The 7pm Project

The Making Connections: Innovations in Learning and Teaching Forum, jointly hosted by the Division of Technology, Information and Learning Support (TILS) and the Learning and Teaching Unit (LTU), was held on 20 June. The forum provided a snapshot of innovative practice across QUT, as well as an overview of services supporting innovation. Past events have attracted sizeable audiences and informal feedback has been very positive and encouraging. The objective of the forum is to give an opportunity to academic teaching staff to share their innovative practice with their peers, and it is planned that more events will be held to allow for further sharing of ideas. The program for the June 2012 forum included the following presentations: Ms Lindy Osborne: The 7pm Project Dr Ana Pavasovic: A multifaceted approach to teaching a first year unit Mr Paul Willis: Out of our comfort zone: How can Collaborate engage students in inclusive teaching practices Dr Kelly Zuniga: Can you draw what I see? Recasting the ‘crit’ to engage a larger classroom audience Dr Peter Bell, Dr Mark Lauchs, Amy Henderson and Edward Robinson: Crime Club: Lightbulb moments Dr Deboarh Peach: Improving student engagement through the integration of blended delivery approaches in WIL. Lindy Osborne Biography: As an early career academic, Lindy Osborne draws upon professional experience as a registered architect to offer students pioneering curricula that are firmly grounded in real-world practice. Since commencing her academic career in 2008, she has purposefully reconceptualised the delivery of Architectural Design, Technology, Professional Practice and Research subjects, using innovative digital technology and empowering students to direct their own learning. Lindy is cognisant of the impact that the physical learning environment has on students, and seeks to actively modify it to support students by enabling powerful enactive learning. Using technology embedded flexible learning spaces and innovative simulated office practice pedagogy,students actively learn in an authentic environment, redressing the structural and cyclical factors that have resulted in a lack of workplace learning opportunities. Lindy’s creative integration of interdisciplinary opportunities, popular culture, social media and Web-2.0 technologies connects with students on their level, while they develop critical professional skills both inside and perhaps more importantly outside, the formal classroom environment.

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.

Recipe for success : cooking up a storm in the technology classroom

Ingredients: - 1 cup Vision - 100ml ‘Real World’ Application - 100ml Unit Structure/Organisation - 100ml Student-centric Approach [optional: Add Social Media/Popular Culture for extra goodness] - Large Dollop of Passion + Enthusiasm - Sprinkle of Approachability Mix all ingredients well. Cover and leave to rise in a Lecture Theatre for 1.5 hours. Cook in a Classroom for 1.5 hours. Garnish with a dash of Humour before serving. Serves 170 Students

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.

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?

National architecture conference 2012

May was a particularly busy month with lots of exciting architectural things happening in Brisbane, including the sell-out 2012 National Architecture Conference. The total number of conference attendees was 1,625, which was the largest number of attendees to any Australian National Architecture Conference to date. This was the first time that the National Architecture Conference had been held in Brisbane in over 20 years, and the enormous turnout of 947 Queenslanders to the conference was testament to the positive decision to include Brisbane as a conference venue. The theme of this year’s conference was ‘experience’. Building on ideas introduced in the recent ‘natural artifice’ conference, creative directors Shane Thompson, Michael Rayner and Peter Skinner focused closely on the real, sensed experience of architecture within its natural and constructed settings and the experience of designing and making architecture. The conference attracted a variety of high profile international speakers, including architect and professor, Wang Shu, the 2012 Pritzker Architecture Prize Laureate and co-founder of the Amateur Architecture Studio in China. Other highlights included presentations from Peter Rich [South Africa], Kathryn Findlay [United Kingdom], Rachel Neeson [Australia], Anuradha Mathur & Dilip da Cunha [United States] and Kjetil Thorsen [Norway]. QUT had a strong presence at the conference. In addition to pleasing attendance rates from QUT School of Design students and staff, our Head-of-School Professor Paul Sanders, was given the honourable task of introducing keynote speaker Peter Rich, and facilitating the Q&A session after his presentation, which received a standing ovation. There were many events organised for students and young architects by QUT’s SONA reps, including a masterclass, opening party, collaborative design and construction of the SONA Pavilion, and finally, organisation of the all important SONA Hangover Breakfast, the morning after the closing party. The 2012 National Architecture Conference was truly memorable and an experience not to have been missed. I encourage anyone with a passion for architecture and a desire to be completely inspired by current and emerging leaders in our exciting profession, to start making plans to attend next year’s conference.

