Original Research

Digital technology integration in fashion education: The role of geographic location

Bongiwe Kolisi, Alettia V. Chisin, Johannes C. Cronje, Desiree Smal

Received: 15 Aug. 2025; Accepted: 23 Jan. 2026; Published: 15 July 2026

Copyright: © 2026. The Authors. Licensee: AOSIS.
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

Abstract

As digital skills become increasingly important in the fashion industry, the integration of digital technologies into fashion education is becoming more important. However, there is still a digital divide, as higher education institutions (HEIs) in remote areas often lack the infrastructure, access and resources available in more affluent urban centres. This qualitative study explored how geographic location influences the integration of digital technologies into fashion design education by examining disparities in infrastructure, resources and teaching methods at two South African HEIs in contrasting environments. The aim was to explore how these differences impact the learning experiences, digital competencies and career preparation of fashion students, to ultimately gain a deeper understanding of the digital divide in fashion education. The study used qualitative methods to analyse the insights of industry practitioners, alumni, students and lecturers. The findings highlight the key challenges posed by unequal access to digital technologies, identifying practical, contextualised solutions.

Transdisciplinary contribution: The study draws on the disciplines of geography, fashion, education and technology to provide a focused understanding of how geographical inequalities impact the integration of digital technologies into fashion education in South African HEIs. It highlights how the limited infrastructure in remote areas hinders students’ acquisition of industry-relevant digital skills. After examining these challenges through a transdisciplinary lens that combines fashion education, digital technology and inequality, context-specific strategies to improve digital access and curriculum relevance are proposed. The findings call for regional efforts to promote equitable education and support digital inclusion in underserved higher education settings.

Keywords: digital technology; fashion design education; fourth industrial revolution (4IR); geographic inequalities; skills integration.

Introduction

The COVID-19 pandemic accelerated the digital transformation of both the fashion industry and higher education (HE). Global lockdowns restricted physical interaction between designers and manufacturers, forcing the fashion sector to adopt digital and virtual solutions and to move towards more sustainable, technology-driven business models.¹ Fashion education, traditionally rooted in hands–on practice, faced significant challenges during the transition to online and theoretical modes of teaching. Higher education institutions (HEIs) were compelled to move rapidly to online platforms, while some suspended face-to-face teaching indefinitely.² However, even before the pandemic, many institutions had already invested in digital infrastructure to enhance learning and align with future industry demands.³ The digital transformation in HE was already underway, but the pandemic acted as a catalyst that accelerated the integration of digital tools into teaching practices and reinforced the role of fashion as a driver of digital transformation.^2,4

Impact on teaching and learning

Rogozin et al.² notes that this disruption prompted a re-evaluation of module design and inspired the introduction of more diverse and innovative teaching methods. However, the abrupt transition faced resistance from some staff, who saw it as a threat to academic freedom and institutional stability.² Despite these tensions, the shift underscored the increasing need for design professionals to update their competencies and adopt new digital tools to remain competitive.⁴ Digital learning environments have demonstrated value by providing flexible access to resources regardless of time or geographic location, promoting more inclusive, technologically enhanced education.⁵

Role of geographic location

Geographic location plays a pivotal role in fashion education, as access to resources such as fabric and trim suppliers, manufacturing mills, textile factories and apparel retail hubs is essential for developing practical skills and industry connections. Van der Merwe⁵ further highlights that ‘the inclusion of features unique to the environment allows the faculty to access the data in a database of their own, which is useful for collectively assessing faculty–based practices’. In South Africa, the decline of garment factories has restricted students’ access to these resources, limiting practice–oriented learning and forcing them to rely on traditional product development methods.

Traditional versus digital product development

Traditional apparel product development transforms market opportunities and technological assumptions into the technology of products for sale through planning, design, sampling, manufacturing and retailing.⁶ It relies on manual techniques such as sketching, pattern drafting, sewing and draping, which require specialised expertise and close collaboration. This makes the process both time–consuming and costly.^7,8 In contrast, digital fashion design enables rapid adjustments, streamlines production and improves efficiency. To succeed, professionals must integrate creative and technical competencies with a strong knowledge of trends and design principles.⁹

While core technical skills such as pattern making, garment construction and design remain vital for designers to carve out their unique niche and build a distinctive brand identity, apparel manufacturers must adopt new technologies to remain competitive.¹⁰ Digital tools such as CLO3D, Marvelous Designer and specialised platforms such as Gerber AccuMark and Lectra enable three-dimensional (3D) visualisation and virtual garment simulation, allowing design efficiency and precision to be significantly enhanced.^1,6,10,11 These advances expand the possibilities of design and are reshaping fashion education to foster innovation and sustainability.

Inclusive and future directions

Digital learning promotes inclusivity and accessibility, breaking traditional classroom boundaries and aligning with ‘education for all’ objectives.^12,13,14 In this evolving landscape, apparel professionals must master both proficient and core design skills and digital technologies.⁹ Although digital platforms enhance sustainability and innovation, adoption remains costly for small enterprises and independent designers.^8,15

Guided by the question ‘What is the impact of geographic location on the integration of digital technologies into fashion education?’, this article reports on the examination of the digital divide between two geographically disparate HEIs and how differences in infrastructure and resources shape learning experiences and readiness for the integration of digital technologies into the fashion industry. The focus is on product development processes, particularly the ‘manufacturing’ methods such as pattern making and garment construction.

