INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CHANGES IN EDUCATION
Research Article
Feb 25, 2025 1 0

Aligning Design Studio Pedagogy to Industry Practice: Future Proofing Higher Design Education

Katja Fleischmann 1 *
1 Queensland College of Art and Design, Griffith University, Australia* Corresponding Author
International Journal of Changes in Education, 2(1), 2025, 10-18, https://doi.org/10.47852/bonviewIJCE42023051
Publication date: Feb 25, 2025
Full Text (PDF)

ABSTRACT

Amid the COVID-19 pandemic, design education experienced a significant shift as traditional studio teaching went online. This transition coincided with industry demands for adaptable, technology-proficient graduates prepared to work and collaborate as part of a decentralized workforce. This study examines how design educators in seven countries adapted their post-pandemic studio pedagogy to align with these industry needs. An online survey was used to efficiently reach the wide, geographically dispersed participant pool of educators. Findings indicate a rising acceptance of online technologies in studio teaching. The majority of design educators are now incorporating online elements into their design teaching. Pre-recorded lectures, online feedback and critique sessions, self-paced learning activities, and the use of cloud-based collaboration tools are among the most frequently employed methods. Nearly a third of surveyed educators are even considering teaching fully online design courses. This shift reflects a forward-thinking approach aimed at better aligning design education and industry. However, the study also highlights the importance of remaining open to disruptive technologies like generative artificial intelligence which is currently reshaping the design industry and work practices.

KEYWORDS

online teaching strategies virtual collaboration online design studio decentralize workforce employability artificial intelligence design industry practice

CITATION (APA)

Fleischmann, K. (2025). Aligning Design Studio Pedagogy to Industry Practice: Future Proofing Higher Design Education. International Journal of Changes in Education, 2(1), 10-18. https://doi.org/10.47852/bonviewIJCE42023051
Harvard
Fleischmann, K. (2025). Aligning Design Studio Pedagogy to Industry Practice: Future Proofing Higher Design Education. International Journal of Changes in Education, 2(1), pp. 10-18. https://doi.org/10.47852/bonviewIJCE42023051
Vancouver
Fleischmann K. Aligning Design Studio Pedagogy to Industry Practice: Future Proofing Higher Design Education. International Journal of Changes in Education. 2025;2(1):10-8. https://doi.org/10.47852/bonviewIJCE42023051
AMA
Fleischmann K. Aligning Design Studio Pedagogy to Industry Practice: Future Proofing Higher Design Education. International Journal of Changes in Education. 2025;2(1), 10-18. https://doi.org/10.47852/bonviewIJCE42023051
Chicago
Fleischmann, Katja. "Aligning Design Studio Pedagogy to Industry Practice: Future Proofing Higher Design Education". International Journal of Changes in Education 2025 2 no. 1 (2025): 10-18. https://doi.org/10.47852/bonviewIJCE42023051
MLA
Fleischmann, Katja "Aligning Design Studio Pedagogy to Industry Practice: Future Proofing Higher Design Education". International Journal of Changes in Education, vol. 2, no. 1, 2025, pp. 10-18. https://doi.org/10.47852/bonviewIJCE42023051

