This webinar helped me understand the module learning outcomes in a much more practical way. Rather than seeing them as abstract assessment criteria, I can use them as a checklist for what I actually need to demonstrate through my Critical Report and Studio Practice.

One of the most useful points was the distinction between formative and summative assessment. Formative opportunities, such as the Panel Review, are there to help develop and “unstick” the project, whereas the final submissions are assessed against the learning outcomes. This means I need to make sure the development of my project visibly demonstrates those outcomes rather than simply producing a strong-looking final design.

Moving Beyond Collecting Research

The discussion of Bloom’s Taxonomy was particularly useful. At Master’s level, it is not enough to simply remember, understand or present information. The project needs to demonstrate analysis, evaluation and creation.

For my project, this means I need to move beyond collecting information about autism, travel and accessibility. I now need to compare different forms of evidence, identify patterns and contradictions, make judgements about what is important, and use this to develop my own design response.

LO3: Analyse

This feels particularly relevant to where I am now.

I have gathered academic literature, primary research from autistic adults and psychologists, secondary data and examples of existing airport accessibility provision. The next stage is to bring these together rather than continuing to treat them as separate pieces of research.

I need to ask:

• Where do different sources agree?
• Where do experiences differ?
• Which barriers appear repeatedly?
• What is already being addressed?
• What remains unresolved?
• What can graphic design realistically respond to?

This is where my research starts becoming an argument rather than simply a collection of information.

LO5: Imagine

The outcome around developing innovative ideas and embracing risk reminded me that I should not settle too quickly on the airport app.

The app can remain one possibility, but I should experiment with different ways design could respond to the barriers I identify. This could include digital tools, visual communication, journey planning, wayfinding, communication systems or interventions that work alongside existing airport services.

The important thing is demonstrating exploration before deciding which direction is strongest.

LO6: Make

I also need to demonstrate the process of making and iteration, rather than jumping from research to one polished final outcome.

For me, this could involve:

Research → initial ideas → experiments → prototypes → feedback/testing → changes → further prototype → final response

This makes the experimentation and decision-making part of the assessed work.

LO8: Design

This learning outcome was particularly important: the final solution should show its strategic journey and a clear relationship between form and function.

This connects directly to something I took from the previous webinar. Every significant part of my final design should have a reason for existing.

If I design a particular feature, interaction or visual system, I should be able to trace it backwards to evidence from my research.

This means the final design becomes the conclusion of the research process.

Context and Communication

The webinar also reinforced that my Critical Report is a contextual review, not simply an account of what I made.

It needs to establish where my research sits within the wider context of autism, accessible design, international travel and existing airport provision. I also need to establish my own position as a designer within this area.

This is particularly relevant to my growing interest in accessible and inclusive design and creating more neuroinclusive experiences and spaces.

LO10: Manage

Project management is also part of the assessment. I therefore need to evidence how I am organising and directing the project myself.

My research maps, planning, changing research question, decisions to narrow the subject, interview process, reflection and future testing can all demonstrate this. Changes in direction are not necessarily a problem if I can show why I made them.

Where This Leaves My Project

I think I am reaching an important transition point. I have spent a significant amount of time understanding the subject and gathering evidence. The next stage is not necessarily more general research.

I now need to analyse what I already have, identify the gap, begin experimenting with possible design responses, and document how the research influences each decision.