912 resultados para Architectural education
em Queensland University of Technology - ePrints Archive
Resumo:
The popularity of Web 2.0 technology amongst tertiary students has become an increased talking point due to its pedagogical capabilities. The purpose of this research was to incorporate the social network Facebook within an architectural design studio to reintroduce the social interaction that was once generated within the traditional, 24 hour setting. This interaction has proven vital to an architect’s future as here they develop the initial peer network within the industry. The study draws upon existing literature to gage the effectiveness of introducing Facebook within the contemporary university environment, further, a case study was established within a second year architectural class. The correspondence was monitored at five intervals across the semester, with the information that was shared, quantified. The aim of this research was to provide the necessary foundation for the feasibility on the possible inclusion of Facebook within architectural tertiary education.
Resumo:
This qualitative study looks at the joint output of 20 architecture students from 2 different countries during their short respective Study Tours to each other’s country to discern the effect of cross-cultural experiences on their learning. This paper uses the students’ joint design efforts and reflective writings to investigate the outcome of this cross-cultural educational exchange. Their joint design efforts resulted in the making of small built structures, drawings and collaborative design proposals for an urban setting. In addition, a short questionnaire and personal interviews were also used as methods to gain insight into their experience and to use as a comparative study. The question is also raised in this paper of whether spontaneous friendship among students is integral to long term learning in a cross-cultural context in comparison to pre-designed learning objectives on the part of the educators. This paper also initiates the dialogue of the extent of cultural influences and universal ideas on collaborative architectural design. With increasing joint design ventures between architectural firms in different countries, there is interest in how collaborative design can be understood in a cross-cultural context. This paper examines short term cross cultural experiences and its contribution to architectural education.
Resumo:
It has been nearly 25 years since the problems associated with passive learning in large undergraduate classes were first established by McDermott (1991). STEM education, for example North Carolina State University’s SCALE-UP project, has subsequently been influenced by some unique aspects of design studio education. While there are now many institutions applying SCALE-UP or similar approaches to enable lively interaction, enhanced learning, increased student engagement, and to teach many different content areas to classes of all sizes, nearly all of these have remained in the STEM fields (Beichner, 2008). Architectural education, although originally at the forefront of this field, has arguably been left behind. Architectural practice is undergoing significant change, globally. Access to new technology and the development of specialised architectural documentation software has scaffolded new building procurement methods and allowed consultant teams to work more collaboratively, efficiently and even across different time zones. Up until recently, the spatial arrangements, pedagogical approaches, and project work outcomes in the architectural design studio, have not been dissimilar to its inception. It is not possible to keep operating architectural design studios the same way that they have for the past two hundred years, with this new injection of high-end technology and personal mobile Wi-Fi enabled devices. Employing a grounded theory methodology, this study reviews the current provision of architectural design learning terrains across a range of tertiary institutions, in Australia. Some suggestions are provided for how these spaces could be modified to address the changing nature of the profession, and implications for how these changes may impact the design of future SCALE-UP type spaces outside of the discipline of architecture, are also explored.
Resumo:
Diversification and expansion of global higher education in the 21st century, has resulted in Learning Landscapes for architectural education that can no longer be sustained by the traditional model. Changes have resulted because of surging student numbers, extensions to traditional curricula, evolving competency standards and accreditation requirements, and modified geographical and pedagogical boundaries. The influx of available new technology has helped to democratise knowledge, transforming when, where and how learning takes place. Pressures on government funded higher education budgets highlight the need for a critical review of the current approach to the design and use of learning environments. Efficient design of physical space contributes significantly to savings in provision, management and use of facilities, while also potentially improving pedagogical quality. The purpose of this research is to identify emerging trends in the design of future Learning Landscapes for architectural education in Australasia; to understand where and how students of architecture are likely to learn, in the future context. It explores the important linkages between space, place, pedagogy, technology and context, using a multi methodological qualitative research approach. An Australasian context study will explore the Learning Landscapes of 23 Schools of Architecture across Australia, New Zealand and Papua New Guinea. The focus of this paper is on the methodology which is being employed to undertake dynamic data collection for the study. The research will be determined through mapping all forms of architectural learning environments, pedagogical approaches and contextual issues, to bridge the gap between academic theory, and architectural design practice. An initial understanding that pedagogy is an intrinsic component imbedded within the design of learning environments, will play an important role. Active learning environments which are exemplified by the architectural design studio, support dynamic project based and collaborative connected learning models. These have recently become a lot more common in disciplines outside of design and the arts. It is anticipated, therefore, that the implications for this research may well have a positive impact far beyond the confines of the architectural studio learning environment.