REFERENCES

  1. White-Hancock, L. (2023). Insights from Bauhaus innovation for education and workplaces in a postpandemic world. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 33(1), 261–279. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-022-09729-2
  2. McLain, M. (2022). Towards a signature pedagogy for design and technology education: A literature review. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 32(3), 1629–1648. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-021-09667-5
  3. Crowther, P. (2013). Understanding the signature pedagogy of the design studio and the opportunities for its technological enhancement. Journal of Learning Design, 6(3), 18–28.
  4. Shreeve, A. (2011). The way we were? Signature pedagogies under threat. In The Researching Design Education: 1st International Symposium for Design Education Researchers.
  5. Shulman, L. S. (2005). Signature pedagogies in the professions. Daedalus, 134(3), 52–59.
  6. Fleischmann, K. (2021). Is the design studio dead? An international perspective on the changing shape of the physical studio across design domains. Design and Technology Education: An International Journal, 26(4), 112–129.
  7. Park, J. Y. (2011). Design education online: Learning delivery and evaluation. International Journal of Art & Design Education, 30(2), 176–187. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1476-8070.2011.01689.x
  8. Fleischmann, K. (2023). German design educators’ post-Covid challenges: Online, artificial intelligence (AI) and government data restrictions. Design and Technology Education: An International Journal, 28(1), 135–153.
  9. Jones, D., & Lotz, N. (2021). Design education: Teaching in crisis. Design and Technology Education: An International Journal, 26(4), 4–9.
  10. Sanders, E. B. N., & Stappers, P. J. (2008). Co-creation and the new landscapes of design. CoDesign, 4(1), 5–18. https://doi.org/10.1080/15710880701875068
  11. Voorberg, W. H., Bekkers, V. J., & Tummers, L. G. (2015). A systematic review of co-creation and co-production: Embarking on the social innovation journey. Public Management Review, 17(9), 1333–1357. https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2014.930505
  12. Iriarte, I., Hoveskog, M., Ngoc, H. N., Legarda, I., Uranga, M., Nazabal, M., & Atxa, A. (2023). Service design for digital servitization: Facilitating manufacturers’ advanced services value proposition design in the context of Industry 4.0. Industrial Marketing Management, 110, 96–116. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2023.02.015
  13. Zallio, M., Grey, T., Boland, P., Kelly, H., White, P. J., & O’Ferrall, E. (2022). Online-based participatory design: A case study of developing international standards during a pandemic. Strategic Design Research Journal, 15(1), 39–51. https://doi.org/10.4013/sdrj.2021.151.05
  14. Jackson, V., van der Hoek, A., Prikladnicki, R., & Ebert, C. (2022). Collaboration tools for developers. IEEE Software, 39(2), 7–15. https://doi.org/10.1109/MS.2021.3132137
  15. Xu, J., Su, H., & Zhang, H. (2021). Research on design collaboration of aircraft digital mock up for suppliers. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 2006(1), 012066. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/2006/1/012066
  16. Sopher, H., Gewirtzman, D. F., & Kalay, Y. E. (2019). Going immersive in a community of learners? Assessment of design processes in a multi-setting architecture studio. British Journal of Educational Technology, 50(5), 2109–2128. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12857
  17. Matthews, B., Shannon, B., & Roxburgh, M. (2023). Destroy all humans: The dematerialisation of the designer in an age of automation and its impact on graphic design—A literature review. International Journal of Art & Design Education, 42(3), 367–383. https://doi.org/10.1111/jade.12460
  18. Christian, A. (2023). Why workers are still winning the returnto-office fight. BBC Worklife. Retrieved from: https://www.bbc.com/worklife/article/20230622-why-workers-are-still-winning-the-return-to-office-fight
  19. Barnes, C., Wragg, N., Fisher, E., Tyagi, S., & de Kruiff, A. (2022). Portfolio literacy and the transition to work for graphic design graduates. International Journal of Art & Design Education, 41(2), 300–319. https://doi.org/10.1111/jade.12407
  20. Bridgstock, R., Tytler, R., & White, P. (2020). Do creative skills future-proof your job? Creativity and the future of work in an age of exponential technological advancement. In G. Hearn (Ed.), The future of creative work (pp. 245–258). Edward Elgar Publishing. https://doi.org/10.4337/9781839101106.00025
  21. Larsson, K. (2015). The graphic designer as (a) digital Nomad. Bachelor’s Thesis, Dalarna University.
  22. Crosby, A., Pham, K., Peterson, J. F., & Lee, T. (2020). Digital work practices: Affordances in design education. International Journal of Art & Design Education, 39(1), 22–37. https://doi.org/10.1111/jade.12231
  23. Lee, T., Pham, K., Crosby, A., & Peterson, J. F. (2021). Digital collaboration in design education: How online collaborative software changes the practices and places of learning. Pedagogy, Culture & Society, 29(2), 231–245. https://doi.org/10.1080/14681366.2020.1714700
  24. Meyer, M. W., & Norman, D. (2020). Changing design education for the 21st century. She Ji: The Journal of Design, Economics, and Innovation, 6(1), 13–49. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sheji.2019.12.002
  25. van Laar, E., van Deursen, A. J. A. M., & van Dijk, J. A. G. M. (2022). Developing policy aimed at 21st-century digital skills for the creative industries: An interview study with founders and managing directors. Journal of Education and Work, 35(2), 195–209. https://doi.org/10.1080/13639080.2022.2036710
  26. Vita, J. (2023). A dialogue about experiences of collaboration in design practice. The Design Journal, 26(1), 173–183. https://doi.org/10.1080/14606925.2022.2144551
