898 resultados para Design Studio Model
Resumo:
While the studio environment has been promoted as an ideal educational setting for project-based disciplines, few qualitative studies have been undertaken in a comprehensive way (Bose, 2007). This study responds to this need by adopting Grounded Theory methodology in a qualitative comparative approach. The research aims to explore the limitations and benefits of a face-to-face (f2f) design studio as well as a virtual design studio (VDS) as experienced by architecture students and educators at an Australian university in order to find the optimal combination for a blended environment to maximize learning. The main outcome is a holistic multidimensional blended model being sufficiently flexible to adapt to various setting, in the process, facilitating constructivist learning through self-determination, self-management, and personalization of the learning environment.
Resumo:
Iran as a developing country faces many considerable shortages of both physical learning environment and inefficient budget to resolve this shortage. Today, Iran needs a $28 billion budget to add 23,000 schools to the existing 120,000 schools to be able to omit two shifts schools [1], [2]. Moreover, the standard learning space is 6-8 square meter per student, while this rate for big cities in Iran is about one square meter per student [1]. This decrease the time students spend in schools. In addition, the education approach in k-12 and higher education is still teacher-centered based and needs to be contemporized with educational, cultural, and technological changes.
Resumo:
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.
Resumo:
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.
Resumo:
While the studio is widely accepted as the learning environment where architecture students most effectively learn how to design (Mahgoub, 2007:195), there are surprisingly few studies that attempt to identify in a qualitative way the interrelated factors that contribute to and support design studio learning (Bose, 2007:131). Such a situation seems problematic given the changes and challenges facing education including design education. Overall, there is growing support for re-examining (perhaps redefining) the design studio particularly in response to the impact of new technologies but as this paper argues this should not occur independently of the other elements and qualities comprising the design studio. In this respect, this paper describes a framework developed for a doctoral project concerned with capturing and more holistically understanding the complexity and potential of the design studio to operate within an increasingly and largely unpredictable global context. Integral to this is a comparative analysis of selected cases underpinned by grounded theory methodology of the traditional design studio and the virtual design studio informed by emerging pedagogical theory and the experiences of those most intimately involved – students and lecturers. In addition to providing a conceptual model for future research, the framework is of value to educators currently interested in developing as well as evaluating learning environments for design.
Resumo:
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.
Resumo:
In this book for the AASA I provide a response to the question asked by the editors: What is Architecture Studio?
Resumo:
The context of this research focuses on the efficacy of design studio as a form of teaching and learning. The established model of project-based teaching makes simple parallels between studio and professional practice. However, through comparison of the discourses it is clear that they are of different character. The protocols of the tutorial tradition can act to position the tutor as a defender of the knowledge community rather than a discourse guide for the student. The question arises as to what constitutes the core knowledge that would enable better self-directed study. Rather than focus on key knowledge, there has been an attempt in other fields to agree and share ‘threshold concepts’ within disciplinary knowledge. Meyer and Land describe threshold concepts as representing “a transformed way of understanding, or interpreting or viewing something without which the learner cannot progress [1]. The tutor’s role should be to assist in transforming student’s understanding through the mastery of the ‘troublesome knowledge’ that threshold concepts may embody. Teaching and learning environments under such approaches have been described as ‘liminal’: holding the learner in an ‘in-between’ state new understanding may be difficult and involve identity shifts. Research on the consequence of pressures on facilities and studio space concur, and indicate that studio spaces can be much better used in assisting the path of learning [2]. Through an overview map of threshold concepts, the opportunities for blended learning in supporting student learning in the liminal space of the design studio become much clearer [3] Design studio needs to be recontextualised within the discourse of higher education scholarship, based on a clarified curriculum built from an understanding of what constitutes its threshold concepts. The studio needs to be reconsidered as a space quite unlike that of the practitioner, a liminal space. 1. Meyer, J.H.F. and R. Land, Threshold concepts and troublesome knowledge. Overcoming Barriers to Student Learning: Threshold concepts and troublesome knowledge., 2006: p. 19. 2. Cai, H. and S. Khan, The Common First Year Studio in a Hot-desking Age: An Explorative Study on the Studio Environment and Learning. Journal for Education in the Built Environment 2010. 5(2): p. 39-64. 3. Pektas, S.T., The Blended Design Studio: An Appraisal of New Delivery Modes in Design Education. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2012. 51(0): p. 692-697.
Resumo:
The paper reports on a study of design studio culture from a student perspective. Learning in design studio culture has been theorised variously as a signature pedagogy emulating professional practice models, as a community of practice and as a form of problem-based learning, all largely based on the study of teaching events in studio. The focus of this research has extended beyond formally recognized activities to encompass the student’s experience of their social and community networks, working places and study set-ups, to examine how these have contributed to studio culture and how there have been supported by studio teaching. Semi-structured interviews with final year undergraduate students of architecture formed the basis of the study using an interpretivist approach informed by Actor-network theory, with studio culture featured as the focal actor, enrolling students and engaging with other actors, together constituting an actor-network of studio culture. The other actors included social community patterns and activities; the numerous working spaces (including but not limited to the studio space itself); the equipment, tools of trade and material pre-requisites for working; the portfolio enrolling the other actors to produce work for it; and the various formal and informal events associated with the course itself. Studio culture is a highly charged social arena: The question is how, and in particular, which aspects of it support learning? Theoretical models of situated learning and communities of practice models have informed the analysis, with Bourdieu’s theory of practice, and his interrelated concepts of habitus, field and capital providing a means of relating individually acquired habits and modes of working to social contexts. Bourdieu’s model of habitus involves the externalisation through the social realm of habits and knowledge previously internalised. It is therefore a useful model for considering whole individual learning activities; shared repertoires and practices located in the social realm. The social milieu of the studio provides a scene for the exercise and display of ‘practicing’ and the accumulation of a form of ‘practicing-capital’. This capital is a property of the social milieu rather than the space, so working or practicing in the company of others (in space and through social media) becomes a more valued aspect of studio than space or facilities alone. This practicing-capital involves the acquisition of a habitus of studio culture, with the transformation of physical practices or habits into social dispositions, acquiring social capital (driving the social milieu) and cultural capital (practicing-knowledge) in the process. The research drew on students’ experiences, and their practicing ‘getting a feel for the game’ by exploring the limits or boundaries of the field of studio culture. The research demonstrated that a notional studio community was in effect a social context for supporting learning; a range of settings to explore and test out newly internalised knowledge, demonstrate or display ideas, modes of thinking and practicing. The study presents a nuanced interpretation of how students relate to a studio culture that involves a notional community, and a developing habitus within a field of practicing that extends beyond teaching scenarios.