Resumo:
This paper discusses two different approaches to teaching design and their modes of delivery and reflects upon their successes and failures. Two small groups of third year design students have been given projects focussing on incorporation of daylighting to architectural design in studios having different design themes. In association with the curriculum, the themes were Digital Tools and Sustainability. Although both studios had the topic of daylighting, the aim and methodology used were different. Digital Tool studio’s aim was to teach how to design daylighting by using a digital tool, where as, Sustainability studio aimed at using scale modelling as a tool to learn about daylighting and integrating it into design. Positive results for providing student learning success within the University context were the students’ chance to learn and practice some new skills –using a new tool for designing; integration of the tutors’ extensive research expertise to their teaching practice; and the students’ construction of their own understanding of knowledge in a student-centred educational environment. This environment created a very positive attitude in the form of exchanging ideas and collaboration among the students of Digital Tools students at the discussion forum. Sustainability group students were enthusiastic about designing and testing various proposals. Problems that both studios experienced were mainly related to timing. Synchronizing with other groups of their studios and learning of a new skill on top of an already complicated process of design learning were the setbacks.
Resumo:
This action research examines the enhancement of visual communication within the architectural design studio through physical model making. „It is through physical model making that designers explore their conceptual ideas and develop the creation and understanding of space,‟ (Salama & Wilkinson 2007:126). This research supplements Crowther‟s findings extending the understanding of visual dialogue to include physical models. „Architecture Design 8‟ is the final core design unit at QUT in the fourth year of the Bachelor of Design Architecture. At this stage it is essential that students have the ability to communicate their ideas in a comprehensive manner, relying on a combination of skill sets including drawing, physical model making, and computer modeling. Observations within this research indicates that students did not integrate the combination of the skill sets in the design process through the first half of the semester by focusing primarily on drawing and computer modeling. The challenge was to promote deeper learning through physical model making. This research addresses one of the primary reasons for the lack of physical model making, which was the limited assessment emphasis on the physical models. The unit was modified midway through the semester to better correlate the lecture theory with studio activities by incorporating a series of model making exercises conducted during the studio time. The outcome of each exercise was assessed. Tutors were surveyed regarding the model making activities and a focus group was conducted to obtain formal feedback from students. Students and tutors recognised the added value in communicating design ideas through physical forms and model making. The studio environment was invigorated by the enhanced learning outcomes of the students who participated in the model making exercises. The conclusions of this research will guide the structure of the upcoming iteration of the fourth year design unit.
Resumo:
Considering how dominant a feature of architectural education the critique has been, and continues to be, little has been written about the affective dimension of engaging students during this key final stage of the design or documentation process. For most students, the critique is unlike any previous educational or life experience that they have ever confronted, and the abrupt change in the instructor’s role, from tutor to judge, can be disconcerting at a time when the student is feeling their most vulnerable. The fact that the period immediately leading up to the critique habitually entails not only a focused and sustained effort, but also sleepless nights of intensive work, further exacerbates this. The purpose of this paper is to recognise the affective phenomena influencing student engagement, during the critique. The participants of this research were second to fourth year architecture students at a major Australian university. Following the implementation of trials in alternative modes of critique in architectural design and technology studios, qualitative data was obtained from students, through questionnaires and interviews. Six indicators of engagement were investigated through this research: motivation and agency, transactional engagement with staff, transactional engagement with students, institutional support, active citizenship, and non-institutional support. This research confirms that affective phenomena play a significant role in the events of the critique; the relationship between instructor and student influences student engagement, as does the choreography and spatial planning of the critique environment; and these factors ultimately have an impact on the depth of student learning.
