Sustainable design education: teaching, learning and assessment in collaborative group design projects

Changes in the funding of tertiary education resulting in less one-to-one staff/student contact time mean that we cannot continue to teach as we have historically been taught. If design schools are unable to implement strategies that successfully overcome resource intensive studio teaching programs, then current architectural education may for many higher education providers be based on an unsustainable course structure. Rather than spreading their time thinly over a large number of individual projects, an increasing number of lecturers are setting group projects. This allows them to co-ordinate longer and more in-depth review sessions on a smaller number of assignments. However, while the group model may reflect the realities of the design process in practice, the approach is not without short comings as a teaching archetype for the assessment of individual skill competencies. Hence, what is clear is the need for a readily adoptable andragogy for the teaching and assessment of group design projects.
The following describes the background, methodology and early results of a Strategic Teaching and Learning Grant currently running at the School of Architecture and Building at Deakin University. The project is evaluating two design programs at Deakin and it is envisaged that the results of the
investigation may inform other project-based teaching disciplines experiencing a similar need for new knowledge and skill-based delivery due to increasing staff-student ratios.

Transitional issues of induction into design education for international undergraduate students : a case study analysis of architecture

The overarching aim of this paper is to present and discuss a collaborative undertaking between the School of Architecture and Building and the Academic Skills Unit at Deakin University, Australia in a programme called The Integrated Support Programme for Architecture. It does this in the following ways. It provides a justification for the setting up of an integrated programme for international architecture students. It describes the programme that was set up and outlines the reasons for collaboration between an academic School and an Academic Skills support services unit to prepare students both nationally and internationally as graduates of architecture. It then reports on a study undertaken to evaluate the programme in terms of student response and perception. Following this, it highlights directions for effective and strategic transition of past and present learning for international students. Using a case study analysis, the thrust of this paper is to advance knowledge and understanding of the pertinent issues related to international students either commencing or articulating into the professional course of architecture. It is envisaged that in this discussion matters may be raised for a strategic and effective transition of generic and internationalised learning for international students.

Web 2.0 VDS : social networking as a facilitator of design education

In 2009, Deakin University and the Chinese University of Hong Kong trailed the use of Web 2.0 technologies to enhance learning outcomes in a third year architectural design studio that was modelled on the Virtual Design Studios (VDS) of past decades. The studio developed the VDS further by integrating a social learning environment into the blended learning experience. The Web 2.0 VDS utilised the social networking sites Ning.com, YouTube and Skype; various 3D modelling and video- and/or image-processing software; plus chat-software. These were used in combination to deliver lectures, communicate learning goals, disseminate learning resources, submit work, and provide feedback and comments on various design works in assessing students’ outcomes. This paper centres on issues of learning and teaching associated with the development of a Social Network VDS (SNVDS).

Web 2.0 virtual design studio : social networking as facilitator of design education

In 2009, Deakin University and the Chinese University of Hong Kong trailed the use of Web 2.0 technologies to enhance learning outcomes in a third-year architectural design studio that was modelled on the virtual design studios (VDSs) of the past decades. The studio developed the VDS further by integrating a social learning environment into the blended learning experience. The Web 2.0 VDS utilized the social networking site Ning.com, YouTube, Skype and various three-dimensional modelling, video and image processing, and chat software to deliver lectures, communicate learning goals, disseminate learning resources, submitting, providing feedback and comments to various design works, and assessing of students’ outcomes. This research centres on issues of learning and teaching associated with the development of a social network VDS.

Developing online construction technology resources in tectonic design education

We outline issues of importance in relation to tectonic design within the architectural profession and the relationship to architectural education in Australia. Twelve years of research and curriculum development at Deakin University is discussed, involving the creation of online resources and case studies, digitally-integrated projects relating to building construction and design studio education. The ethos behind the Construction Primer of engaging students as ‘amateur researchers’ in a way that ensures ‘that student research work is worth more than course assessment’ forms the pedagogical foundation of much of this work. A model of Socially Networked Construction Technology education has been developed that integrates social networks and the Internet to engage students in tectonic design within and outside the classroom through authentic curricula. Through the use of Virtual Galleries, Blogs, YouTube and social networks, a culture of peer learning and sharing has been developed. Through shared knowledge facilitated through social networks, great potential lies for expanding the synergies between higher order learning and online resource development for design decision support.

Collaboration and student engagement in design education

One of the great paradoxes in design education is that undergraduate students are encouraged to study and model the behaviors and attitudes of famous designers, but without being aware that such esteemed individuals rarely work in isolation. The vast majority of designers work in teams, as part of both the conceptualization and production processes. Even 'design-auteurs' or 'artist-designers' must still interact with, respectively, clients, consultants and contractors, or patrons, curators and publishers. As a result of this, collaboration is widely considered an essential part of the design process and a critical skill for developing a career in the design industries. However, while design practitioners and the professional bodies that represent them acknowledge the importance of groups and teams, there has been a general reluctance (either an unwillingness or inability) to emphasize the importance or team processes, or em­bed the development of team skills, in undergraduate design curricula. There are many reasons for this situation existing, but we cannot underestimate the general attitude, implicit in much design education and promulgated through the design media, that creativity is an individual trait.

