Introducing participatory action research to vocational fashion education: theories, practices, and implications
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper revisits the philosophical trajectory and practices in fashion education. It examines to what extent participatory action research (PAR) can contribute to the advancement of vocational education by emancipating practice-based skills and knowledge co-created by students, faculty members, and market practitioners. While the fashion market is dynamically reshaping today’s fashion pedagogy by imparting new skills and abilities to students, this investigation aims to highlight the limitations of the Bauhaus tradition as a top-down approach aimed at continually producing work-ready graduates for junior positions. Drawing upon the findings yielded by our experimental project fashionthnography.com, the analyses presented in this paper elucidate to what extent PAR can meet the intended goal of equipping the students with a higher level of working capabilities and creativity, as well as greater cultural appreciation. This study contributes to the expansion of vocational education and training, as its findings indicate that we need to embrace practice-based knowledge co-creation for long-term success in both industry and academia.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.123 | 0.068 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.013 | 0.068 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.020 | 0.014 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.015 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".