Resumo:
A full architectural education typically involves five years of formal education and two years of practice experience under the supervision of a registered architect. In many architecture courses some of this period of internship can be taken either as a ‘year out’ between years of study, or during enrolment as credited study; work place learning or work integrated learning. This period of learning can be characterised as an internship in which the student, as an adult learner, is supervised by their employer. This is a highly authentic learning environment, but one in which the learner is both student and employee, and the architect is both teacher and employer; at times conflicting roles. While the educational advantages of such authentic practice experience are well recognised, there are also concerns about the quality and variability of such experiences. This paper reviews the current state of practice, with respect to architectural internships, and analyses such practice using Laurillard’s ‘conversational framework’ (2002). The framework highlights the interactions and affordances between teacher and student in the form of concepts, adaptations, reflections, actions and feedback. A review of common practice in architectural work place learning, internships in other fields of education, and focused research at the author’s own university, are discussed, then analysed for ‘affordances’ of learning. Such analysis shows both the potential of work place learning to offer a unique environment for learning, and the need to organise and construct such experiences in ways that facilitates learning.
Resumo:
While the studio environment has been promoted as an ideal educational setting for project-based disciplines associated with the art and design, few qualitative studies have been undertaken in a comprehensive way, with even fewer giving emphasis to the teachers and students and how they feel about changing their environment. This situation is problematic given the changes and challenges facing higher education, including those associated with new technologies such as online learning. In response, this paper describes a comparative study employing grounded theory to identify and describe teachers’ and students’ perceptions of the physical design studio (PDS) as well as the virtual design studio (VDS) of architectural students in an Australian university. The findings give significance to aspects of design education activities and their role in the development of integrated hybrid learning environments.
Resumo:
Extending Deleuze’s later writing on the cinema and engaging both film and built work, the article explores what I call the "close-up," an immanent subjectivity of architectural encounter, whereby the architectural surface aggressively colonizes the subject at close range through a touch or by another mechanism I describe as the "withdrawn effect," the surface assimilates the subject.
Resumo:
After state-wide flooding and a category-5 tropical cyclone, three-quarters of the state of Queensland was declared a disaster zone in early 2011. This deluge of adversity had a significant impact on university students, a few weeks prior to the start of the academic semester. The purpose of this paper is to examine the role that design plays in facilitating students to understand and respond to, adversity. The participants of this study were second and fourth year architectural design students at a large Australian University, in Queensland. As a part of their core architectural design studies, students were required to provide architectural responses to the recent catastrophic events in Queensland. Qualitative data was obtained through student surveys, work design work submitted by students and a survey of guests who attending an exhibition of the student work. The results of this research showed that the students produced more than just the required set of architectural drawings, process journals and models, but also recognition of the important role that the affective dimension of the flooding event and the design process played in helping them to both understand and respond to, adversity. They held the ‘real world’ experience and practical aspect of the assessment in higher regard than their typical focus on aesthetics and the making of iconic design. Perhaps most importantly, the students recognised that this process allowed them to have a voice, and a means to respond to adversity through the powerful language of design.
Resumo:
In a study aimed at better understanding how staff and students adapt to new blended studio learning environments (BSLE’s), a group of 165 second year architecture students at a large school of architecture in Australia were separated into two different design studio learning environments. 70% of students were allocated to a traditional studio design learning environment (TSLE) and 30% to a new, high technology embedded, prototype digital learning laboratory. The digital learning laboratory was purpose designed for the case-study users, adapted Student-Centred Active Learning Environment for Undergraduate Programs (SCALE-UP) principles, and built as part of a larger university research project. The architecture students attended the same lectures, followed the same studio curriculum and completed the same pieces of assessment; the only major differences were the teaching staff and physical environment within which the studios were conducted. At the end of the semester, the staff and students were asked to complete a questionnaire about their experiences and preferences within the two respective learning environments. Following this, participants were invited to participate in focus groups, where a synergistic approach was effected. Using a dual method qualitative approach, the questionnaire and survey data were coded and extrapolated using both thematic analysis and grounded theory methodology. The results from these two different approaches were compared, contrasted and finally merged, to reveal six distinct emerging themes, which were instrumental in offering resistance or influencing adaptation to, the new BLSE. This paper reports on the study, discusses the major contributors to negative resistance and proposes points for consideration, when transitioning from a TSLE to a BLSE.
