For this project, I’m collecting data in a few different ways, rather than relying on just one method. My aim here is to use a triangulation approach, where different methods are used to cross-check findings and strengthen their validity (Creswell, 2014). Mixed or multi-method approaches like this give both breadth and depth of information, which is especially useful when research aims to both teach and generate practical guidance.
Student Feedback forms
One of my main tools will be student feedback forms completed after the workshop. (Link to example form) These will focus on what students feel they learned, what surprised them, and how useful they found the workshop overall. I’ll also be asking for feedback on my approach as a facilitator, so I can reflect critically on how the session was delivered. Student feedback is widely used in education research as a way of understanding learning experiences directly from the learner’s perspective (Nicol and Macfarlane-Dick, 2006). It allows students to reflect on their own learning, while also helping me to identify what worked well and what could be improved. In the context of this project, their feedback will be crucial in understanding whether the workshop actually increased awareness around nuances in lighting different skin tones.
Written Reflections on the Skin Tone Tests
Alongside the general feedback forms, students will also be asked to write short reflections specifically during the IRE (exposure) lighting tests (Link to example form). This will include their impressions of how lighting affected different skin tones, as well as where they perceive their own skin tone to sit on the Monk Skin Tone Scale. Written reflection is commonly used in qualitative research because it allows participants to describe their experiences in their own words, rather than being limited to fixed survey answers (Braun and Clarke, 2006). These reflections should give me more detailed insight into how students interpret what they’re seeing on camera, and how their understanding evolves throughout the testing process.
Footage from the Lighting Tests
Another key data source will be the actual footage produced during the lighting tests. This visual material is essential because my project is fundamentally about how skin tones respond to light on camera. Practice-based research often relies on creative outputs as data in their own right, not just as final outcomes (Smith and Dean, 2009). By analysing this footage later, I’ll be able to compare how different lighting approaches, filters and exposure levels visually affect different skin tones. This also allows students’ practical experimentation to directly feed back into the teaching resources I’m building.
My Own Observations and Documentation
Finally, I’ll be collecting observations from the workshop itself, along with photographs of students working. This includes noting how students interact with the equipment, how confident they seem when adjusting lighting and where they appear uncertain or curious. Reflective observation is a common feature of practitioner research, especially in education and creative disciplines, because it allows the researcher to critically evaluate their own teaching practice in real time (Dancis, Coleman & Ellison, 2023).
These observations will help contextualise the student feedback and the footage — for example, if students struggled with a particular test setup, I may see that reflected both in their written responses and in the images they produce. Using all of these methods together helps build a more complete picture of what the workshop achieves. Feedback forms capture students’ voices, written reflections capture personal interpretation, footage shows visual outcomes, and my own observations provide a teaching-focused perspective. Combining qualitative and visual data is especially valuable in creative education, where learning is not always easily measured through numbers alone (Gray and Malins, 2004). Together, these data sources will help me evaluate not only whether the workshop works, but how and why it works and how it might be improved in future iterations.
References
Braun, V. and Clarke, V., 2006. Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), pp.77–101.
Creswell, J.W., 2014. Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches. 4th ed. London: SAGE.
Gray, C. and Malins, J., 2004. Visualizing Research: A Guide to the Research Process in Art and Design. Aldershot: Ashgate.
Nicol, D. and Macfarlane-Dick, D., 2006. Formative assessment and self-regulated learning: A model and seven principles of good feedback practice. Studies in Higher Education, 31(2), pp.199–218.
Dancis, J.S., Coleman, B.R. & Ellison, E.R., 2023. Participatory Action Research as Pedagogy: Stay Messy. Journal of Participatory Research Methods, 4(2). https://doi.org/10.35844/001c.75174
Smith, H. and Dean, R.T., 2009. Practice-led Research, Research-led Practice in the Creative Arts. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.