Traditionally, design -- and by extension design education -- has focused on the creation of distinct outputs (forms, artefacts, and objects) that satisfy a specific purpose and need. Historically these needs -- and often the designed outputs themselves -- have been dictated not by the designer but by clients and also through established disciplinary practices. Design was broadly framed as a commercial industry, where a client needed something (a poster, a chair) and the designer provided the requested output. Design education practices grew out of a master-apprentice approach, where students often learned by recreating idealized outputs repetitively. This didactic and skills-acquisition approach was sufficient when design focused on distinct fields (e.g., graphic, industrial, or fashion design), specific outputs, and traditionally understood challenges. As the field of design has expanded -- in the scope of practice, the complexity of challenges tackled, and the range of collaborators -- there is a need to re-examine our pedagogy. Traditional design education approaches are insufficient for the role that design needs to play in the 21st century. In this paper, I argue that a critical consideration of this re-examination is the reframing of a central tenet of design education, which is the production of outputs. Instead, what is needed is a re-focus considering the outcomes of design practice -- the processes involved, and the effects of our design actions and artefacts. I identify seven principal and interconnected factors that drive the need for this shift in focus.