Related literature

As fashion design and product development shift from traditional craftsmanship to digitally mediated disciplines, it is important to examine how education systems respond, particularly in geographically and economically diverse contexts such as South Africa. Globally, many countries are moving away from uniform education models towards more innovative, personalised approaches that prioritise quality and adaptability.¹⁶ This shift takes place within the broader context of the Fourth Industrial Revolution (4IR), which is reshaping both education and industry through rapid technological advancement.¹⁷ Consequently, the fashion sector, including HEIs, must adopt digital technologies and modernise production and learning methods to remain competitive and relevant.⁵ Educational technologies offer benefits beyond the classroom that enhance flexibility and accessibility.

The impact of innovative educational technologies

The use of innovative educational and creative technologies in fashion design education enables easier and more accessible learning. This allows students to acquire knowledge quickly while fostering creativity, visual thinking and design skills, ultimately improving education quality.¹³ Furthermore, Akundele¹⁸ notes that in developed economies such as the United States, Japan and the United Kingdom, the integration of artificial intelligence (AI) and digital technologies has significantly reduced production costs and timelines in the apparel industry. As a result, designers in these in these regions can produce more diverse, trend-responsive collections that cater to evolving consumer preferences.

This section provides background on the fashion product development process, focusing on pattern making and garment construction; examines the impact of geographic location and related disparities on the South African clothing industry; and explores the digital shifts in apparel industry product development that have driven changes in pedagogy and equity strategies in fashion education.

Background on the fashion product development process: Pattern making and garment construction

The fashion product development process is essential to transform market opportunities and technological assumptions into tangible products. Traditional product development requires a comprehensive understanding of various tools and versatility in learning and working across relevant domains.¹⁹ Historically, the creation of physical artefacts has been regarded as the most effective approach to product design and teaching. Hands-on activities, such as laboratory exercises, enable students to acquire foundational skills necessary for careers in the apparel industry.

The traditional process of apparel innovation involves several stages, including market research, creative design, pattern making, fitting and production, requiring collaboration among designers, pattern makers and tailors. This process is often time-consuming and costly.⁸ This was echoed by Sun and Zhao,²⁰ noting that conventional product design and development involve a costly, iterative process with multiple rounds of sampling, fitting and design alterations to realise the designer’s original concept as a final physical product. All of these demand specialised skills from both the designers and the product development team.

The concept of manufacturing, which is the focus of this study, aligns with Fung et al.,⁶ who define it as ‘the process that transforms a design concept into an actual product’ (p. 9). Figure 1, adapted from Fung et al.,⁶ illustrates the phases of product development, namely planning, design, manufacturing and launch. Although there are more aspects of fashion product development, they are beyond the scope of this study.

FIGURE 1: Evolution of the fashion product development process.

Pattern making

Pattern making is the art of designing templates that form the foundation for sewing clothing and craft items, acting as a link between the vision of a designer and the final product.¹⁰ It plays a crucial role in the fashion industry by translating design concepts into finished garments and requires proficiency in both traditional and digital methods.^5,10 Conventional approaches, such as flat pattern drafting and draping, often do not accommodate diverse body shapes and lead to the adoption of updated size charts and digital simulations to improve fit and inclusivity.¹¹ Flat pattern drafting involves creating patterns on paper using specific tools and measurements.⁶

Although relatively straightforward, challenges arise in manually crafting templates or using pattern-making software. Traditional pattern-making methods based on standard body models often result in a poor fit due to variations in body shapes. To address this, companies update size charts using measurements from the target audience and employ garment simulation techniques.²¹ Fashion design software, including 3D body scanners, computer-aided design (CAD) applications and 3D software, is available worldwide. Computer-aided design programmes use 3D scanning technology to model accurate product representations and reduce costs, especially for customised products.²²

The potential benefits of three-dimensional production (3DP) technology for designers are significant despite adoption challenges. Designers can use 3D scanning to eliminate prototyping by inputting precise body measurements into CAD programmes to create perfectly fitting garments or accessories. This reduces the need for the commonly required physical alterations. With 3D technology, alterations can be made directly in the software.²³

Garment construction

Garment construction has traditionally relied on manual methods but is increasingly enhanced by digital tools that improve precision, reduce waste and reduce costs. Manufacturers often begin the design phase with 3D concepts, converting them into two-dimensional (2D) sketches. Patterns with fabrics are then extracted in the 3D-to-2D phase. Conventional methods require a comprehensive understanding of different tools and adaptability in related areas.¹⁵ Technologies such as CAD, 3D modelling and 3D printing enable virtual prototyping and customisation that support innovation and sustainability.^6,24 Digital technology is expected to offer alternative approaches to sustainable manufacturing from environmental, social and economic perspectives.²⁰

Zero-waste design and digital integration

Three-dimensional software also advances zero-waste fashion design, which aims to eliminate production waste. Traditionally, this process used 2D digital tools, such as Gerber AccuMark pattern software, Adobe Illustrator and Photoshop.²⁵ McQuillan²⁵ further defines zero-waste design as the process that focuses on avoiding waste during cutting and sewing, and the digital system enables virtual prototypes that reduce physical samples and unnecessary waste. Figure 2 illustrates the differences between a basic fashion design process, a basic zero-waste design process without 3D tools and the improvements introduced by 3D software.

FIGURE 2: Zero-waste fashion design: A comparison of traditional and three-dimensional-enabled processes.

However, integrating digital technology presents challenges. Glogar et al.¹⁵ highlight some difficulties when adopting modern machinery and software, which are due to high initial costs, infrastructure requirements and the need for specialised expertise. Resistance to change in traditional markets that require adjustments to business processes and employee roles further complicates digital transformation. Workforce training is essential, and concerns about job displacement from automation must be managed.

