A holistic blended design studio model : Exploring and expanding learning opportunities

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.

Dichotomy in the design studio 2.0 : adapting to new blended learning environments

In a study aimed at better understanding how students adapt to new blended studio learning environments, all undergraduate and masters of architecture students at a large school of architecture in Australia, learned a semester of architectural design in newly renovated, technology embedded, design studio environments. The renovations addressed the lessons learned from a 2011 pilot study of a second year architectural design studio learned in a high technology embedded prototype digital laboratory. The new design studios were purpose designed for the architecture students and adapted Student-Centred Active Learning Environment for Undergraduate Programs design principles. At the end of the semester, the students completed a questionnaire about their experiences of learning in the new design studio environments. Using a dual method qualitative approach, the questionnaire data were coded and extrapolated using both thematic analysis and grounded theory methodology. The results from these two approaches were compared, contrasted and finally merged, to reveal five distinct emerging themes, which were instrumental in offering resistance or influencing adaptation to, the new blended studio learning environments. This paper reports on the study, discusses the major contributors to resistance and adaptation, and proposes points for consideration when renovating or designing new blended studio learning environments. This research extends the 2011 pilot study by the same authors: ‘Dichotomy in the design studio: Adapting to new blended learning environments’.

Sublime acts : desire in the studio

Acknowledging the recent call to review design creativity and consideration of the body's affective states in education, this paper explores how desire, conceptualized as an immanent force (Deleuze & Guattari, 1987) and an irresistible force (Burke, 1753) can be a means of deeper engagement within the design studio. Positing 'disruption or blockage' as a key agent which propels subjects from fields of normalcy to fields of otherness, and subsequently mobilises distinct modes of desire, this paper takes Edmund Burke's Romantic sublime and Patricia Yaeger's feminine sublime as critical lenses through which to review a first year interior program posited around the body. The paper highlights how the embodiment of 'desirous processes' within the design program and relational encounters within the studio represent an overarching pedagogical 'hinge' (Ellsworth, 2005). Rather than being a point of beginning, the start of first year is seen and experienced as a threshold opening to a new rhythm in a proces of becoming that is already underway.

First year industrial design studio-based teaching pedagogies and students’ engagement

Student engagement tends to be viewed as a reflection of learning processes, and in the context of first year university studies, it is a crucial means of an educational process that establishes the foundations for successful later year studies (Krausse and Coates, 2008). In the context of first year design studio teaching in higher education, fostering students’ positive engagement poses challenges to design educators as current trends set these design studios to be large size classes that makes difficult to manage and follow up students’ individual learning experiences. At QUT’s first year industrial design studio classes we engage in a variety of teaching pedagogies from which we identify two of them as instrumental vehicles to foster positive student engagement. Concept bombs and the field trip experience provide such platform as shown in student responses through a learning experience survey.

Dichotomy in the design studio : adapting to new blended learning environments

Since the architectural design studio learning environment was first established in the early 19th century at the École des Beaux-Arts in Paris, there has been a complete transformation in how the discipline of architecture is practiced and how students of architecture acquire information. Digital technologies allow students to access information instantly and learning is no longer confined to the rigid boundaries of a physical campus environment. In many schools of architecture in Australia, the physical design studio learning environments however, remain largely unchanged. Many learning environments could be mistaken for those last refurbished 30 years ago, being devoid of any significant technological intervention. While some teaching staff are eagerly embracing new digital technologies and attempting to modify their pedagogical approaches, the physical design studio learning environment is resistant to such efforts. In a study aimed at better understanding how staff and students adapt to new blended learning environments, 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 design studio setting 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, all staff and students were asked to complete a questionnaire about their experiences and preferences within the two respective learning environments. The questionnaire response rate represented the opinions of 100% of the 10 teaching staff and over 70% of the students. Using a qualitative grounded theory approach, data were coded, extrapolated and compared, to reveal emerging key themes. The key themes formed the basis for in-depth interviews and focus groups of teaching staff and students, allowing the researchers to understand the data in more detail. The results of the data verified what had become increasingly evident during the course of the semester: an underlying negative resistance to the new digital studio learning environment, by both staff and students. Many participants openly exhibited a yearning for a return to the traditional design studio learning environments, particularly when the new technology caused frustration, by being unreliable or failing altogether. This paper reports on the study, discusses the negative resistance and explores the major contributors to resistance. The researchers are not aware of any similar previous studies across these particular settings and believe that it offers a necessary and important contribution to emergent research about adaptation to new digital learning environments.

