This article examines the deliberations and actions of a group of communication design educators in replacing discretionary grading in eight core units of a design course with a combination of pass/fail grading, rich formative feedback and a reinvigorated studio environment. The changes sought to better focus students on their creative process and improve their awareness of their acquisition of attributes, skills and knowledge along the path to becoming work-ready graduates. The traditional studio model of graphic design education approaches student learning through immersion in practice, imagining novice designers absorbing abilities and dispositions through experimentation and proximity to discipline experts and peers. If this model ever truly operated in Australia’s design schools, it has been eviscerated by the massification, marketization and rationalization of tertiary education since the early 1990s. Australian design education now operates with significantly reduced contact hours, tightly scheduled classes and standardized administrative, classroom and assessment practices that do not effectively model professional practice and limit students’ development of creative confidence. Another barrier to fostering students’ design acumen is their frequent fixation on grades as markers of success. We looked to removing grades to revitalize students’ flagging creative ambitions within the constraints of a tertiary education system we could not change. In stressing that a move to pass/fail grading is not an action to be taken lightly, we discuss our research into its advantages and disadvantages, the integral reconceptualization of learning and teaching approaches required to make the change and the challenges in implementation. This included understanding how students and staff interacted in the studio, their emotional and philosophical attachment to graded assessment, the effort required to communicate the changes to staff and students and developing resources to combat the fragmentation of the educational experience, which risks stripping change of its meaning and purpose.

There is a rising imperative for design education programs to better prepare graduates for the challenges of the future job market. Future work contexts forecast rising complexity which requires designers to upskill in cross-disciplinary collaboration as well as adapt to the demands of data-driven and agile design. The challenge and constraints of revising curricula, let alone introducing significant change, cannot be underestimated. This paper presents the AIGA Designer 2025 as a framework tool to assess the effectiveness of a non-traditional design education program. A comparative analysis of learning outcomes was undertaken with three case studies within an Australian university design school. Here, the importance of cross-disciplinary collaborations and complex problem solving in real-life contexts is highlighted. These results provide a best practice exemplar education model that future design educators can build upon and apply to their own curricula.

Authentic learning is widely recognised as critical for graduate employability, yet embedding it across curricula presents challenges, including resourcing, time for redevelopment, and managing large-scale cultural change. Scalable approaches require pilot studies to explore how authentic learning principles can be implemented and scaffolded effectively. This paper presents a case study of an Australian university’s co-created ‘Authentic Learning Blueprint’, designed to embed industry/community engaged learning throughout the learner’s experience. Phase one involved a team of educators, drawing on insights from learners, and employer feedback to co-develop the Blueprint. The Blueprint allows learners to progress through scaffolded stages, Novice, Associate, and Emerging Practitioner, gaining discipline-specific and industry-ready skills through real-world project briefs and work-integrated learning experiences. The Blueprint distributes teaching and learning responsibilities across learners, educators, and industry/community in a three-way partnership model. Learning experiences were designed to reflect knowledge and skills relevant to professional practice. In phase two, the proof-of-concept was applied to two design units, one undergraduate and one postgraduate, and we tested acceptance and scalability, with positive student feedback. Phase three showcases how the Blueprint then informed curriculum redesign within the design school’s flagship course, including trials of ungraded assessment to further support authentic learning. The findings demonstrate that a co-created, scaffolded approach integrating industry-engaged experiences from enrolment to graduation can bridge the gap between academia and professional practice. This study contributes a practical framework for embedding authentic learning at scale, offering insights for institutions seeking to enhance employability through curriculum innovation.

By Gloria Gomez, Areli AVENDAÑO Franco, Rea Daellenbach, et al., Published on 11/29/23