Geographic location and disparities: The state of the South African industry

The South African fashion industry has a rich heritage and considerable potential to drive economic growth, expand exports and strengthen local value chains.²⁶ However, its economic contribution and its role in job creation have declined dramatically in recent decades. The sector’s share of national gross domestic product (GDP) fell from 6% in 2005 to 3% in 2016. In 2021, the drop increased the sector’s share to only 0.7%.²⁶ Similarly, its contribution to manufacturing value-add decreased from 5% in 1994 to roughly 3% in 2019, and then to 2% by 2022.²⁴ Reflecting this trend, the sector’s contribution to the GDP dropped from 0.59% in 1994 to 0.25% in 2019, and reached a low of 0.22% by the end of 2022.¹⁹

Since the end of the 1990s, employment in the formal sector decreased from around 143 000 to 81 000 jobs, mainly due to reduced government support, difficult production conditions and cheap imports of clothing from Asia.²⁶ Before 1994, protective policies shielded industry from international competition.²⁷ After 1994, reintegration into the global economy brought structural weaknesses to light by outsourcing low-skilled production to lower-cost regions, while concentrating high-value design services in developed countries. The textile and clothing industry (TCI) has contributed to social and environmental challenges. For sustainability, the South African textile and clothing industry must integrate supply chain practices and align production methods with sustainable goals. The digital transformation is promising to fulfil this important need in the TCI.²⁸

The fashion industry: Product development digital shifts

Traditional fashion product development relies on manual techniques such as sketching, pattern drafting and sewing, which are time-consuming and costly. However, the COVID-19 pandemic accelerated the shift to virtual solutions.⁴ Digital fashion includes the: (1) marketing and communication of physical and virtual products, (2) process innovation, and communication of physical and virtual products, and (3) understanding the societal impact of digital technologies.⁴

The textile industry is undergoing a significant transformation that is driven by automation, AI, the Internet of Things and 3D printing that reshapes design and production.¹⁵ Digital tools such as CLO3D, Marvelous Designer and Gerber AccuMark enable 3D visualisation, virtual prototyping and quick adjustments that increase efficiency and sustainability. Wei⁸ notes that design software allows rapid concept development, 3D modelling, texture replication and simulation of virtual fittings. These technologies enhance efficiency, sustainability and adaptability but present challenges, including high costs and reliance on labour-intensive processes.¹⁵ However, adoption varies; some companies embrace digital methods, while others remain in its early stages due to cost and infrastructure constraints. Integrating these competencies into fashion education is essential to prepare students for the technology–driven industry.

Fashion design education: Pedagogical shifts and equity strategies

As professional practice and society’s relationship with design evolve, fashion education must adapt. Pontis and Van der Waarde¹⁶ identify four areas that are affected by socioeconomic and technological shifts: design practice, teaching, students and pedagogy. These changes require a new educational paradigm to prepare designers for global challenges. Institutions have begun re-evaluating long-standing philosophies in art and design education, adapting their curricula and updating outdated systems.²⁹ However, Meyer and Norman³⁰ observe that design education still does not meet 21st-century requirements; particularly, they highlight gaps in technical skills. The responses differ; some programmes maintain traditional approaches and others focus on future-relevant aspects.³⁰

The South African education system is under similar pressure as it adapts to the 4IR and emerging technologies.³¹ Although access to HE is a fundamental human right, opportunities remain uneven. At the heart of these changes is the growing role of digital technologies in teaching and learning, which currently encompasses a diverse and rapidly evolving range of resources.¹² Yet, both HEIs and public sector resources tend to be concentrated in urban areas, which is deepening the divide between geographically advantaged and disadvantaged institutions.³¹ Some educators see digital adoption as a threat to academic freedom and fear institutional instability. Meanwhile, digital transformation and curriculum modernisation were already planned before the pandemic, but the sudden shift to remote learning then made it inseparable.¹⁴

The Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK) framework and Actor–Network Theory (ANT) serve to guide solutions:

• TPACK: Integrates pedagogy, content and technology to align curricula with industry needs.
• ANT: Examines human and non-human actors (e.g. software, policy) that influence digital adoption.

Recommendations include the creation of bridging courses for digital skills such as 3D and CAD simulations, government and industry funding for digital laboratories and ongoing staff training. The next section describes these two models in more detail.

Theoretical framework and conceptual framework

A purposive sampling technique was used to identify actors, both human (students, alumni from universities and clothing industry practitioners) and non-human (computers), for individual and focus group interviews. Actor–Network theory guided questions to explore the perspectives, functions and influences of the different network actors that provide insights into collaborations and relationships within the network.

To deepen our understanding of the digital divide in HE, this study draws on the TPACK framework and ANT to investigate how disparities affect the digital competencies, learning experiences and career preparation of fashion students. Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge provides a framework for integrating technology effectively and focuses on the intersection of content, pedagogy and technology to foster new teaching competencies to improve learning outcomes.³² Actor–Network theory complements the TPACK framework by exploring the dynamic relationships between human and non–human actors that include students, educators, technologies and infrastructure, to reveal how digital tools are adopted within the fashion industry and embedded in fashion education.³³ By examining the roles, resources and environments that shape digitally mediated learning, ANT challenges traditional assumptions about technology in education and offers fresh perspectives for rethinking curriculum design and pedagogical practice.