What is the Architecture Studio?

What is the Architecture Studio? What is the studio? Where do architect’s make architecture? What happens in architecture studios at QUT? How does QUT architecture provide assessment feedback? Why is QUT architecture Experimenting with Change?

De-mystifying [a facet of] mobile learning : collaborative media in studio

“Our students have changed radically. Today’s students are no longer the people our educational system was designed to teach” (Prensky, 2001, p. 1). The influx of available new technology has helped to democratise knowledge, transforming when, where and how learning takes place, and changing perceptions of traditional learning landscapes (JISC, 2006; Neary et al., 2010). Mobile computers combined with wireless technology, have completely transformed the educational world; students have turned nomad[ic], engaging in conversations and thinking across traditional campus spaces (Alexander, 2004; Fisher, 2005). In this workshop we will be attempting to de-mystify a facet of mobile learning, by working in small groups to set up and kick start a number of social media sites, which can be used for collaboration and information exchange, in the design studio.

Facebook : a 24 hour studio environment for contemporary architectural education

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.

What is studio?

Noun or verb? A noun in which to verb. A noun created by verbs. Noun/verb semantics - or a "situated process"?

Changing relationships : Re-activating student and staff engagement in the design studio learning environment

QUT Teaching and Learning Support Services 'Revisiting University Teaching’program for mid-career academics. 'Innovations in Teaching at QUT' presentations. Presentations were part of a 2 day program that provides opportunities for experienced academic staff with responsibilities for teaching to review their current teaching practices and explore innovations in teaching that will assist them to enhance student learning and develop their own scholarship of teaching. The presenter responded to the following: 1.What is the innovation you have incorporated into your teaching? - give a brief overview/ description/ demonstration of the innovation 2.What challenges/issues prompted you to make changes in your approach? Were they discipline specific? Operational? Opportunistic? 3.What factors did you need to consider in implementing these changes? Which factors enabled success or hindered? 4.What has this innovation achieved so far? How have learners responded? How have the broader teaching team and academic staff from other units in your course responded? 5.How could this innovation be used by other academics in their teaching? What do you see as the possibilities for further expansion of this innovation? (NB. This question could be answered as part of a final sharing of group discussion). Presenter: Shannon Satherley

Changing relationships : engaging students and staff in the design studio

QUT Learning and Teaching Unit Seminar Making a Real Difference: Learning and Teaching Grants Showcase This event recognised and shared teaching innovations, including those from faculty learning and teaching grants. The Showcase featured four ALTC Grant project leaders (Helen Partridge, Sylvia Edwards, Robyn Nash and Mary Ryan) who had recently completed or were about to complete their grants. Each QUT faculty nominated two 2010 faculty teaching and learning grant recipients to showcase grant outcomes via a poster. Poster: Shannon Satherley & Abbe Winter Changing Relationships: Engaging Students and Staff in the Design Studio 'In the design studio learning environment, traditional student and staff expectations are of close contact teaching and learning. However, in recent years increasing class sizes have meant students experiencing reduced personal staff attention, and increasingly feeling “anonymous” and correspondingly disengaged, to the detriment of quality learning (Carbone 1998: 8; Biggs 2003). Concurrently, there has been a necessary increase in teaching by sessional (casual) teaching staff at QUT, with varied levels of experience and assurance. While teachers primarily regard engagement as “cognitive and conative,” for students it is emotional: “... an essential need to feel that they were engaged with the context of their learning and that it was meaningful in some way” (Solomonides and Martin 2008: 18). As a response to these conditions, the Changing Relationships action-research project was run within a QUT School of Design studio unit in 2009 and 2010, based on the premise that engaged teaching can encourage emotionally engaged learning. The project inverted the structure of the traditional QUT studio unit, empowering both students and sessional staff with a sense of increased autonomy: literally changing the relationships within the studio learning environment.'

