Responding to Nicholas Addisons, Doubting Learning Outcomes in Higher Education Contexts: from Performativity towards Emergence and negotiation.
This is a difficult one, as much as I believe we need learning outcomes for parity and learning and teaching and guidelines for some students, I also believe they should not be the benchmark for individual feedback.
In fashion education, creativity thrives when students are encouraged to explore, take risks, and develop their unique voice. While learning outcomes provide a necessary framework, they should never become a rigid checklist that limits innovation. Instead, educators must prioritise individual feedback, ensuring that each student’s learning experience is personal, meaningful, and reflective of their own creative journey.
Learning Outcomes: A Guide, Not a Limit
Fashion is an ever-evolving industry driven by originality, cultural shifts, and innovation. If we strictly adhere to predefined learning outcomes without questioning them, we risk creating uniformity rather than diversity in student work. Learning outcomes should serve as a guide rather than a restriction—helping students understand key skills and concepts while leaving room for individual exploration.
The challenge lies in balancing structure with flexibility. When designing projects, educators must look beyond learning outcomes to ensure that students are not just meeting criteria but also engaging in deeper creative inquiry. A forward-thinking fashion curriculum acknowledges that true progress happens when students challenge norms, redefine boundaries, and push their personal creative limits.
The Role of Individual Feedback
One of the most crucial elements in fashion education is tailored feedback. Generic, one-size-fits-all critiques do not serve students who are developing their distinct design identities. Individual feedback acknowledges each student’s unique strengths, areas for growth, and creative direction. It also fosters autonomy, allowing students to take ownership of their learning and decision-making.
Written feedback plays a key role in this process but must be delivered with intention. Too many words can overwhelm and dilute the message, while too few can leave students directionless. The ideal feedback is precise, insightful, and encourages reflection without dictating outcomes. It should act as a conversation rather than a directive—offering guidance while leaving room for interpretation and independent thinking.
Creativity Over Compliance
If we do not look beyond learning outcomes, we risk stifling creativity and producing students who conform rather than innovate. Fashion education must prioritise experimentation, conceptual thinking, and individuality over rigid assessment models. By focusing on the development of a student’s personal design language rather than just technical proficiency, we ensure that they are prepared to contribute something unique to the industry.
This approach also means rethinking how we assess students. Rather than measuring success solely by predefined learning outcomes, we should consider their ability to problem-solve, adapt, and express a clear creative vision. The emphasis should be on process as much as the final product—valuing the journey of discovery as much as the outcome itself.
Conclusion
In fashion education, we are not just teaching students to follow trends or replicate existing ideas; we are guiding them to become independent thinkers and designers. By prioritising individual feedback and embracing learning outcomes as flexible rather than prescriptive, we empower students to find their own voice while still acquiring essential skills. Education should not create sheep—it should cultivate visionaries who can shape the future of fashion with originality and confidence!
Doubting Learning Outcomes in Higher Education Contexts: from Performativity towards Emergence and negotiation
Nicholas Addisons.