Modelling information-communicative competence for AI-era designers

Oleksandr O. Musiienko

doi:10.55056/cte.1277

Автор(и)

Oleksandr O. Musiienko Kryvyi Rih State Pedagogical University https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4906-8172

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.55056/cte.1277

Ключові слова:

information-communicative competence, TPACK, design education, artificial intelligence, studio pedagogy, competency framework, generative AI

Анотація

The rapid diffusion of generative artificial intelligence (AI) in design practice is transforming the professional competencies required of designers, yet the theoretical foundations guiding educational responses remain underdeveloped. A recent scoping review found that 73.7% of studies on generative AI in design education are entirely atheoretical, while domain-specific competency constructs for the AI era remain scarce. This conceptual paper proposes an integrative theoretical framework that (1) operationalises information-communicative competence (ICC) as a four-component construct for designers in the context of AI-driven professional transformation; (2) adapts the TPACK model to account for AI tools and studio pedagogy; and (3) identifies gaps when mapping national design competency standards to ICC. The study employs a conceptual analysis approach combining theory synthesis with framework adaptation. Terminological differentiation situates ICC among adjacent constructs (digital competence, ICT competence, information literacy, media competence). The framework is developed through systematic integration of TPACK, studio pedagogy theory, and competency-based education. ICC is operationalised as a four-component model comprising information-analytical, communicative, technological, and reflective components, each incorporating AI-specific descriptors. An adapted TPACK model reconceptualises Technological Knowledge to encompass prompt engineering, AI tool selection, and critical evaluation of AI outputs. A gap analysis of the Ukrainian B2 Design standard against ICC reveals systematic omissions in AI-related competencies across all four components. The integrative framework synthesises these three pillars into a coherent theoretical foundation for curriculum transformation. The proposed framework addresses the dominant atheoretical trend in generative AI design education research by providing a domain-specific theoretical architecture that can guide curriculum redesign. Its three-pillar structure - what knowledge is needed (TPACK), how it is acquired (studio pedagogy), and what standards require (competency mapping) - offers a replicable model for other professional fields undergoing AI transformation.

Завантажити

Дані для завантаження поки недоступні.

Abstract views: 130 / PDF (Англійська) views: 57

Посилання

Al-Adwan, A.S., Meet, R.K., Anand, S., Shukla, G.P., Alsharif, R. and Dabbaghia, M., 2025. Understanding continuous use intention of technology among higher education teachers in emerging economy: evidence from integrated TAM, TPACK, and UTAUT model. Studies in Higher Education, 50(3), pp.505–524. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2024.2343955. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2024.2343955

Al-Ayash, A.A., 2025. Design Studio Pedagogy: A Comparative Study of Teaching Approaches. Dirasat: Human and Social Sciences, 52(6), p.7169. Available from: https://doi.org/10.35516/hum.v52i6.7169. DOI: https://doi.org/10.35516/hum.v52i6.7169

Alayyar, G.M., Fisser, P. and Voogt, J., 2012. Developing technological pedagogical content knowledge in pre-service science teachers: Support from blended learning. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 28(8), pp.1298–1316. Available from: https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.773. DOI: https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.773

American Library Association, 1989. Presidential Committee on Information Literacy: Final Report. Washington, D.C.: American Library Association. Available from: https://www.ala.org/acrl/publications/whitepapers/presidential.

Association of College and Research Libraries, 2015. Framework for Information Literacy for Higher Education. Chicago: American Library Association. Available from: https://www.ala.org/acrl/standards/ilframework.

Biggs, J., 1996. Enhancing teaching through constructive alignment. Higher Education, 32(3), pp.347–364. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00138871. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00138871

Bowen, G.A., 2009. Document Analysis as a Qualitative Research Method. Qualitative Research Journal, 9(2), pp.27–40. Available from: https://doi.org/10.3316/QRJ0902027. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3316/QRJ0902027

Braun, V. and Clarke, V., 2006. Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), pp.77–101. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa

Carolus, A., Koch, M.J., Straka, S., Latoschik, M.E. and Wienrich, C., 2023. MAILS - Meta AI literacy scale: Development and testing of an AI literacy questionnaire based on well-founded competency models and psychological change- and meta-competencies. Computers in Human Behavior: Artificial Humans, 1(2), p.100014. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chbah.2023.100014. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chbah.2023.100014

Council of the European Union, 2017. Council recommendation of 22 May 2017 on the European Qualifications Framework for lifelong learning and repealing the recommendation of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 April 2008 on the establishment of the European Qualifications Framework for lifelong learning. Official Journal of the European Union, C 189, pp.15–28. Available from: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:32017H0615(01).