Conflict resolution in student teams: an exploration in the context of design education

This chapter examines conflict in student design teams. A review of literature is presented to understand conflict within student design teams and explore strategies to manage it. In addition, qualitative data on students’ experiences of team conflict is analysed from two surveys offered to design students in 18 Australian Higher Education Institutions. Analysis of the survey found that “ignoring or avoiding to acknowledge team conflict” is a strategy commonly adopted by students, followed by “trying to resolve team conflict through discussion and improving communication” and “seeking support from teachers.” Drawing upon these findings, the chapter makes recommendations on strategies to prepare students for conflict situations through a number of support models that design instructors might adopt, including both preventive and intervention strategies.

An evaluation of group work in first-year engineering design education

It is argued that ‘design' is an essential characteristic of engineering practice, and hence, an essential theme of engineering education. It is suggested that first-year design courses enhance commencing student motivation and retention, and introduce engineering application content and basic design experience early in the curriculum. The research literature indicates that engineering design practice is a deeply social process, with collaboration and group interactions required at almost every stage. This chapter documents the evaluation of the initial and subsequent second offerings of a first-year engineering design unit at Griffith University in Australia. The unit 1006ENG Design and Professional Skills aims to provide an introduction to engineering design and professional practice through a project-based approach to problem solving. The unit learning design incorporates student group work, and uses self-and-peer-assessment to incorporate aspects of the design process into the unit assessment and to provide a mechanism for individualization of student marks.

A research agenda for design-based learning in engineering education

It is often argued that ‘design’ is an (perhaps the) essential characteristic of engineering practice; that, “Design requires unique knowledge, skills, and attitudes common to all engineering disciplines, and it is these attributes that distinguish engineering as a profession.” Hence, it is not surprising to see engineering design identified as a key element of engineering education. There are a range of pedagogical models described, badged with a range of names, that are suggested as approaches to teaching engineering design, for example: project-based learning, problem-based learning, design-based learning, conceive-design-implement-operate (CDIO), problem-oriented project-based learning, social design based learning and project-oriented, design-based learning. While significant literature on engineering design education generally exists, many authors note open questions regarding optimal pedagogical approaches, and opportunities for further evaluation and research. In this paper we draw on literature about design education and DBL in engineering education, and synthesise themes that present a potential research agenda for those educators involved in DBL in engineering education.A search of the research literature was conducted using terms related to DBL in engineering education, including ‘Engineering Design’, ‘Design Education’, ‘Engineering + Project Based Learning’, ‘Engineering + Problem Based Learning’ and ‘Engineering + Design Based Learning’. The literature thus collected was expanded by inspecting the lists of references in the initially identified literature set for further potentially relevant literature. This process was repeated until no further related literature was identified, and resulted in 124 items. All collected literature was carefully reviewed for explicitly identified suggestions for future research. The authors also considered the literature set as a whole to identify additional research possibilities implied by aspects of DBL practice commonly addressed weakly, or not at all, in the available published research. From the results of this review, a set of themes was synthesised by grouping related research recommendations and possibilities. In the following section the identified research themes are presented and, for each, a summary of the supporting literature is given and a central research question is formulated by the authors.

Teaching and learning in collaborative group design projects

The 200 years of apprentice/master tradition that underpins the atelier studio system is still at the core of much present-day architectural design education. Yet this tradition poses uncertainties for a large number of lecturers faced with changes in the funding of tertiary education. With reductions in one-to-one staff/student contact time, many educators are finding it increasingly difficult to maintain an atelier teaching model. If these deficiencies remain unchecked and design-based schools are unable to implement strategies to reduce the resource intensity of one-to-one studio teaching programmes, then, for many higher-education providers, current architectural education may be based on an untenable course structure. Rather than spreading their time thinly over a large number of individual projects, an increasing number of lecturers are setting group projects. This allows them to coordinate longer and more in-depth review sessions on a smaller number of assignment submissions. However, while the group model may reflect the realities of the design process in professional practice, the approach is not without shortcomings as a teaching and learning archetype for the assessment of individual student skill competencies. Hence, what is clear is the need for a readily adoptable andragogy for the teaching and assessment of group design projects. The following is a position paper that describes – with a focus on effective group structures and assemblage and fair assessment models – the background, methodology and early results of a Strategic Teaching and Learning Grant currently running at the School of Architecture and Building at Deakin University in Australia.