Moments of Recognition:The Four Semester Studio in QUB

It is a legitimate assertion that the common ground of work of worth in architecture, whether theoretical or built comes from a firmly held position on the part of the author. In addition to delivery key competencies architectural education should act to support the formation of such a position in the student, or to make students aware of the possibility of holding such a position.

It is with this in mind perhaps that intensive unit-based diploma and masters structures are increasingly becoming the standard structure for for schools of architecture across the UK. The strengths of such a structure are most evident when the school, either by virtue of financial strength or geographic location is able to attract a diverse range of contrasting positions to bear in the formation of these units. In effect the offering to the student is a short, intensive immersion into a clear line of thought based on the position of those running the unit. Research is channeled by those running the unit to the work of the students. A single cohort of students therefore is able to observe and understand a wide range of ways of thinking about the subject whether or not they are participants in a unit or not. It is axiomatic that where this structure is applied in the absence of these resources the result can be less helpful, individual units are differentiated not to reflect the interests of those running the unit but for the sake of difference as its own end.

In structuring the M.Arch programme in Queens University Belfast the reality of our somewhat peripheral location was placed at the forefront of our considerations. A single 4 semester studio is offered. The first three semesters are carefully structured to offer a range of directed and self directed projects to the students. By interrogation of these projects, and work undertaken at undergraduate level the aim is to assist the students to identify a personal position on architecture, which is then developed in the thesis in semester four. Research and design outputs are emergent from the interest of the student body, cultivated by staff who have the time over the four semesters to get to know all aspects of a students interests.

This paper will lay out this structure and some of the projects run within it. Now having delivered two graduating years the successes and challenges of the system will be laid out by reference to several case studies of individual student experiences of the structure.

An evaluation of the Socrative (personal response system) app for increasing student engagement and learning in an undergraduate psychology curriculum.

Personal response systems using hardware such as 'clickers' have been around for some time, however their use is often restricted to multiple choice questions (MCQs) and they are therefore used as a summative assessment tool for the individual student. More recent innovations such as 'Socrative' have removed the need for specialist hardware, instead utilising web-based technology and devices common to students, such as smartphones, tablets and laptops. While improving the potential for use in larger classrooms, this also creates the opportunity to pose more engaging open-response questions to students who can 'text in' their thoughts on questions posed in class. This poster will present two applications of the Socrative system in an undergraduate psychology curriculum which aimed to encourage interactive engagement with course content using real-time student responses and lecturer feedback. Data is currently being collected and result will be presented at the conference.
The first application used Socrative to pose MCQs at the end of two modules (a level one Statistics module and level two Individual Differences Psychology module, class size N≈100), with the intention of helping students assess their knowledge of the course. They were asked to rate their self-perceived knowledge of the course on a five-point Likert scale before and after completing the MCQs, as well as their views on the value of the revision session and any issues that had with using the app. The online MCQs remained open between the lecture and the exam, allowing students to revisit the questions at any time during their revision.
This poster will present data regarding the usefulness of the revision MCQs, the metacognitive effect of the MCQs on student's judgements of learning (pre vs post MCQ testing), as well as student engagement with the MCQs between the revision session and the examination. Student opinions on the use of the Socrative system in class will also be discussed.
The second application used Socrative to facilitate a flipped classroom lecture on a level two 'Conceptual Issues in Psychology' module, class size N≈100). The content of this module requires students to think critically about historical and contemporary conceptual issues in psychology and the philosophy of science. Students traditionally struggle with this module due to the emphasis on critical thinking skills, rather than simply the retention of concrete knowledge. To prepare students for the written examination, a flipped classroom lecture was held at the end of the semester. Students were asked to revise their knowledge of a particular area of Psychology by assigned reading, and were told that the flipped lecture would involve them thinking critically about the conceptual issues found in this area. They were informed that questions would be posed by the lecturer in class, and that they would be asked to post their thoughts using the Socrative app for a class discussion. The level of preparation students engaged in for the flipped lecture was measured, as well as qualitative opinions on the usefulness of the session. This poster will discuss the level of student engagement with the flipped lecture, both in terms of preparation for the lecture, and engagement with questions posed during the lecture, as well as the lecturer's experience in facilitating the flipped classroom using the Socrative platform.