Cross, N., 2023. Design Thinking: Understanding How Designers Think and Work. 2nd ed. Bloomsbury Visual Arts. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5040/9781350305090

Davis, M. and Dubberly, H., 2023. Rethinking Design Education. She Ji: The Journal of Design, Economics, and Innovation, 9(2), pp.97–116. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sheji.2023.04.003. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sheji.2023.04.003

Dolezal, D., Motschnig, R. and Ambros, R., 2025. Pre-Service Teachers’ Digital Competence: A Call for Action. Education Sciences, 15(2), p.160. Available from: https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci15020160. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci15020160

Ejsing-Duun, S. and Skovbjerg, H.M., 2019. Design as a Mode of Inquiry in Design Pedagogy and Design Thinking. International Journal of Art and Design Education, 38(2), pp.445–460. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1111/jade.12214. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/jade.12214

European Committee for Standardization, 2014. European e-Competence Framework 3.0 (CWA 16234-1:2014). CEN. Available from: https://itprofessionalism.org/professionalism/e-competence-framework/.

Federiakin, D., Molerov, D., Zlatkin-Troitschanskaia, O. and Maur, A., 2024. Prompt engineering as a new 21st century skill. Frontiers in Education, 9, p.1366434. Available from: https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2024.1366434. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2024.1366434

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 and Society, 8(2), pp.247–272. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1386/dbs_00042_1. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1386/dbs_00042_1

Fleischmann, K., 2024. Making the case for introducing generative artificial intelligence (AI) into design curricula. Art, Design & Communication in Higher Education, 23, pp.187–207. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1386/adch_00088_1. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1386/adch_00088_1

Hameed, U. and Mimirinis, M., 2023. How does digital reflective practice in textile design education relate to creativity? Reflective Practice, 24(3), pp.310–323. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1080/14623943.2023.2194623. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/14623943.2023.2194623

Hameed, U. and Mimirinis, M., 2025. Digital Reflective Practice in Textile Design Studio Courses: Perspectives from Pakistan. International Journal of Art & Design Education, 44(1), pp.119–131. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1111/jade.12528. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/jade.12528

Hwang, Y. and Wu, Y., 2025. Graphic Design Education in the Era of Text-to-Image Generation: Transitioning to Contents Creator. International Journal of Art and Design Education, 44(1), pp.239–253. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1111/jade.12558. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/jade.12558

Iranmanesh, A. and Lotfabadi, P., 2025. Critical questions on the emergence of text-to-image artificial intelligence in architectural design pedagogy. AI & Society, 40(5), pp.3557–3571. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00146-024-02111-x. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00146-024-02111-x

Ismail, A.K., Ali, N., Azmin, S. and Suroya, S.H., 2025. A Conceptual Framework for Integrating Generative AI in Advertising Image Creation for Graphic Design Education. International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science, 9(26), pp.8387–8395. Available from: https://doi.org/10.47772/IJRISS.2025.903SEDU0631. DOI: https://doi.org/10.47772/IJRISS.2025.903SEDU0631

Jaakkola, E., 2020. Designing conceptual articles: four approaches. AMS Review, 10(1-2), pp.18–26. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13162-020-00161-0. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13162-020-00161-0

Kalbaska, N. and Cantoni, L., 2019. Digital Fashion Competences: Market Practices and Needs. In: R. Rinaldi and R. Bandinelli, eds. Business Models and ICT Technologies for the Fashion Supply Chain. Cham: Springer International Publishing, vol. 525, pp.125–135. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-98038-6_10. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-98038-6_10

Kamalipour, H. and Peimani, N., 2022. Learning and Teaching Urban Design through Design Studio Pedagogy: A Blended Studio on Transit Urbanism. Education Sciences, 12(10), p.712. Available from: https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci12100712. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci12100712

Karadağ, D. and Ozar, B., 2025. A new frontier in design studio: AI and human collaboration in conceptual design. Frontiers of Architectural Research, 14(6), pp.1536–1550. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foar.2025.01.010. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foar.2025.01.010