The interdisciplinary combination of TPACK and ANT is crucial. Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge illuminates the pedagogical and technological knowledge for effective integration, while ANT unpacks sociometrical dynamics within complex networks. This approach explores not only the presence or absence of technology (the digital divide), but also the interplay of actors and their agency in shaping digital competences, learning experiences and career preparation for a digitally driven industry.

Research methods and design

A qualitative approach was adopted to examine how geographical location influences the integration of digital technologies into fashion education in two South African HEIs located in contrasting environments. Higher education institution 1 is in a small town in the Eastern Cape with limited access to industry infrastructure, while HEI2 is in Gauteng, South Africa’s economic hub. Gauteng has a well-established fashion sector and is known as the ‘Place of Gold’, attracting significant opportunities. It is perceived to offer better socioeconomic opportunities due to its strong economic position.³⁴ The Eastern Cape is one of South Africa’s poorest provinces, with poverty rates higher than the national average. This is due to the economic neglect of the former homelands, previously known as Transkei and Ciskei. High rural poverty has driven urbanisation that leads to increased urban unemployment rates,³⁵ and socio-economic disparities are evident between affluent and marginalised communities. Wealthy areas have advanced infrastructure, comprehensive social services and a high concentration of employment opportunities. In contrast, many predominantly Black communities face systematic social injustices, including violent crime, unemployment and poverty. To further exacerbate inequality, these marginalised communities are geographically distant from economic centres.³⁶ Figure 3, extracted from Machabele and Weir-Smith,³⁶ shows the location of South African metro areas, with the economically viable and poorest areas also highlighted. The Gauteng province (represented by the City of Tshwane, Ekurhuleni, and the City of Johannesburg) shows a high concentration of jobs, while the Eastern Cape (represented by Buffalo City and Nelson Mandela Bay) has fewer job opportunities.³⁶

FIGURE 3: Location of South African metro areas.

The two participating institutions were purposively selected for their fashion design programmes and distinct geographic contexts to enable a comparative exploration of digital integration in rural and urban settings. Due to time constraints, the study was limited to these two institutions.

Data collection

This review followed Stratton’s³⁷ guidance, which emphasises that a valid and comprehensive review is a systematic, scientifically structured analysis of a defined body of literature, applying the rigour of original research to minimise bias in the findings. Secondary data were collected through a targeted literature review, focusing on studies published between 2008 and 2025 to capture recent advances in digital technologies and their role in fashion education, while excluding non-English articles.

The review included a systematic search of digital databases and indexing services to identify sources relevant to exploring how geographic location, particularly disparities in resources and infrastructure, affects the integration of digital technologies into fashion design education. Articles that did not meet these criteria were excluded.

The searches were conducted using online databases: (1) Google Scholar; (2) Berg Fashion Library; (3) EBSCOhost; and (4) Scopus. Additional articles were identified through backward and forward snowballing techniques,^17,38 using keywords such as digital technology, fashion design education, the 4IR, geographic inequalities and skills integration. The search continued until data saturation was reached, when no new information was emerging.

Primary data were collected through fieldwork with selected participants from July 2022 to February 2023. To capture insights from both academic and industry perspectives, participants were selected for their expertise in the development of fashion products and their lived experience. This approach ensured a comprehensive understanding of the influence of geographic context on the adoption of digital technology in fashion education.

Population

As shown in Figure 4, the sample groups of participants were:

• Final–year fashion design students (31%) at HEI1 and HEI2;
• Lecturers (19%) teaching fashion design at both institutions;
• Alumni (23%) of various HEIs that offer fashion design programmes who are currently employed in small, medium and large fashion manufacturing and retail companies. They include those who are proficient in digital technologies, as well as those who rely on traditional fashion product development methods; and
• Fashion industry professionals (27%) (fashion designers, garment technologists and pattern designers) with knowledge of HEI fashion programmes and active experience in fashion product development.

FIGURE 4: Roles and distribution of study participants by designation.

Sample

Purposive sampling, a cost-effective non-probability technique, was used to select relevant participants from the target population.³⁹ The sample consisted of 25 participants, as detailed in Table 1.

Data collection method

Interviews were conducted to explore the extent to which the two selected HEIs had integrated new product development systems into their fashion design curricula. A combination of open-ended and closed-ended questions was used to capture both detailed perspectives and structured responses. Open-ended questions were initially prioritised to familiarise participants with the topics and encourage voluntary participation. The interview schedule and a detailed outline of the research interview questions are visually presented in Online Appendix 1 and Online Appendix 1 Table A-A1.

Drawing on secondary data, the interviews focused on the following: (1) categories of digital technologies used to enhance learning; (2) improvement of teaching methodologies for fashion product development; (3) potential changes resulting from technology integration; and (4) the impact of technological advancement on teaching and learning. Additional questions addressed implementation planning, resource requirements and readiness for change, key factors for successful adoption. To accommodate geographically dispersed participants, interviews were conducted both online and face–to–face. Notes and audio recordings were taken for precision, transcribed using MS Teams and Microsoft (MS) Word Online, and uploaded to ATLAS.ti version 25, 2002-2025 (Lumivero, LLC, Denver, Colorado, US) for coding and thematic analysis.

Data analysis

The interview data were analysed using thematic analysis, a structured and summative approach supported by ATLAS.ti v25. The responses were systematically organised to synthesise the empirical findings with the existing literature. The process involved four steps: (1) Reviewing transcripts to identify recurring themes; (2) Coding of data according to these themes; (3) Examining coded data to detect patterns and connections; and (4) Consolidating results to highlight key trends and insights in relation to the research questions.⁴⁰ Established themes guided the coding process and structured the findings, while emerging themes and sub-codes served as headings and subheadings in the literature review and the presentation of results.

