” (Appendix A, p.1)
To assess how my students felt about the implementation of these strategies into the document and workflow, I asked the set of questions below. In addition, I also had conversations with students who’d openly shared their thoughts – along with their personal experiences with ADHD.
- Does the document balance independent exploration with direct support (such as workshops or consultations) in a way that works for your learning style?
- Are tools like checklists, flowcharts, or visual resources helpful for breaking down complex tasks? Would you find these useful in your workflow?
- How comfortable are you using online guides, video tutorials, or similar resources independently?
- Is there anything that could make these resources more engaging or easier to use?
In response to the first question, students highlighted that the document served as a communication tool, which I suppose it is. The students explained that it allowed them to convey they ideas and objectives whilst allowing a technician to understand and support by suggesting resources such as specific workshops and additional guides.
Student: “It’s a communication tool, isn’t it?”
Elliott: “Yes.”
Student: “…[So] that you know what direct us in terms of like, here’s a guide, like learn this… Come to this workshop”
I think this is a great way of thinking about the document, as it further provides a way of explaining the project to others but also refining the scope of the project if they haven’t already – whilst actively testing if the project is being communicated effectively, a key element within good design practice.
Straight after asking the second question I received a round of “Yes”, but was pleased to hear the following:
“Student: Yes… I don’t know about you guys, but with a lot of these projects, I found it very overwhelming being like, I will never achieve this project. I’m fully aware that this is too big. And then if it was broken down into little tiny tasks, we’re like, hey, wait a second, that’s very achievable.”
In addition to directly answering the question, I noticed something particularly interesting that I hope to address: the lack of confidence in self-reflection. This lack of confidence is a common issue among my students and one I can completely relate to. It may stem from exploring a discipline outside their usual field of study, misinterpreting its complexities, or the pervasive mindset in online communities where beginner-level information on electronics and programming often suggests, “If you don’t do it this way, you’re doing it wrong.”
Confidence is something that as an educator I feel a bit helpless to, and makes me uncomfortable, as I feel it is my job to instill confidence within them – something I actively try to do. However I feel like I only really get to see a confident perspective on the tail end of the projects, as the students start to see everything coming together, and if this document manages to challenge that notion and potentially instil confidence through structure I would be incredibly happy with that. Overall the responses I received indicate that the use of visual aids and organisational tools are perceived as valuable for breaking down complex tasks into manageable and approachable steps – hopefully enhancing the project planning and even the reduction of overwhelm.
The answers to the third question were simple and swift with the students indicating they were pleased with the online guides available to them on the Digital Learning Lab Sharepoint page, stating that they liked them but had only recently discovered them when I had to take unexpected annual leave, although signposted prior, students admitted that was something that was often forgotten about when direct support was so accessible. To me this further supported the need for these agreed goals to be documented and reflected upon, as when they are used – they are clearly of benefit. Additionally, students preferred ones that were less word-heavy and had lots of visual elements like screenshots and videos. With this in mind, I have recently updated one of my guides to contain a higher visual-to-text ratio (See Figure 3) using elements such as animated GIFS, videos and annotated screenshots. I agree that the page feels much more accessible, but equally, the time taken to create the guide was substantially more. I hope this new document allows me more time to continue producing higher-quality content.
Figure 3. Digital Learning Lab Sharepoint Site, A Visual Upgrade To Guides.
