This study aims to make a critical reading on the constraints and potentials that emerge through the transition from face-to-face to screen-to-screen teaching and learning experiences in design education during the COVID-19 pandemic. By making a critical reading of current discussions, mostly in narrative surveys, on architectural design education, it is attempted to re-contextualize the emerging concepts of the remote teaching and learning to the broader context of design studio pedagogy literature. The theoretical framework of the study is based on the model developed by Shaffer (2003) regarding the three main elements of the design studio pedagogy as (1) “surface structures”, (2) “pedagogical forms” and (3) “epistemological principles.” The study revealed that the current situation, on the one hand, opened the ways for us to test “new” tools, methods and experiences of teaching and learning, and on the other hand, allowed us to better understand the potentials and well-functioning aspects of the “existing” pedagogical models. Rather than reducing the discussions on remote teaching and learning to a ‘technology-driven’ paradigm change in design education, future research should focus on the effects of changing pedagogical tools and practices on the manifold dimensions of ‘human learning’, which in turn will have implications for the epistemology of design pedagogy.
This article explores the tools and processes of effective learning in the design studio with a special emphasis on the pedagogic roles of the tutors and the students in desk critique and peer critique. It aims to identify the ways that pedagogical roles of the tutor and the student change due to the nature of their communication and the degree of their engagement in learning processes. The inquiry is based on the findings of a qualitative case study involving tutors, students and graduates from a bachelor of architecture degree programme. Data were gathered via focus group and in-depth interviews, studio observations and analysed through qualitative content analysis. The findings indicated that the pedagogic identity of a tutor could help scaffold the formation of a community of learners in the design studio. However, the lack of negotiation and trust between a tutor and students in the feedback processes weakens the students’ effective learning experiences.
This article examines the pedagogical potential and challenges of the design jury as an assessment method from the perceptions of the tutor/jury member and the design students. It aims to gain an understanding of the factors that create opportunities for, and barriers to, the promotion of learning in the design jury. It inquires the possible contributions of the jury into formative evaluation processes in design education. The results show that (1) the communication modalities, and (2) the evaluation criteria influence the way tutors and students perceive design jury as a pedagogical method. While the hierarchy between the jury member and the student creates a barrier to constructive feedback, a balance between formative and summative evaluations is essential in the design jury. Transparency of evaluation criteria decreases design students’ concern for grade. The design jury could also serve for formative evaluation. A student-centred approach to design jury engenders experiences of deep learning.
This study aims to analyze the factors, driven by intrinsic and/or extrinsic motivations, that affect the students' choice(s) of profession before entering the school of architecture and to reveal how the participants' perceptions of their "self-efficacy" about becoming an architect altered in parallel to the skills they acquire during their professional education. The research, based on the qualitative research methodology, is undertaken in a Bachelor of Architecture degree program in a private university in Istanbul and the data was collected through the participation of 40 undergraduate architecture students from different class levels. The data collection procedures covered four recorded focus group interviews with students at different class levels and the interview transcriptions were analyzed through qualitative content analysis. The results regarding the reasons for studying architecture has revealed that the participants are influenced by (1) their self-perceptions, which overlap with the profession-related qualities and (2) the influence of their social environment and families. It is shown that the professional education that the participants have received has improved their design skills and supported their selfefficacy beliefs in this regard, but made them feel insufficient about technical-practical skills. The research findings have implications for the students who think to study architecture, the secondary education teachers, and the administrators and instructors of schools of architecture for various reasons: by uncovering the interrelated dynamics and requirements of the architectural profession and education, these findings may guide the attempts to choose a profession compatible with individuals' capabilities and orientations and to structure a balanced architectural curriculum.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.