Kolb, D.A., 1984. Experiential Learning: Experience as the Source of Learning and Development. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Küçükersen, F., Özemir, P., Dinçer, D. and Demirbilek, O., 2026. Beyond Kolb: Constructing a Design Learning Cycle for the Foundation Studio. Journal of Experiential Education, 49(1), pp.158–191. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1177/10538259251362141. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/10538259251362141

Lawson, B., 1990. How Designers Think: The Design Process Demystified. 2nd ed. Butterworth-Heinemann. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/C2013-0-04512-4. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-7506-0268-6.50007-3

Lee, J. and Suh, S., 2024. AI Technology Integrated Education Model for Empowering Fashion Design Ideation. Sustainability, 16(17), p.7262. Available from: https://doi.org/10.3390/su16177262. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/su16177262

Li, J., Liu, S., Zheng, J. and He, F., 2024. Enhancing visual communication design education: Integrating AI in collaborative teaching strategies. Journal of Computational Methods in Sciences and Engineering, 24(4-5), pp.2469–2483. Available from: https://doi.org/10.3233/JCM-247471. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3233/JCM-247471

Long, D. and Magerko, B., 2020. What is AI Literacy? Competencies and Design Considerations. Proceedings of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. New York, NY, USA: Association for Computing Machinery, CHI ’20, p.1–16. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1145/3313831.3376727. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1145/3313831.3376727

Mewburn, I., 2012. Lost in translation: Reconsidering reflective practice and design studio pedagogy. Arts and Humanities in Higher Education, 11(4), pp.363–379. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1177/1474022210393912. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1474022210393912

Ministry of Education and Science of Ukraine, 2018. Standard of higher education of the first (bachelor’s) level, field of knowledge 02 “Culture and Art” in the specialty 022 “Design” [Standart vyshchoi osvity pershoho (bakalavrskoho) rivnia, haluzi znan 02 «Kultura i mystetstvo» za spetsialnistiu 022 «Dyzain»]. Order No. 1391, 13 December 2018. Available from: https://osvita.ua/doc/files/news/630/63009/022-dizayn-bakalavr.pdf.

Mishra, P. and Koehler, M.J., 2006. Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge: A Framework for Teacher Knowledge. Teachers College Record, 108(6), pp.1017–1054. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9620.2006.00684.x. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/016146810610800610

Mouza, C. and Karchmer-Klein, R., 2013. Promoting and Assessing Pre-Service Teachers’ Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK) in the Context of Case Development. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 48(2), pp.127–152. Available from: https://doi.org/10.2190/EC.48.2.b. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2190/EC.48.2.b

Musiienko, O.O., 2025. Design education in Ukraine: competency development and European integration in artistic-project training of future design professionals. Educational Dimension, 13, pp.257–284. Available from: https://doi.org/10.31812/ed.1112. DOI: https://doi.org/10.31812/ed.1112

Musiienko, O.O., 2026. From maker to curator: a scoping review of generative artificial intelligence in design higher education. Educational Dimension, 14, pp.212–231. Available from: https://doi.org/10.31812/ed.1093. DOI: https://doi.org/10.31812/ed.1093

Ng, D.T.K., Leung, J.K.L., Chu, S.K.W. and Qiao, M.S., 2021. Conceptualizing AI literacy: An exploratory review. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 2, p.100041. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2021.100041. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2021.100041

Osadcha, K., Shumeiko, N. and Spišiaková, M., 2025. AI-based solutions and J. Dewey’s philosophy in training IT students. Advanced Education, 19(27), pp.81–102. Available from: https://doi.org/10.20535/2410-8286.324073. DOI: https://doi.org/10.20535/2410-8286.324073

Osadcha, K.P., Krasheninnik, I.V. and Osadchyi, V.V., 2024. Developing digital skills in professional students: International educational practices. Innovative Pedagogy, 68(2), pp.110–113. Available from: https://doi.org/10.32782/2663-6085/2024/68.2.22. DOI: https://doi.org/10.32782/2663-6085/2024/68.2.22

Pamuk, S., 2012. Understanding preservice teachers’ technology use through TPACK framework. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 28(5), pp.425–439. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2729.2011.00447.x. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2729.2011.00447.x

