Sensing Spaces:A Body-oriented Architectural Design Education

The contemporary dominance of visuality has turned our understanding of space into a mode of unidirectional experience that externalizes other sensual capacities of the body while perceiving the built environment. This affects not only architectural practice but also architectural education when an introduction to the concept of space is often challenging, especially for the students who have limited spatial and sensual training. Considering that an architectural work is not perceived as a series of retinal pictures but as a repeated multi-sensory experience, the problem definitions in the design studio need to be disengaged from the dominance of a ‘focused vision’ and be re-constructed in a holistic manner. A method to address this approach is to enable the students to refer to their own sensual experiences of the built environment as a part of their design processes. This paper focuses on a particular approach to the second year architectural design teaching which has been followed in the Department of Architecture at Izmir University of Economics for the last three years. The very first architectural project of the studio and the program, entitled ‘Sensing Spaces’, is conducted as a multi-staged design process including ‘sense games, analyses of organs and their interpretations into space’. The objectives of this four-week project are to explore the sense of space through the design of a three-dimensional assembly, to create an awareness of the significance of the senses in the design process and to experiment with re-interpreted forms of bodily parts. Hence, the students are encouraged to explore architectural space through their ‘tactile, olfactory, auditory, gustative and visual stimuli’. In this paper, based on a series of examples, architectural space is examined beyond its boundaries of structure, form and function, and spatial design is considered as an activity of re-constructing the built environment through the awareness of bodily senses.

Design and Practice in Architectural Theory Education

Benefiting from design in theory learning is not common in architecture schools. The general practice is to design in studio and to theorise in lectures. In the undergraduate module History and Theory in Architecture II at Queen’s University Belfast, students attend interactive lectures, participate in reading group discussions, design TextObjects, and write essays. TextObjects contain textual, audio and/or graphic representations that highlight a single concept or a complex set of issues derived from readings. Students experiment with diverse media, such as filmmaking, photography, and graphic design, some of which they experience for the first time. Lectures and readings revolve around theories of architectural representation, media and communication, which are practiced through TextObjects. This is a new way to link theory and practice in architectural education. Through action research, this study analyses this innovative teaching method called TextObject, which brings design and practice into architectural theory education to stimulate students towards critical thinking. The pedagogical research of architectural theoretician Necdet Teymur (1992, 1996, 2002) underlies the study.

Daylighting design in the architectural design studio

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.

Spatial stimulus : Model making in the architectural design studio

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.

Butterpaper, sweat & tears : the affective dimension of engaging students during the architectural critique

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.

Beyond the walls of academia : architectural internships

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.

Perceptions of physical versus virtual design studio education

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.

Architectural research and its enemies

Like the Research Assessment Exercise (RAE) that preceded it, the UK government's proposed Research Excellence Framework (REF) is a means of allocating funding in higher education to support research. As with any method for the competitive allocation of funds it creates winners and losers and inevitably generates a lot of emotion among those rewarded or penalised. More specifically, the 'winners' tend to approve of the method of allocation and the 'losers' denigrate it as biased against their activities and generally unfair. An extraordinary press campaign has been consistently waged against research assessment and its methods by those involved in architectural education, which I will track over a decade and a half. What follows will question whether this campaign demonstrates the sophistication and superior judgment of those who have gone into print, or conversely whether its mixture of misinformation and disinformation reveals not just disenchantment and prejudice, but a naivety and a depth of ignorance about the fundamentals of research that is deeply damaging to the credibility of architecture as a research-based discipline. With the recent consultation process towards a new cycle of research assessment, the REF, getting under way, I aim to draw attention to the risk of repeating past mistakes. Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2010.

Traversing the international rainbow of academia and architectural practice

In the context of contemporary tertiary education immersed as such in internationalisation strategies and internationalised curricula, the cultivation and promotion of international awareness in Australian graduates can be expected to lead to desirable lifelong attributes. Consideration of the need to be prepared for a globalised professional and cultural climate is integral to sustaining and growing the future and the fortunes of many. For the architectural community, the combined phenomena of globalisation and internationalisation strategies herald implications for the education and professional preparation of architects which traverse academia and architectural practice. This paper presents the case for exploring potential benefits of establishing closer links between academia and architecture practice, discusses the relevance of international student practice experience for the twenty first century and looks at its role within an intemationalised curriculum in preparing graduates for the future. Analysis of a survey of work experience as a component of Australian architecture courses is used to gauge the extent of current programs that seek to integrate the academic curriculum with practice experience, and the Deakin study (a work in progress) of architecture students in international practice contexts is presented as a vehicle for exploring the degree to which the combination of professional practice education and cultural experience may be beneficial to architecture students, academia and the profession more generally.

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.