Guerrillas in the [urban] midst : Developing and using creative research methods - guerrilla research tactics

This paper explores what we are calling “Guerrilla Research Tactics” (GRT): research methods that exploit emerging mobile and cloud based digital technologies. We examine some case studies in the use of this technology to generate research data directly from the physical fabric and the people of the city. We argue that GRT is a new and novel way of engaging public participation in urban, place based research because it facilitates the co- creation of knowledge, with city inhabitants, ‘on the fly’. This paper discusses the potential of these new research techniques and what they have to offer researchers operating in the creative disciplines and beyond. This work builds on and extends Gauntlett’s “new creative methods” (2007) and contributes to the existing body of literature addressing creative and interactive approaches to data collection.

Rebuilding in Ranongga : reflecting on practice based research

Two hundred million people are displaced annually due to natural disasters with a further one billion living in inadequate conditions in urban areas. Architects have a responsibility to respond to this statistic as the effects of natural and social disasters become more visibly catastrophic when paired with population rise. The research discussed in this paper initially questions and considers how digital tools can be employed to enhance rebuilding processes, but still achieve sensitive, culturally appropriate and accepted built solutions. Secondly the paper reflects on the impact ‘real-world’ projects have on architectural education. Research aspirations encouraged an atypical ‘research by design’ methodology involving a focused case study in the recently devastated village Keigold, Ranongga, Solomon Islands. Through this qualitative approach specific place data and the accounts of those affected were documented through naturalistic and archival methods of observation and participation. Findings reveal a number of unanticipated results which would have been otherwise undetected if field research within the design and rebuilding process was not undertaken, reflecting the importance of place specific research in the design process. Ultimately, the study proves that it is critical for issues of disaster to be addressed on a local rather than global scale; decisions cannot be speculative, or solved at a distance, but require intensive collaborative work with communities to achieve optimum solutions. Architectural education and design studios would continue to benefit from focused community engagement and field research within the design process.

Bouncing back : Students learning through real-world experiences

The Bouncing Back research study, which began after the Queensland flooding in January 2011, has organically expanded through a number of architectural student design projects and exhibitions, which have sought to respond to catastrophic flooding events. In September 2011, 10 Queensland University of Technology architecture students travelled to Sydney to help construct a 1:1 true-to-life scale shelter, for the Emergency Shelter Exhibition at Customs House in Circular Quay. During the construction of the shelter, data were collected in situ, through dynamic interviews with the students. Using a grounded theory methodology, data were coded and then thematically analysed, to reveal three influential factors that positively impacted the students’ learning in this informal context. These were the student experience, the process of learning through physical making/fabrication, and development of empathy with the community. Analysis of these three factors demonstrated how this informal situated learning activity promoted vitally important learning in a real-world context, which is difficult to replicate in a physical on-campus environment.

Survey : The design studio now

In this book for the AASA I provide a response to the question asked by the editors: What is Architecture Studio?

