This dissertation study focuses on students’ innovation competences in higher education. The aim of the research is to present assessment tools to measure students’ innovation competences, test and evaluate them in practice, and examine students’ innovation competences in innovative learning environments at the course and degree levels. The study has been implemented as a case study at one Finnish university of applied sciences, where innovation competences have been set as learning targets for all students in its pedagogical strategy, which is called innovation pedagogy. The research includes four independent sub-studies using mixed research methods. The first study tests and evaluates the functioning of the earlier developed model measuring students’ innovation competences (n=495). The second study supplements the first study, and evaluates and uses a further developed instrument in the innovative courses using students’ group interviews (approx. 30 students) and self-assessments (n=69). The third study examines students’ perceptions of learning innovation competences during the courses (n=77), and the fourth study (n=236) approaches students’ innovation competences and their associations with students’ study experiences of learning environments based on innovation pedagogy at the degree level. The dissertation study shows that innovation competence can be assessed, learned and supported already in higher educational environments. There were no differences in the learning of innovation competences by gender, study year, work experience, or course. Instead, certain individual and environmental factors, especially students’ motivation, the importance of learning, and the atmosphere of the course, are related to the learning of innovation competences. The results also show that students’ study experiences of learning environments based on innovation pedagogy play a significant role in the level of their innovation competences at the degree level. The students who have more experience on studying in different learning environments of innovation pedagogy assessed their innovation competences higher than those students who have less experience. All the six cornerstones of innovation pedagogy: activating learning and teaching methods; multidisciplinary learning environments; working life orientation and RDI integration; flexible curricula; entrepreneurship and internationalization, are associated with the students’ innovation competences. However, innovation pedagogy demands plenty of work to be visible in practice. During their 3–4 years of study, the students did not have many experiences studying in learning environments based on innovation pedagogy. Overall, this dissertation suggests that higher education institutions have a meaningful role in training innovative professionals, but special consideration should be placed on developing innovative learning environments.