An additional aspect that cannot be understated is the reflection on time management, the document well not specifically targeted at precise time management and instead more advanced planning does however have some elements that attempt to do this such as the agreed targets, workshop planning etc. I didn’t intend to create a schedule as I thought that it may become too invasive as I didn’t want to feel I was pushing too much onto the students however the feedback I got back supported the addition of further time planning, and in hindsight to my own experiences that makes a lot of sense. One student for example pointed out that:
“…if you narrow it down, like the main idea, it’s really useful for people who are neurodivergent, because you can basically, forget within a second and get so immersed into another task and another part of the project and another part of the project that you forget what was the supposed outcome. (Group Agrees)”
One student even proposed the inclusion of a blank templated timetable that could be used to help forward plan their projects: “Yeah, yeah, like a blank one… because all of our projects… [are]… Different.” I think this is a really good idea, which if done carefully would allow a sort of pace to be set, for example, it could be colour-coded to correspond at what point the project should be in such as prototyping, refining, testing, etc. I think this would be a great addition to any students but as pointed out by the group could be particularly supportive to neurodivergent students; this further aligns with the flipped classroom model, where students can engage with learning materials at their own pace and utilise class time for deeper discussion, problem-solving, and collaborative activities. It also emphasises the importance of regular check-ins to provide support and guidance as needed, while maintaining flexibility to accommodate individual student needs and project timelines. As pointed out by a different student, this timetable could be used to plan and visualise planned interim deadlines or for 1-to-1 tutorials to be used to greater effect such as for accountability – a popular and recommended strategy for those with ADHD: “…because if I know that I have a tutorial in a week, then I will work towards it so that I have something to show.” Although situated around neurodivergence in this particular example, the response suggests that scheduled check-ins can serve as motivating factors for students to maintain consistent progress, again aligning with the flipped classroom model, where regular check-ins and deadlines can help students stay on track and maintain momentum in their learning.
Scaffolded Learning & Flipped Classroom Models
As students did not use the document throughout their term (as discussed in depth within a previous post), unfortunately, I feel it becomes very difficult to truly assess the success of the scaffolded learning and flipped classroom model without its implementation and feedback regarding the perceived experience. However, the student’s feedback offers valuable insights into the anticipated strengths and limitations of the document through the lens of its proposed structure and tools along with the alignment of their individual learning preferences and needs. I believe that the range of student feedback and analysis within this document, it clearly shows a desire and attitude for a greater level of structure that can assist in supporting independent learning. Be that through an enhanced level of confidence, or by reducing barriers through a highly considered accessible design and structure, or even just simply an enhanced and documented planning that allows students to make better use of the resources already available to them.
An important aspect of the scaffolded learning structure and flipped classroom approach is to be able to reduce the reliance on myself to free up my time from low-level and repetitive tasks, to be used better in leading group sessions or tackling complex problems (Harvard University, 2024; Larcara, 2014; Stanier, 2015; The Bell Foundation, 2024). I believe that the additional planning that this document provides would also allow me to better harness the overlapping nature of the student projects to appropriately lay out opportunities for peer-to-peer learning, further enhancing knowledge whilst also providing a more supportive and social classroom environment. During questions related to support with creating a flowchart, students pointed out that it would be nice to have full group sessions:
“Elliott: Would you prefer to attempt the flowchart independently with a guide or collaboratively with a technician?
Student: Yeah, as a group. Yeah. For sure. (whole group agrees in response to this student.)
Elliott: as a, like a full group?
Student: I think anyone that’s doing wearable tech this term, come for a flowchart session. We’ll all brainstorm. Also the peer-to-peer thing can be really helpful.
Elliott: That’s a really, really great point.”
I think this is something really important to highlight as, as time has gone on, I’ve always thought to myself there were not enough students around to make this a worthwhile endeavour but I think this shows quite the opposite and that even small groups would be better than purely being independent, as it creates an opportunity for collaboration and knowledge sharing which should all be considered tools within my arsenal. So far this is not something I have promoted but the general structure of the lab and the closeness of the students this year have shown me how positive of an effect this can have – so will make an active point to organise these sessions in the future. Although there may not be a definitive goal as set out by the student – I think that even an advertised day/morning/afternoon dedicated to wearable tech students could get more people actively working in the space which could ultimately lead to more peer-to-peer learning and support – effectively assisting in the aims of reducing technician dependence. This further aligns with the flipped classroom model, which emphasises active learning and collaborative activities (Harvard University, 2024; Larcara, 2014).
Overall, the feedback suggests that the scaffolded and flipped approaches within the proposed document have strong potential to enhance autonomy and teaching efficiency within not just my technical area, but could easily be applied to other areas to support autonomy, accountability and engagement. If you wish to learn more about the design considerations supported by these pedagogical methodologies please read the post “My Learning Pathway Document | ARP” which goes into depth about these implementations.