Understanding the signature pedagogy of the design studio and the opportunities for its technological enhancement

This paper presents an analysis of the studio as the signature pedagogy of design education. A number of theoretical models of learning, pedagogy, and education are used to interrogate the studio for its advantages and shortcomings, and to identify opportunities for the integration of new technologies and to explore the affordances that they might offer. In particular the theoretical ideas of signature pedagogies, conversational frameworks, and pedagogical patterns are used to justify the ‘unique’ status of the studio as a dominant learning environment and mode of delivery within design education. Such analysis identifies the opportunities for technological intervention and enhancement of the design studio through a re-examining of its fundamental pedagogical signature. This paper maps the dimensions and qualities that define the signature pedagogy against a range of delivery modes and technological media forms. Through such investigation it seeks to identify appropriate opportunities for technology; in essence offering a structure or framework for the analysis of future enquiry and experimentation.

Objectifying the Subjective : Assessment and Feedback in Creative Arts Studio Learning and Teaching

This paper examines the Assessment and Feedback aspects of Studio Teaching as Creative Arts pedagogy. Prompted by USQ’s newly offered Bachelor of Creative Arts (BCA), the author has developed an Assessment Matrix specifically designed to satisfy a number of imperatives, including: • ‘objectifying’ the subjective aspects of creative practice as assessable coursework/research • providing the means by which accurate, detailed, personalised and confidential feedback may be provided to students individually • providing consistent, accurate, meaningful assessment records for student, lecturer, and institution • ensuring consistency, continuity, and transparency of assessment processes and records to satisfy quality audits • minimising marking and assessment time, whilst maximising assessment integrity and depth • requiring only basic level skills and knowledge of a computer application already in common use (Microsoft Excel) • adaptability to a range of creative courses ‐ across disciplines This Assessment Matrix has been in development (and trialled) since January 2009.

Too many cooks? Co-creating and co-teaching studio courses in the creative media context : a career-focussed approach

This Case Study relates to the creation and implementation of career‐focussed courses in Creative Media for film, television, animation, broadcast and web contexts. The paper examines the advantages and disadvantages of co‐teaching, and how different professional and academic backgrounds and disciplines can productively inform curriculum design and delivery in the academic/professional context. The authors, as co‐creators and co‐lecturers, have developed a number of courses which represent current working models for intermediate to advanced level academic/professional study, and attract students from across the creative disciplines; including theatre, media, visual arts and music. These courses are structured to develop in students a wide range of aesthetic and technical skills, as well as their ability to apply those skills professionally within and across the creative media industries. Issues regarding the balance between academic rigour, practical hands‐on skill development, assessment, logistics, resources, teamwork and other issues, are examined in the paper.

QUT Architecture Film Studio (Aus)

Research Statement: An urban film produced by Luke Harrison Mitchell Benham, Sharlene Anderson, Tristan Clark. RIVE NOIR explores the film noir tradition, shot on location in a dark urban space between high-rises and the river, sheltered by a highway. With an original score and striking cinematography, Rive Noir radically transforms the abandoned river’s edge through the production of an amplified reality ordinarily unseen in the Northbank. The work produced under my supervision was selected to appear in the Expanded Architecture Research Group’s International Architecture Film Festival and Panel Discussion in Sydney: The University of Sydney and Carriageworks Performance Space, 06 November 2011. QUT School of Design research submission was selected alongside exhibits by AA School of Architecture, London; The Bartlett School of Architecture, London; University of The Arts, London; Arrhaus School of Architecture, Denmark; Dublin as a Cinematic City, Ireland; Design Lab Screen Studio, Australia; and Sona Cinecity, The University of Melbourne. The exhibit included not only the screening of the film but the design project that derived from and extended the aesthetics of the urban film. The urban proposal and architectural intervention that followed the film was subsequently published in the Brisbane Times, after the urban proposal won first place in The Future of Brisbane architecture competition, which demonstrates the impact of the research project as a whole. EXPANDED ARCHITECTURE 2011 - 6th November Architecture Film Night + Panel Discussion @ Performance Space CarriageWorks was Sydney's first International Architectural Film Festival. With over 40 architectural films by local and international artists, film makers and architects. It was followed by Panel Discussion of esteemed academics and artists working in the field of architectural film.