Resumo:
The development of the Learning and Teaching Academic Standards Statement for Architecture (the Statement) centred on requirements for the Master of Architecture and proceeded alongside similar developments in the building and construction discipline under the guidance and support of the Australian Deans of Built Environment and Design (ADBED). Through their representation of Australian architecture programs, ADBED have provided high-level leadership for the Learning and Teaching Academic Standards Project in Architecture (LTAS Architecture). The threshold learning outcomes (TLOs), the description of the nature and extent of the discipline, and accompanying notes were developed through wide consultation with the discipline and profession nationally. They have been considered and debated by ADBED on a number of occasions and have, in their fi nal form, been strongly endorsed by the Deans. ADBED formed the core of the Architecture Reference Group (chaired by an ADBED member) that drew together representatives of every peak organisation for the profession and discipline in Australia. The views of the architectural education community and profession have been provided both through individual submissions and the voices of a number of peak bodies. Over two hundred individuals from the practising profession, the academic workforce and the student cohort have worked together to build consensus about the capabilities expected of a graduate of an Australian Master of Architecture degree. It was critical from the outset that the Statement should embrace the wisdom of the greater ‘tribe’, should ensure that graduates of the Australian Master of Architecture were eligible for professional registration and, at the same time, should allow for scope and diversity in the shape of Australian architectural education. A consultation strategy adopted by the Discipline Scholar involved meetings and workshops in Perth, Melbourne, Sydney, Canberra and Brisbane. Stakeholders from all jurisdictions and most universities participated in the early phases of consultation through a series of workshops that concluded late in October 2010. The Draft Architecture Standards Statement was formed from these early meetings and consultation in respect of that document continued through early 2011. This publication represents the outcomes of work to establish an agreed standards statement for the Master of Architecture. Significant further work remains to ensure the alignment of professional accreditation and recognition procedures with emerging regulatory frameworks cascading from the establishment of the Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Agency (TEQSA). The Australian architecture community hopes that mechanisms can be found to integrate TEQSA’s quality assurance purpose with well-established and understood systems of professional accreditation to ensure the good standing of Australian architectural education into the future. The work to build renewed and integrated quality assurance processes and to foster the interests of this project will continue, for at least the next eighteen months, under the auspices of Australian Learning and Teaching Council (ALTC)-funded Architecture Discipline Network (ADN), led by ADBED and Queensland University of Technology. The Discipline Scholar gratefully acknowledges the generous contributions given by those in stakeholder communities to the formulation of the Statement. Professional and academic colleagues have travelled and gathered to shape the Standards Statement. Debate has been vigorous and spirited and the Statement is rich with the purpose, critical thinking and good judgement of the Australian architectural education community. The commitments made to the processes that have produced this Statement reflect a deep and abiding interest by the constituency in architectural education. This commitment bodes well for the vibrancy and productivity of the emergent Architecture Discipline Network (ADN). Endorsement, in writing, was received from the Australian Institute of Architects National Education Committee (AIA NEC): The National Education Committee (NEC) of the Australian Institute of Architects thank you for your work thus far in developing the Learning and Teaching Academic Standards for Architecture In particular, we acknowledge your close consultation with the NEC on the project along with a comprehensive cross-section of the professional and academic communities in architecture. The TLOs with the nuanced levels of capacities – to identify, develop, explain, demonstrate etc – are described at an appropriate level to be understood as minimum expectations for a Master of Architecture graduate. The Architects Accreditation Council of Australia (AACA) has noted: There is a clear correlation between the current processes for accreditation and what may be the procedures in the future following the current review. The requirement of the outcomes as outlined in the draft paper to demonstrate capability is an appropriate way of expressing the measure of whether the learning outcomes have been achieved. The measure of capability as described in the outcome statements is enhanced with explanatory descriptions in the accompanying notes.
Resumo:
This book involves a comprehensive study of the learning environment by adopting Grounded Theory methodology in a qualitative comparative way.It explores the limitations and benefits of a face-to-face and a virtual design studio as experienced by architecture students and educators at an Australian university in order to find the optimal combination for a blended environment to enhance the students’ experience. The main outcome:holistic multidimensional blended learning model,that through the various modalities,provides adaptive capacity in a range of settings.The model facilitates learning through self-determination,self-management,and the personalisation of the learning environment. Another outcome:a conceptual design education framework,provides a basic tool for educators to evaluate existing learning environments and to develop new learning environments with enough flexibility to respond effectively to a highly dynamic and increasingly technological world.The provision of a practical framework to assist design schools to improve their educational settings according to a suitable pedagogy that meets today’s needs and accommodates tomorrow’s changes.