Ethical considerations

Ethical clearance for the study was granted by the Research Ethics Committee (Ref. No. 201100924/2021/39) of the researcher’s home institution, and the respective ethics boards of HEI1 (using the same reference number as the researcher’s home institution) and HEI2 (REC/2022/02/017), authorising the investigation in two HEIs located in differing geographic settings. Both institutions granted permission for their fashion students and lecturers to participate. Informed consent was obtained from all participants prior to conducting the interviews and audio recordings. Ethical standards were rigorously maintained throughout the research process, ensuring that participants were fully informed about the objectives, procedures, benefits and their rights to voluntary participation, withdrawal and confidentiality.⁴¹ To protect anonymity, participants were assigned pseudonyms. No personally identifiable information was collected, and no images were captured. All online interviews were conducted with the video turned off. To further protect confidentiality, data were securely stored in an authorised repository of the researcher’s home institution.

Results

Analysis of the data revealed three themes – geographic location, fashion industry and education – as well as sub-themes aligned with the research question. These are summarised in Table 2.

The findings from the data analysis are presented below, organised by themes and sub-themes, to illustrate the impact of geographic location on the integration of digital technologies into fashion education.

Theme 1: Geographic location

Institutional region disparities (higher education institution 1 versus higher education institution 2)

Access to HE is essential for promoting social mobility and developing a highly skilled and resilient workforce. However, many students continue to be systematically excluded from university, generation after generation, not because of a lack of ability, but due to limited opportunities. Although enrolment rates among young people have increased, concerns remain about the persistent impact of socio-economic disparities on university participation.²⁶

This theme examines the institutional region as a key external factor that influences HE performance. These findings are consistent with studies by Lou et al.⁴² and Brownie et al.⁴³ Before 1994, the South African HE system was characterised by significant inequalities and a lack of alignment with economic needs.⁴⁴ Post-1994 reforms aimed to create a unified system through institutional mergers previously rare in the publicly funded HE sector, but inequalities persist.⁴⁴

Higher education institution 1, located in a smaller town, faces resource limitations that restrict students’ access to the fashion industry due to inadequate infrastructure. Students and lecturers reported being unable to use computers because the available devices are not functional, and there is no access to digital technologies. Consequently, students have fewer opportunities for direct engagement with industry practices and exposure to advanced technologies.

In contrast, HEI2, located in a larger city, benefits from better infrastructure and stronger industry connections, offering students more hands-on learning experiences. This contrast underscores the significant impact of geographical location on educational opportunities, particularly in terms of access to digital resources. The lack of advanced digital skills among many HEI1 students, especially at the postgraduate level, poses a challenge, as they are expected to build on competencies they have not developed sufficiently.

The fashion industry and academic institutions expect all postgraduate students, regardless of institution or location, to demonstrate the same proficiency in fashion product development technologies. However, this expectation overlooks the disparities in resources and infrastructure that result from geographic location. White and Lee⁴⁵ recognise the failure to acknowledge distance as a barrier and a global issue, suggesting that government funding could support students disadvantaged by location. They note that no national or university programmes that address these disadvantages have been identified in the substantive literature. Brownie et al.⁴³ echo this, acknowledging that geographic location affects access to educational services and opportunities; however, the extent to which location determines enrolment decisions or outcomes is less clear. Urban universities have greater access to modern technologies and industry networks, while institutions in remote areas often face significant limitations due to their location. This imbalance underscores the need to address systemic inequalities in educational access.

The geographic divide between HEI1 and HEI2 directly affects students’ access to learning opportunities and industry-relevant resources. Furthermore, graduate employability, the degree of technological integration within universities and the level of institutional innovation are critical factors that influence student outcomes.⁴⁴

Limited industry access in remote areas (factory closures and travel restrictions)

Sub-theme 1.2 highlights significant disparities between HEI1 and HEI2 in terms of access to modern resources and infrastructure, which directly affect the preparedness of fashion students for digital technologies. Higher education institution 2 benefits from advanced facilities, up-to-date software and exposure to industry-relevant tools. In contrast, HEI1 faces considerable challenges due to its geographic location, limited access to product development resources and inadequate infrastructure.

These limitations are reflected in the following statement:

‘There is a rarity of factory visits due to the lack of garment factories and the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic, which has led to factory closures, restricting us from visiting the factories.’ (Lecturer 1, HEI1, Male)

Lecturer 2 from HEI1 further emphasised this constraint, referring to pandemic-related travel restrictions and financial cuts in universities:

‘Student access to factories in more advanced urban provinces has been limited since 2021 due to the ongoing tense situation.’ (Lecturer 2, HEI1, Female)

Although HEI1 acknowledges the importance of integrating digital technologies into fashion education, its implementation remains largely theoretical. This gap in practical application arises from limited training opportunities and insufficient access to essential resources, such as computers capable of running pattern-making software. In contrast, HEI2 benefits from strong industry partnerships that support internships, workshops and joint projects, significantly improving students’ practical learning. Higher education institution 1, however, lacks such industry connections due to the scarcity of local manufacturers and fashion-related enterprises, resulting in fewer opportunities for students to engage with professionals and develop practical skills.

