Enhancing Sensory-Friendly Inclusive Fashion Design Education: A Toolkit-Based Approach

Abstract

Translate Article

Background : Fashion design has increasingly been criticized for its limited consideration of diversity and inclusivity, particularly regarding sensory needs (Abdel & Mohammed, 2015; Hallgrímsson, 2018). Sensory-Friendly Inclusive Fashion Design (SFIFD) has emerged as a methodological response, aiming to integrate sensory problem awareness, sensory integration, and sensory experience into the design process (Lee & Kim, 2020). Prior studies highlight that maintaining conceptual consistency throughout the design process is essential for achieving inclusive outcomes (Brown & Wyatt, 2010). Furthermore, toolkits have been shown to facilitate collaborative practices, to expand designers’ perspectives, and to enhance individual competencies, thereby improving the overall quality of inclusive design (Sanders & Stappers, 2014; Kim, 2021). Building on this foundation, the present study situates SFIFD within educational practice and examines how structured tools can support systematic implementation and foster more diverse and inclusive design approaches.<br/>Methods : This study aims to develop an SFIFD education prototype and an assistive toolkit through four stages: prototype and toolkit development, experimental application, analysis, and extraction of educational insights. Based on the inclusive fashion design model (Lee et al., 2024) and the 3C3R framework (Hung, 2006), two prototypes were created: one using a design spectrum toolkit and the other a conventional target-setting method. The toolkit, informed by Microsoft’s Inclusive Design Toolkit and Cambridge’s digital personas, incorporated physical, sensory, social, emotional, and environmental diversity. Experiments involved 20 senior-level students (10 U.S., 10 South Korea) divided into teams, guided by instructors and teaching assistants. Participants designed fashion items for users with diverse sensory needs, completed PIE (Problem, Intervention, Evaluation) self-checklists, and were evaluated through interviews and thematic analysis. Data were analyzed using the 3C3R framework and four-phase thematic analysis (Vaismoradi et al., 2016) to identify key educational insights.<br/>Results : The results showed significant differences between the two SFIFD prototypes. Type 1 (toolkit-based) consistently scored higher in addressing sensory problems, sensory integration, and sensory-friendly experiences, while Type 2 (conventional) was slightly stronger in considering users’ sensory issues. Participants evaluated the toolkit as useful for concept development, user needs reflection, and practical design outcomes. Thematic analysis revealed advantages such as diverse perspectives, detailed problem-solving, and enhanced collaboration, alongside challenges in researching medical aspects, integrating aesthetics, and specifying sensory contexts. Both prototypes highlighted the importance of balancing functional and aesthetic elements in SFIFD education.<br/>Conclusions : This study confirms the effectiveness of the SFIFD toolkit in guiding multi-perspective analysis, ensuring conceptual consistency, and supporting research, idea generation, and teamwork. The SFIFD process offers a valuable design experience, with the toolkit enhancing understanding of principles and application. Future research should expand participants, team diversity, and toolkit scope to advance SFIFD education and to foster broader adoption of inclusive design in fashion.