Focus Group Hindsight
In hindsight, two things I wish I had done were, firstly engage more with resources specifically around focus groups in the sense of how I can get the most out of them and different techniques, some great resources I’ve only come across when writing up and thinking “Why didn’t I read this a month ago!”. Secondly, was give individuals time to respond to the questions independently, for example, giving out a Q&A after hearing the pitch or just reviewing the document, I believe would have revealed more information and insights that I could have used to greater effect for analysis. Although I did collect a lot of individual responses as shown within this document, equally a lot of my feedback would often be answered by an individual and agreed upon by the rest of the group. This of course did rotate to get a range of responses – but even if the answers had been the same written, I think it would have revealed more specific areas that could have been addressed. Equally though as one of my students told me: “Captain Hindsight is the worst superhero of all time” and couldn’t agree more. Nevertheless, the experience has been incredibly valuable and all the prep in the world would not replace the experience of being out of my comfort zone, running a group session where my work is the focus instead of theirs, which still didn’t go the way I’d anticipated it would have regardless. I hope that the lessons I’ve learned will be invaluable in developing my teaching practice further, along with my upcoming MA in addition to the confidence that comes along with doing something out of your comfort zone for the first time.
Supplementary Quantitative Survey
Although the range of data is very small with a total of 6 participants, I believe that the implementations show an overwhelming support for the changes I have made throughout the term and changes that I will continue to make into the next. Although not strictly necessary is positive to see that the follow-up results matched what I was expecting from my qualitative connection method (See Figures 4, 5 & 6).
Figure 4. Survey Response to Question One.
Figure 5. Survey Response to Question Two.
Figure 6. Survey Response to Question Three.
Conclusion
To conclude, the feedback gathered from the student focus group has led to valuable insights into the perceived strengths and limitations of the proposed learning pathway document. The incredibly positive feedback to the structured approach, and especially in the use of visual aids, checklists, and time planning, provides a clear demonstration that there is value in the proposed framework – particularly for complex and long-term projects. While there is a clear need for greater visual accessibility, and the inclusion of the highlighted time management tools it’s clear that the underlying principles of scaffolded learning and the flipped classroom, have the potential to enhance both autonomy and efficiency. I will reflect on all of the feedback I have received as I continue to create and implement the next iteration of the project to create learning environments that better support future students whilst developing technical projects.
Bibliography:
Advance HE (2025) Education For Mental Health Toolkit – Inclusivity ADHD | Advance HE, Advance HE. Available at: https://www.advance-he.ac.uk/teaching-and-learning/curricula-development/education-mental-health-toolkit/social-belonging/inclusivity-adhd (Accessed: 24 January 2025).
Betteridge, A. (2024) ‘Interview Conducted On Zoom, Re: ADHD in Technical Education’.
CAST (2024) The Goal Of UDL: Learner Agency. CAST Inc. Available at: https://www.cast.org/products-services/resources/2017/udl-tips-fostering-expert-learners (Accessed: 24 January 2025).
Communication Theory (2025) The Johari Window Model, Communication Theory. Available at: https://www.communicationtheory.org/the-johari-window-model/ (Accessed: 14 January 2025).
Harvard University (2024) Flipped Classrooms | The Derek Bok Center For Teaching And Learning, Harvard University. Available at: https://bokcenter.harvard.edu/flipped-classrooms (Accessed: 24 January 2025).
Larcara, M. (2014) ‘Benefits of the Flipped Classroom Model’, pp. 132–144. doi: 10.4018/978-1-4666-4987-3.CH007.
Morris, D. (2018) ‘Beyond Satisfaction’, Handbook of Quality Assurance for University Teaching. 1st Edition. Routledge, pp. 304–316. doi: 10.4324/9781315187518-23.
Paul Singh Selhi (2014) Linear / Smooth Flow vs. Turbulent Flow. YouTube. Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jkiv5r4Wq1g (Accessed: 14 January 2025).
Skill Packs (2025) Johari Window Model. Skill Packs. Available at: https://www.skillpacks.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/johari-window-model.jpg (Accessed: 14 January 2025).
Stanier, C. (2015) ‘Scaffolding in a Higher Education Context’, in. Available at: https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:111127539.
The Bell Foundation (2024) Scaffolding – The Bell Foundation, The Bell Foundation. Available at: https://www.bell-foundation.org.uk/resources/great-ideas/scaffolding/ (Accessed: 24 January 2025).
Zelenka, V. (2017) ‘Universal Interventions for Students With ADHD—and All Students’, Kappa Delta Pi Record, 53(1), pp. 37–40. doi: 10.1080/00228958.2017.1264820.
Appendix A: