Interactive architecture

This chapter explores the development of concepts of interactive environments by comparing two major projects that frame the period of this book. The Fun Palace of 1960 and the Generator of 1980 both proposed interactive environments responsive to the needs and behaviour of their users, but the contrast in terms of the available technology and what it enabled could not be more marked. The Fun Palace broke new architectural, organizational and social ground and was arguably the first proposition for cybernetic architecture; the Generator demonstrated how it could be achieved. Both projects are now acknowledged as seminal architectural propositions of the twentieth century, and both were designed by Cedric Price.

From tiers to tables – enhancing student experience through collaborative learning spaces

BACKGROUND Collaborative and active learning have been clearly identified as ways students can engage in learning with each other and the academic staff. Traditional tier based lecture theatres and the didactic style they engender are not popular with students today as evidenced by the low attendance rates for lectures. Many universities are installing spaces designed with tables for group interaction with evolutions on spaces such as the TEAL (Technology Enabled Active Learning) (Massachusetts Institute of Technology, n.d.) and SCALE-UP (Student-Centred Activities for Large-Enrolment Undergraduate Programs) (North Carolina State University, n.d.) models. Technology advances in large screen computers and applications have also aided the move to these collaborative spaces. How well have universities structured learning using these spaces and how have students engaged with the content, technology, space and each other? This paper investigates the application of collaborative learning in such spaces for a cohort of 800+ first year engineers in the context of learning about and developing professional skills representative of engineering practice. PURPOSE To determine whether moving from tiers to tables enhances the student experience. Does utilising technology rich, activity based, collaborative learning spaces lead to positive experiences and active engagement of first year undergraduate engineering students? In developing learning methodology and approach in new learning spaces, what needs to change from a more traditional lecture and tutorial configuration? DESIGN/METHOD A post delivery review and analysis of outcomes was undertaken to determine how well students and tutors engaged with learning in new collaborative learning spaces. Data was gathered via focus group and survey of tutors, students survey and attendance observations. The authors considered the unit delivery approach along with observed and surveyed outcomes then conducted further review to produce the reported results. RESULTS Results indicate high participation in the collaborative sessions while the accompanying lectures were poorly attended. Students reported a high degree of satisfaction with the learning experience; however more investigation is required to determine the degree of improvement in retained learning outcomes. Survey feedback from tutors found that students engaged well in the activities during tutorials and there was an observed improvement in the quality of professional practice modelled by students during sessions. Student feedback confirmed the positive experiences in these collaborative learning spaces with 30% improvement in satisfaction ratings from previous years. CONCLUSIONS It is concluded that the right mix of space, technology and appropriate activities does engage students, improve participation and create a rich experience to facilitate potential for improved learning outcomes. The new Collaborative Teaching Spaces, together with integrated technology and tailored activities, has transformed the delivery of this unit and improved student satisfaction in tutorials significantly.

Bouncing back : homegrown. Curated exhibition of student work and design workshop

Bouncing Back Architecture Exhibition: This exhibition showcases interpretations of urban resiliency by 2nd and 4th Year undergraduate architecture students who explore the notion of Bouncing Back from the 2011 Queensland floods, in the context of contemporary Brisbane built environment. Design solutions have been expressed in a variety of forms including emergency shelters, flood-proof housing and a range of urban designs, some of which address extreme environmental conditions. Design Process Workshop | Architecture Workshop with Queensland Academy of Creative Industries Students: In collaboration with Homegrown Facilitator Natalie Wright, Lindy Osborne and Glenda Caldwell and some of their architecture students from the QUT School of Design, extended the university design studio experience to 18 Secondary School students, who brainstormed and designed emergency food distribution shelters for those affected by floods. Designs and models created in the workshop were subsequently included in the Bouncing Back Architecture Exhibition.

Emerging from student to practitioner : a cumulative development tool for students

PURPOSE: This pilot project’s aim was to trial a tool and process for developing students’ ability to engage in self-assessment using reflection on their clinical experiences, including feedback from workplace learning, in order to aid them in linking theory to practice and develop strategies to improve performance. BACKGROUND: In nursing education, students can experience a mismatch in performance compared to theoretical learning, this is referred to as the ‘theory practice gap’ (Scully 2011, Chan Chan & Liu 2011). One specific contributing factor seems to be students’ inability to engage in meaningful reflection and self-correcting behaviours. A self-assessment strategy was implemented within a third year clinical unit to ameliorate this mismatch with encouraging results, as students developed self-direction in addressing learning needs. In this pilot project the above strategy was adapted for implementation between different clinical units, to create a whole of course approach to integrating workplace learning. METHOD: The methodology underpinning this project is a scaffolded, supported reflective practice process. Improved self-assessment skills is achieved by students reflecting on and engaging with feedback, then mapping this to learning outcomes to identify where performance can be improved. Evaluation of this project includes: collation of student feedback identifying successful strategies along with barriers encountered in implementation; feedback from students and teachers via above processes and tools; and comparison of the number of learning contracts issued in clinical nursing units with similar cohorts. RESULTS: Results will be complete by May 2012 and include analysis of the data collected via the above evaluation methods. Other outcomes will include the refined process and tool, plus resources that should improve cost effectiveness without reducing student support. CONCLUSION: Implementing these tools and processes over the entire student’s learning package, will assist them to demonstrate progressive development through the course. Students will have learnt to understand feedback and integrate these skills for life-long learning.

The role of radiotherapy patients in provision of student interpersonal skills feedback

Background At Queensland University of Technology, student radiation therapists receive regular feedback from clinical staff relating to clinical interpersonal skills. Although this is of great value, there is anecdotal evidence that students communicate differently with patients when under observation. Purpose The aim of this pilot was to counter this perceived observer effect by allowing patients to provide students with additional feedback. Materials and methods Radiotherapy patients from two departments were provided with anonymous feedback forms relating to aspects of student interpersonal skills. Clinical assessors, mentors and students were also provided with feedback forms, including questions about the role of patient feedback. Patient perceptions of student performance were correlated with staff feedback and assessment scores. Results Results indicated that the feedback was valued by both students and patients. Students reported that the additional dimension focused them on communication, set goals for development and increased motivation. These changes derived from both feedback and study participation, suggesting that the questionnaires could be a useful teaching tool. Patients scored more generously than mentors, although there was agreement in relative grading. Conclusions The anonymous questionnaire is a convenient and valuable method of gathering patient feedback on students. Future iterations will determine the optimum timing for this method of feedback.