Theme 2: Fashion industry

Industry’s mixed adoption of digital tools: Reliance on manual alterations

High start-up costs and limited access to digital technologies remain significant barriers in the fashion industry, while some companies provide only minimal computer resources for tasks such as digital pattern alterations.⁴⁶ However, pattern-making expertise remains essential, and its absence leads to issues such as design misappropriation. Meyer and Norman³⁰ recommend balancing fundamental principles with specialised digital training in fashion education. Study participants supported this view and advocated for a curriculum that blends traditional and digital methods, whether it is a 50/50 split or through a gradual transition. An independent fashion designer and quality manager emphasised that digital skills are critical to maintaining industry relevance and competitiveness, highlighting the shortage of digitally trained pattern designers. The participant called on the HEIs to equip students with these essential skills.

The digital transformation of garment construction is an important sub-sector of apparel manufacturing. Participants were asked: What approaches or techniques are used by both the fashion industry and the participating HEIs in the context of garment construction? Industry practitioners stressed the need for students to develop digital competencies. Higher education institution 2 students demonstrated willingness to engage with industry; however, despite better university resources, they preferred traditional garment manufacturing when starting their own businesses due to resource constraints and concerns about high start-up costs after graduation.

The geographical disparities between HEI1 and HEI2 further highlighted the digital divide. Participants at HEI1 have limited access to modern resources and infrastructure and showed a limited understanding of industry realities. A HEI1 lecturer stated:

‘We have Lectra systems which are CAD, but at the moment they are not in service, not in use, and our focus at the moment, it’s only on manual.’ (Lecturer 1, HEI1, Male)

A participating student from HEI1 said:

‘For now, we have been told that the software we are supposed to use in the computer lab has not yet been installed, so we are still having challenges with that. So, we have been watching videos of certain practical aspects of the CAD.’ (Speaker-3, Student Focus Group [SFG], HEI1)

Participants reported using a combination of conventional, digital, semi-automated and theoretical digital methods. Despite technological advances in pattern making, lead times remained a concern, and garment sewing continues to rely heavily on human labour:

‘The factory is still very traditional; there is nothing three-dimensional in the production floor, we still do everything traditionally.’ (Alumnus 6, 40 years, Female).

An independent fashion designer echoed this view, noting:

‘With my brand, I feel very comfortable (sewing garments by hand) because I do not know if the quality can sometimes be affected when the human hand is removed from a product.’ (Alumnus 4, 35 years, Male)

Access to digital technology in garment manufacturing remains limited and is primarily confined to specialised machines.

Theme 3: Education

Varied digital exposure in higher education institutions

Theme 3 highlights the varied exposure to digital education across participating HEIs, which emphasises the impact of technological advancements on teaching and learning in fashion product development. The findings underscore the importance of integrating digital technologies into the fashion education curriculum. When asked about its relevance, all participants unanimously affirmed its necessity.

Fashion design students and lecturers acknowledged the vital role digital technologies play in fashion product development, a view echoed by industry participants who emphasised their indispensability in modern apparel production. However, a significant challenge emerged during the interviews; students at HEI1 lack a solid foundation in digital technologies that limit their ability to use the software and hardware for the development of digital products. This issue is compounded by the institution’s limited resources, which hinder comprehensive digital education. A HEI1 lecturer explained:

‘At the moment, because the system is not in use, we are teaching the systems theoretically, taking students through the process, helping them understand how to operate the system, but not printing garment patterns out to use them for production.’ (Lecturer 1, HEI1, Male)

Despite these obstacles, the interview insights highlight the undeniable need to incorporate digital technologies into the education of fashion product development and emphasise their central role in shaping the future landscape of the fashion industry. This integration is crucial for local competitiveness on a global scale, where success depends on technological advancements, accelerated time to market, diversified product ranges and improved garment quality.⁴⁷

The theme of education and its sub-theme – varied digital exposure and curriculum gaps – also explored the level of study at which participants were first introduced to digital technologies and provides insight into disparities between the two participating universities. The findings indicate that the students’ experiences with the integration of digital technology in fashion education vary significantly. Some graduate fashion students were introduced to digital systems alongside traditional methods as early as their first year, while others only began using digital systems in their second or even third year. This inconsistency reflected broader challenges in access to digital resources and hands-on training. The students also expressed concerns about the lack of practical experience, saying:

‘We do the manual way. In most cases, we have just been introduced theoretically to the computer aided design way of doing it, but we have not done any practical in that sense.’ (SFG, HEI1, Female)

The students at HEI1 are only exposed to theoretical knowledge of digital pattern making, which highlights the challenges of teaching practical subjects through a predominantly theoretical framework. This issue is evident in student feedback:

‘We do everything manually. The software is not installed yet, so we still have challenges in the practical aspects of Computer Aided Design [CAD], not knowing how it works delays us.’ (SFG, HEI1, Female)

In contrast, HEI2 appears to be in the process of integrating digital technologies into its curriculum:

‘This year we are given a choice because last year we were told that in fourth year we can use both methods, manual or digital. It’s up to us which one we wanted choose.’ (Speaker-3, SFG, HEI1)

From an industry perspective, there is a notable disparity in the degree to which companies within the fashion sector have embraced digital transformation. Although some organisations have adapted more quickly, others remain in the early stages of adoption.²⁸ Despite the reluctance of certain manufacturers to incorporate the available digital technologies, the COVID-19 pandemic acted as a catalyst, compelling companies to implement new ways of working (Lecturers from HEI1).