The architecture of influence: Paul Rudolph's Art and Architecture Building at Yale

Focussing on Paul Rudolph’s Art & Architecture Building at Yale, this thesis demonstrates how the building synthesises the architect’s attitude to architectural education, urbanism and materiality. It tracks the evolution of the building from its origins – which bear a relationship to Rudolph’s pedagogical ideas – to later moments when its occupants and others reacted to it in a series of ways that could never have been foreseen. The A&A became the epicentre of the university’s counter culture movement before it was ravaged by a fire of undetermined origins. Arguably, it represents the last of its kind in American architecture, a turning point at the threshold of postmodernism. Using an archive that was only made available to researchers in 2009, this is the first study to draw extensively on the research files of the late architectural writer and educator, C. Ray Smith. Smith’s 1981 manuscript about the A&A entitled “The Biography of a Building,” was never published. The associated research files and transcripts of discussions with some thirty interviewees, including Rudolph, provide a previously unavailable wealth of information. Following Smith’s methodology, meetings were recorded with those involved in the A&A including, where possible, some of Smith’s original interviewees. When placed within other significant contexts – the physicality of the building itself as well as the literature which surrounds it – these previously untold accounts provide new perspectives and details, which deepen the understanding of the building and its place within architectural discourse. Issues revealed include the importance of the influence of Louis Kahn’s Yale Art Gallery and Yale’s Collegiate Gothic Campus on the building’s design. Following a tumultuous first fifty years, the A&A remains an integral part of the architectural education of Yale students and, furthermore, constitutes an important didactic tool for all students of architecture.

Creative Activism: a pedagogical and research tool

Environmental activism has a long history in protest, addressing issues of degradation and segregation that threaten existing ecologies, social and built fabrics. Environmental activism is traditionally understood as a reaction, chiefly by groups of people, against a perceived external threat. In the 60’s and 70’s, an activist stance began to emerge in the work of some artists and architects, who used creative methods such as performances, happenings, temporary spatial interventions etc to convey their political/aesthetic messages. Some of this work engaged directly with communities but predominantly it was the production of one individual working ‘outside’ society. However such actions demonstrated not only the power of the visual in conveying a political message but also the potential of conceptual creative approaches to reveal alternative values and hidden potentials. This marked a shift from activism as protestation towards an activism of reconceptualisation. Recently, activist groups have developed a more politically informed process. Whilst their ‘tools’ may resemble work from the 60’s and 70’s , their methodologies are non-traditional, ’rhizomatic’, pedagogical and fluid; working alongside, rather than against, the established power and funding structures. Such creative processes build new, often unexpected, stakeholder networks; offer neutral spaces in which contentious issues can be faced; and create better understanding of values and identities. They can also lead to permanent improvements and development in the physical fabric. This paper will discuss a pedagogical example of activism in architectural education. The event (www.fourdaysontheoutside.com) is in its fifth year of existence and as such has revealed a value and impulse beyond its learning and teaching value. The paper will discuss how the event contributes to the university’s outreach programme and how its structure acts as a seedbed for potential research projects and partnerships. UK Universities talk extensively about applied research but have few actual strategies by which to generate it. Fourdaysontheoutside offers some potential ways forward.

The Design Process- Making It Relevant For Students

Within the ever-changing arenas of architectural design and education, the core element of architectural education remains: that of the design process. The consideration of how to design in addition to what to design presents architectural educators with that most constant and demanding challenge of how do we best teach the design process?

This challenge is arguably most acute at a student's early stages of their architectural education. In their first years in architecture, students will commonly concentrate on the end product rather than the process. This is, in many ways, understandable. A great deal of time, money and effort go into their final presentations. They believe that it is what is on the wall that is going to be assessed. Armed with new computer skills, they want to produce eye-catching graphics that are often no more than a celebration of a CAD package. In an era of increasing speed, immediacy of information and powerful advertising it is unsurprising that students want to race quickly to presenting an end-product.

Recognising that trend, new teaching methods and models were introduced into the second year undergraduate studio over the past two years at Queen's University Belfast, aimed at promoting student self-reflection and making the design process more relevant to the students. This paper will first generate a critical discussion on the difficulties associated with the design process before outlining some of the methods employed to help promote the following; an understanding of concept, personalisation of the design process for the individual student; adding realism and value to the design process and finally, getting he students to play to their strengths in illustrating their design process like an element of product. Frameworks, examples, outcomes and student feedback will all be presented to help illustrate the effectiveness of the new strategies employed in making the design process firstly, more relevant and therefore secondly, of greater value, to the architecture student.