  27. Brosens, L., Raes, A., Octavia, J. R., & Emmanouil, M. (2023). How future proof is design education? A systematic review. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 33, 663–683. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-022-09743-4
  28. Nielsen, E. J. L. (2019). Employability strategies used by creative industries graduates. PhD Thesis, Queensland University of Technology.
  29. Design Council. (2018). Designing a future economy: Developing design skills for productivity and innovation. Retrieved from: https://www.designcouncil.org.uk/fileadmin/uploads/dc/Documents/Designing_a_future_economy18.pdf
  30. Schön, D. A. (1987). Educating the reflective practitioner: Toward a new design for teaching and learning in the professions. USA: Wiley.
  31. Kolb, D. A. (1984). Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and development. USA: Prentice-Hall.
  32. Hart, J., Zamenopoulos, T., & Garner, S. (2011). The learningscape of a virtual design atelier. Compass: Journal of Learning and Teaching in Higher Education, 2(3), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.21100/compass.v2i3.45
  33. Jones, D. (2021). Making little things visible. Design and Technology Education: An International Journal, 26(1), 8–11.
  34. Wragg, N. (2020). Online communication design education: The importance of the social environment. Studies in Higher Education, 45(11), 2287–2297. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2019.1605501
  35. Lotz, N., Jones, D., & Holden, G. (2015). Social engagement in online design pedagogies. In Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference for Design Education Researchers, 1645–1668.
  36. Thompson, J., Tregloan, K., Soccio, P., & Song, H. S. (2021). Dual delivery design studios: Exploring design learning for hybrid cohorts. Design and Technology Education: An International Journal, 26(4), 221–238.
  37. Fleischmann, K. (2022). A paradigm shift in studio pedagogy during pandemic times: An international perspective on challenges and opportunities teaching design online. Journal of Design, Business & Society, 8(2), 247–272. https://doi.org/10.1386/dbs_00042_1
  38. Tessier, V., & Aubry-Boyer, M. P. (2021). Turbulence in crit assessment: From the design workshop to online learning. Design and Technology Education: An International Journal, 26(4), 86–95.
  39. Nubani, L., & Lee, E. (2022). Sense of classroom community in interior design studios: In-person learning versus online learning approaches. Journal of Interior Design, 47(2), 51–70. https://doi.org/10.1111/joid.12217
  40. Spruce, J., Thomas, P., & Moriarty, S. (2021). From sharing screens to sharing spaces. Design and Technology Education: An International Journal, 26(4), 96–111.
  41. Hepburn, L. A., & Borthwick, M. (2021). Synchronicity in the online design studio: A study of two cases. Design and Technology Education, 26(4), 71–85.
  42. Golightly, L., Chang, V., Xu, Q. A., Gao, X., & Liu, B. S. (2022). Adoption of cloud computing as innovation in the organization. International Journal of Engineering Business Management, 14, 18479790221093992. https://doi.org/10.1177/18479790221093992
  43. Soler-Costa, R., Lafarga-Ostáriz, P., Mauri-Medrano, M., & Moreno-Guerrero, A. J. (2021). Netiquette: Ethic, education, and behavior on internet—A systematic literature review. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 18(3), 1212. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18031212
  44. Kaushik, V., & Walsh, C. A. (2019). Pragmatism as a research paradigm and its implications for social work research. Social Sciences, 8(9), 255. https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci8090255
  45. Prasad, M. (2021). Pragmatism as problem solving. Socius, 7, 2378023121993991. https://doi.org/10.1177/2378023121993991
  46. Punch, K. (2009). Introduction to research methods in education. USA: SAGE Publications.
  47. Wright, K. B. (2005). Researching internet-based populations: Advantages and disadvantages of online survey research, online questionnaire authoring software packages, and web survey services. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 10(3), JCMC1034.
  48. Morse, J. M., & Niehaus, L. (2009). Mixed method design: Principles and procedures. USA: Left Coast Press.
  49. Kiger, M. E., & Varpio, L. (2020). Thematic analysis of qualitative data: AMEE guide no. 131. Medical Teacher, 42(8), 846–854. https://doi.org/10.1080/0142159X.2020.1755030
  50. Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
  51. Thody, A. (2006). Writing and presenting research. UK: SAGE Publications.
  52. Radhakrishna, R., & Doamekpor, P. (2008). Strategies for generalizing findings in survey research. Journal of Extension, 46(2), 22.
  53. Meterko, M., Restuccia, J. D., Stolzmann, K., Mohr, D., Brennan, C., Glasgow, J., & Kaboli, P. (2015). Response rates, nonresponse bias, and data quality. Public Opinion Quarterly, 79(1), 130–144. https://doi.org/10.1093/poq/nfu052
  54. Koçak, Ö. (2024). Adapting the flipped classroom model to a design course in online learning environments: A case study. International Journal of Art & Design Education, 43(1), 51–66. https://doi.org/10.1111/jade.12481
  55. Peng, F., Kueh, C., & Cetinkaya Sendas, M. (2023). Design pedagogy in a time of change: Applying virtual flipped classroom in design higher education. Journal of Design, Business & Society, 9(1), 41–56. https://doi.org/10.1386/dbs_00045_1
  56. Huang, Y. C. J., Wensveen, S., & Funk, M. (2023). Experiential speculation in vision-based AI design education: Designing conventional and progressive AI futures. International Journal of Design, 17(2), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.57698/v17i2.01
  57. Meron, Y. (2022). Graphic design and artificial intelligence: Interdisciplinary challenges for designers in the search for research collaboration. In DRS2022: Bilbao, 1–16.
  58. UNESCO. (2023). Guidance for generative AI in education and research. Retrieved from: https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000386693

LICENSE

Creative Commons License
This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.