This theme also encompassed pattern making and garment construction. To understand the perspectives of participants on digital transformation in pattern making within the fashion industry and HEIs, a key question was posed: ‘What approaches or techniques do you use in the product development process, especially in relation to digital transformation and pattern making?’ The findings showed that digital tools are reshaping pattern making in the industry. Although practitioners valued digital transformation, they emphasised the continued importance of conventional methods, particularly for manual alterations. In HEI1, the absence of installed software delays student learning and hinders progress, leaving them unprepared for a study course that emphasises hands-on product development (Lecturer from HEI1).

In contrast, HEI2 is integrating digital technologies into pattern making. Higher education institution 1 is based on theoretical instruction due to limited staff development, outdated software and financial constraints. A student from HEI1 expressed frustration about the lack of installed software, which delayed their progress in CAD and practical learning (Student Focus Group from HEI1), stating that this lack of knowledge will affect them when they join the industry. Society could either artificially impose digitalisation on universities, or inhibit it due to a lack of funding, necessary organisational decisions and similar factors. Students might either have a strong demand for innovations in education or no demand at all. In academia, personal ambitions and scepticism influence the progress of the information technology-based revolution.²

Discussion

Skills for Industry 4.0 and 5.0

Digital expertise is essential for modern clothing professionals. Digital technologies are transforming the textile industry towards sustainable production by incorporating renewable materials, energy efficiency and circular economy principles.¹⁵ Industry practitioners emphasised the importance of mastering both basic design principles (pattern making and garment construction) and digital tools. To remain competitive in an evolving fashion landscape, South African manufacturers must adopt innovations such as automation and digital design tools to improve efficiency and responsiveness.¹² Graduates without these competencies face challenges in a competitive global marketplace where success depends on technological agility, diversified product ranges and quality improvement.

The outcomes of Theme 3 showed that HEI2 students are exposed early to digital tools (e.g. CAD in the first year), whereas HEI1 students only receive theoretical knowledge, which delays practical preparation. Industry graduates emphasised the balance between traditional craftsmanship and digital innovation to maintain quality and competitiveness.

Education: Integrating digital technologies

Geographic location: Rural–urban divides in infrastructure exacerbate inequities

This study demonstrates that the integration of digital technologies in fashion design education is heavily influenced by geographical location, which leads to unequal access, digital competencies and career readiness across institutions. Qualitative data underscore a digital divide between a rural and an urban HEI in South Africa. Urban fashion universities generally benefit from greater access to digital tools and industry resources, while remote institutions face significant constraints that limit student access to educational technologies and affect their readiness for postgraduate studies and careers in the fashion industry.^12,44 Theme 3 results highlight inequalities in practical learning. The industry collaborations of HEI2 enable workshops and internships, while the theoretical approach of HEI1 lacks practical application.

Technology skills and curriculum gaps

Mbatha²⁴ emphasises that enhancing graduate readiness for the South African clothing sector requires early and consistent access to technical education, while Mourlam et al.⁴⁸ report that students’ experiences with educational technologies vary according to the level of institutional integration. Therefore, HEIs must bridge the digital divide to ensure equitable skills development. Urban HEIs such as HEI2 integrate digital technologies through updated curricula, vendor partnerships and staff training, while rural HEIs such as HEI1 face barriers such as outdated software, financial constraints and limited staff development. Sub-theme 3 highlights the inconsistencies in digital adoption; some students use CAD already from the first year, while others only gain access later.

Alenezi et al.¹² argue that digitisation in HE improves course quality and reduces dropout rates by identifying learning barriers, yet resistance to full adoption remains a challenge. Lecturers also cite the restrictions of the Department of Higher Education and Training (DHET) curriculum and large class sizes as obstacles. To maintain employability and relevance, universities are continuously updating systems and curricula to incorporate CAD and other digital design tools.²⁴

Education: Higher education institutions are balancing traditional and digital pedagogy through equity-driven strategies

The combined application of the TPACK framework and ANT has been pivotal in revealing systemic digital inequalities. Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge offers a structured lens to understand how pedagogy, content and technology must intersect effectively within fashion education. In rural institutions with limited resources and digital infrastructure, the framework highlights misalignment between these three elements, making it challenging for students to acquire the requisite competencies.³² In contrast, urban institutions benefit from better access to digital resources that enables lecturers and students to integrate technologies more seamlessly and align curricula with the evolving demands of the fashion industry.⁴⁶ Actor–Network theory complements this by framing divides as socio-technical networks. By treating digital platforms – like CAD software – and lecturers, students and institutional policies as connected actors, it is demonstrated how access, or its absence, shapes learning outcomes and the ability of students to adapt to technological advances.³³

Value of combining Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge and Actor–Network Theory

The strength of these theories lies in their combined ability to address both the pedagogical and infrastructural dimensions of the digital divide. Together, they reveal how unequal access to digital technologies affects student competencies and career prospects. It offers a comprehensive lens for assessing institutional readiness and proposes targeted interventions. This interplay underscores that technology in education functions not only as a pedagogical tool, but also as a socio–technical actor that operates within complex institutional and geographic contexts.

Constraints and challenges

Despite their value, these frameworks have limitations. Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge, while robust in analysing teaching and learning dynamics, struggles to capture larger systemic issues such as unequal resource allocation or institutional policies. Similarly, ANT’s expansive focus on actor-network relationships complicates its operationalisation in small-scale qualitative studies. Both approaches require intense data collection and advanced analytical capacity, posing challenges in resource-constrained environments.