Park, H., 2025. Generative AI in Studio-Based Design Education: Human–AI Relationships, Collaboration and Assessment. In: C.Y. Chang and Y. Hsu, eds. IASDR 2025: Design Next, 02-05 December, Taiwan. Available from: https://doi.org/10.21606/iasdr.2025.845. DOI: https://doi.org/10.21606/iasdr.2025.845

Pitsikalis, S., Lasica, I.E., Kostas, A. and Vitsilaki, C., 2024. Educational Design Guidelines for Teaching with Immersive Technologies—Updating Learning Outcomes of the European Qualification Framework. Trends in Higher Education, 3(4), pp.1091–1108. Available from: https://doi.org/10.3390/higheredu3040064. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/higheredu3040064

Punie, Y., ed., 2017. European Framework for the Digital Competence of Educators: DigCompEdu. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union. Available from: https://doi.org/10.2760/159770.

Schön, D.A., 1985. The Design Studio: An Exploration of its Traditions and Potentials. London: RIBA Publications.

Schön, D.A., 1992. The Reflective Practitioner: How Professionals Think in Action. London: Routledge. Available from: https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315237473. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315237473

Sennett, R., 2008. The Craftsman. New Haven: Yale University Press.

Shulman, L.S., 1986. Those Who Understand: Knowledge Growth in Teaching. Educational Researcher, 15(2), pp.4–14. Available from: https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X015002004. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X015002004

Shulman, L.S., 2005. Signature pedagogies in the professions. Daedalus, 134(3), pp.52–59. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1162/0011526054622015. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1162/0011526054622015

Tan, X., Cheng, G. and Ling, M.H., 2025. Enhancing teachers’ AI competency: A professional development intervention study based on intelligent-TPACK framework. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 9, p.100521. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2025.100521. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2025.100521

Tellez, F.A., 2025. Reflecting on the Integration of Generative AI in Design Education: Lessons from the Field. Voces y Silencios. Revista Latinoamericana de Educación, 16(2), p.169–191. Available from: https://doi.org/10.18175/VyS16.2.2025.9. DOI: https://doi.org/10.18175/VyS16.2.2025.9

Tomczyk, Ł., 2025. AI in Education - Mapping Theoretical Frameworks for Digital Literacy: DigComp 2.2, AI Literacy Competency Framework, AI Literacy TPACK, the Machine Learning Education Framework, the UNESCO AI Competency Framework for and Teachers and Other Innovative Approaches. In: Ł. Tomczyk, ed. New Media Pedagogy: Research Trends, Methodological Challenges, and Successful Implementations. Cham: Springer Nature Switzerland, Communications in Computer and Information Science, vol. 2537, pp.173–191. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-95627-0_12. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-95627-0_12

Torraco, R.J., 2005. Writing Integrative Literature Reviews: Guidelines and Examples. Human Resource Development Review, 4(3), pp.356–367. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1177/1534484305278283. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1534484305278283

Turchi, T., Carta, S., Ambrosini, L. and Malizia, A., 2023. Human-AI Co-creation: Evaluating the Impact of Large-Scale Text-to-Image Generative Models on the Creative Process. In: L.D. Spano, A. Schmidt, C. Santoro and S. Stumpf, eds. End-User Development. Cham: Springer Nature Switzerland, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 13917, pp.35–51. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-34433-6_3. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-34433-6_3

Vuorikari, R., Kluzer, S. and Punie, Y., 2022. DigComp 2.2, The Digital Competence framework for citizens – With new examples of knowledge, skills and attitudes. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union. Available from: https://doi.org/10.2760/115376.

Walczak, D.A., Reuter, M.E. and Sammet, D.L., 2010. A Program for Introducing Information Literacy to Commercial Art and Design Students. Communications in Information Literacy, 3(2), pp.193–203. Available from: https://doi.org/10.15760/comminfolit.2010.3.2.81. DOI: https://doi.org/10.15760/comminfolit.2010.3.2.81

Wegerif, R. and Casebourne, I., 2025. A dialogic theoretical foundation for integrating generative AI into pedagogical design. British Journal of Educational Technology. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.70026. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.70026

Zhang, K., Zhang, X., Wu, W., Wu, S., Cai, S. and Shen, H., 2025. Redefining design competence: A framework for equipping product designers in the generative AI era. The Design Journal, 28(3), pp.452–474. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1080/14606925.2025.2462862. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/14606925.2025.2462862