Resumo:
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.
Resumo:
Shrinking product lifecycles, tough international competition, swiftly changing technologies, ever increasing customer quality expectation and demanding high variety options are some of the forces that drive next generation of development processes. To overcome these challenges, design cost and development time of product has to be reduced as well as quality to be improved. Design reuse is considered one of the lean strategies to win the race in this competitive environment. design reuse can reduce the product development time, product development cost as well as number of defects which will ultimately influence the product performance in cost, time and quality. However, it has been found that no or little work has been carried out for quantifying the effectiveness of design reuse in product development performance such as design cost, development time and quality. Therefore, in this study we propose a systematic design reuse based product design framework and developed a design leanness index (DLI) as a measure of effectiveness of design reuse. The DLI is a representative measure of reuse effectiveness in cost, development time and quality. Through this index, a clear relationship between reuse measure and product development performance metrics has been established. Finally, a cost based model has been developed to maximise the design leanness index for a product within the given set of constraints achieving leanness in design process.
Resumo:
In the design studio learning environment, traditional student and staff expectations are of close contact teaching and learning. In recent years at QUT students have experienced reduced personal staff attention, and have increasingly felt “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 staff at QUT with varied levels of experience and assurance. This paper outlines the first iteration of an action research project exploring whether changing the current QUT design studio student and staff relationships may lead to more engaged, dynamic learning environments. “Engagement” is understood as a primarily emotional, rather than operational student concern (Solomonides and Martin 2008; Austerlitz and Aravot 2007). The project inverted the standard QUT design studio teaching structure, and evaluated the new structure and activation of student engagement across four identified markers: attendance, participation, learning and performance (ACER 2009; NSSE 2005; Chapman 2003). Student and staff surveys and focus groups, corporate data, and informal feedback informed these evaluations. Overall, the results support the premise that when students and staff feel part of a reasonably-sized studio class with a dedicated lecturer and self-selected project, the majority are inclined to value these relationships, to feel actively engaged, and to experience some improvement in their learning and teaching performances.
Resumo:
In a study aimed at better understanding how staff and students adapt to new blended studio learning environments (BSLE’s), 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 studio design learning environment (TSLE) 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, the staff and students were asked to complete a questionnaire about their experiences and preferences within the two respective learning environments. Following this, participants were invited to participate in focus groups, where a synergistic approach was effected. Using a dual method qualitative approach, the questionnaire and survey data were coded and extrapolated using both thematic analysis and grounded theory methodology. The results from these two different approaches were compared, contrasted and finally merged, to reveal six distinct emerging themes, which were instrumental in offering resistance or influencing adaptation to, the new BLSE. This paper reports on the study, discusses the major contributors to negative resistance and proposes points for consideration, when transitioning from a TSLE to a BLSE.
Resumo:
Research background: The general public is predominantly unaware of the complexities and skills involved in the fashion supply chain (design, manufacture and retail) of couture/bespoke garments. As cited in McMahon and Morley (2011) “While a high price tag is widely accepted as a necessary element of luxury products (Fionda &Moore, 2009) this must be accompanied by a story that gives the items intrinsic as well as extrinsic value (Keller, 2009). Research question: Is it possible to simulate a fashion couture studio environment in a non-traditional public space in order to produce and promote the processes involved in couture designs; each with their own story and aligned to the aesthetic of six collaborating high profile couture fashion retailers? Research contribution: The Couture Academy project allowed the team to curate the story behind the couture design and supply chain process. It was an experimental, curated, ‘hot-house’ fashion design project undertaken in real time to create one-off couture garments, inspired by key seasonal fashion trends as determined by leading Westfield retailers. The project was industry based, with Westfield Chermside as the launch pad for six QUT fashion students to experiment with design nuances aligned to renowned national fashion industry retailers; Cue, Dissh, Kitten D'Amour, Mombasa and Pink Mint. Industry mentors were assigned to each student designer, in order to heighten the design challenge. The exhibition consisted of a pop-up couture workshop based at Westfield Chermside. A complete fashion studio (sewing machines, pattern-cutting tables and mannequins) was set up for a seven day period in the foyer of the shopping centre with the public watching as the design process unfolded in real-time. The final design outcomes were paraded at the Southbank Precinct to a prominent industry and media panel, with the winner receiving a $2000 prize to fund a research trip to an international fashion capital of their choice. Research significance: This curated fashion project was funded by Westfield Group Australia. "It was the most successful season launch Westfield Chermside has ever had from both an average volume for exposure perspective, and in terms of the level of engagement with retailers and shoppers," said Laura Walls, Westfield Public Relations Consultant. Significant media coverage was generated; including three full pages of editorial in Brisbane’s Sunday Mail, with an estimated publicity value of $95,000. And public exposure through the live project/exhibition was estimated at 7,000 people over the 7 days.
Resumo:
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’.