Therefore, the combined application of the TPACK and ANT frameworks provides a multilayered understanding of the digital divide in fashion education. By highlighting both pedagogical and infrastructural dimensions, this approach offers a valuable foundation for reshaping institutional policies and practices. The key challenge remains to ensure that advances in technology benefit all students, regardless of geographic location and to foster an equitable, inclusive and future–ready fashion education landscape.

Limitations

Despite careful selection of the study population within a defined context, this study was limited to two selected South African HEIs that offer fashion design programmes. Consequently, the findings are specific to these two institutions and may not be fully generalisable to other HEIs. The selection of these HEIs was purposive, as they both offer comprehensive fashion design programmes and were accessible for data collection.

The study focused on the integration of digital technologies in practical components of fashion design education, such as pattern making and garment construction. Another curriculum was excluded. This narrow scope was intentional to allow for an in-depth exploration of digital tools in technically challenging areas, but it limits the ability to capture the context of the broader curriculum.

Implication for theory and practice

This study demonstrates the value of applying the TPACK framework together with ANT to examine how geographic location influences digital learning in fashion education. Theoretically, the combination of TPACK and ANT provides a nuanced lens for understanding both the pedagogical and infrastructural dimensions of digital divides and reveals how human and non–human actors – lecturers, students, equipment and institutional policies – shape access and outcomes.

Practically, these insights highlight the urgent need for targeted interventions, including digital laboratories, staff training and industry–academic partnerships, to bridge rural–urban gaps and ensure equitable access to digital technologies. Although the application of these frameworks required intensive data and analytical rigour, the approach yielded a multilayered understanding that can affect institutional and policy reforms. Future research should extend this approach to more institutions and geographic contexts, focusing on digital literacy programmes and evaluating their long–term impact. Such studies can support the development of a more inclusive, resilient and future–ready fashion education landscape.

Industry and educational recommendations

Students, alumni and industry professionals acknowledged the complexity of implementing digital tools and stressed the need for early adoption while maintaining a balance between traditional craftsmanship and technological innovation. Despite advances in digital pattern making, garment construction remains labour-intensive and reliant on skilled labour. As participant disparities indicated, HEIs face systematic challenges. Therefore, making meaningful change is a long-term process. Geographic location significantly affects educational outcomes, particularly in postgraduate programmes where some students lack basic digital skills.

Bridging the digital skills gap

This study recommends a part-time bridging course between the fashion diploma and postgraduate qualifications to address the digital skills gap. The target beneficiaries include graduates who pursue further study and entry-level professionals. The course should cover 3D garment simulation, digital pattern making, virtual prototyping and fashion-specific CAD tools aligned to industry standards.

Infrastructure and capacity building

To ensure the success of the bridging course and address the greater disparities in digital education, the researcher also advocates for the gradual improvement of universities’ digital infrastructure by establishing digital laboratories supported by government and industry partnerships in funding, equipment and software. Continuous staff training and mentoring are essential to the effective integration of digital tools into teaching. In addition, initiatives to build student confidence in the use of digital technologies are critical. Without these efforts, the relevance and quality of fashion education and graduate readiness for the digital industry could be compromised.

Conclusion

Future research and policy directions

The study recommends that future research address the digital literacy and infrastructure gaps identified by TPACK and ANT through targeted multi–level interventions. To accommodate graduates from remote institutions, digital bridging courses should be introduced to build foundational digital competencies to ease transitions into postgraduate studies and the workforce. To mitigate infrastructure limitations, HEIs should prioritise the establishment of collaborative digital hubs and laboratories that are supported by national policies and industry partnerships. Curriculum reforms must balance traditional design methods with digital proficiency to align with the demands of 4IR.⁸ Continuous staff training and digital mentoring are vital for institutional sustainability.

Acknowledgements

This article is based on research originally conducted as part of Bongiwe Kolisi’s doctoral thesis titled ‘The integration of digital technologies into fashion product development education’, submitted to the Faculty of Informatics and Design, Cape Peninsula University of Technology. The thesis is currently unpublished and not publicly available. The thesis was supervised by Johannes C. Cronje (retired), Alettia V. Chisin (retired) and Desiree Smal. The manuscript has been revised and adapted for journal publication. The author confirms that the content has not been previously published or disseminated and complies with ethical standards for original publication.

Competing interests

The author, Bongiwe Kolisi, reported that they received funding from Cape Peninsula University of Technology (CPUT) which may be affected by the research reported in the enclosed publication. The author has disclosed those interests fully and has implemented an approved plan for managing any potential conflicts arising from their involvement. The terms of these funding arrangements have been reviewed and approved by the affiliated University in accordance with its policy on objectivity in research.

CRediT authorship contribution

Bongiwe Kolisi: Conceptualisation, Data curation, Formal analysis, Investigation, Methodology, Project administration, Resources, Software, Validation, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing. Alettia V. Chisin: Conceptualisation, Resources, Supervision, Writing – review & editing. Johannes C. Cronje: Conceptualisation, Methodology, Supervision, Writing – review & editing. Desiree Smal: Conceptualisation, Supervision, Writing – review & editing. All authors reviewed the article, contributed to the discussion of results, approved the final version for submission and publication and take responsibility for the integrity of its findings.

Funding information

This work was supported by the university where the authors are affiliated. This work was supported by CPUT.

Data availability

The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author, Bongiwe Kolisi, upon reasonable request.

Disclaimer

The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the authors and are the product of professional research. They do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of any affiliated institution, funder, agency or that of the publisher. The authors are responsible for this article’s results, findings, and content.

References