This paper analyses the predominant trend between the students to follow, frame, and develop a concept in the architectural thesis design. The research targets to question how the students derive their inspiration from diverse sources and influencers into the architectural design concept. The research methodology was based on semi-structured questionnaires with Likert scale questions to analyse and interpret data through the Chi-Square test in SPSS software. The findings revealed that first, the students preferred to employ more symbolic and poetic elements for the design than real projects, second, to create their concepts under influences of supervisors and juries than research, third, to follow personal procedure than the structured process of the course. In conclusion, the results revealed that the students adopted a personal procedure under the influences of the supervisors to design a concept that is closely aligned with a subjective approach, rather than a structured research process.

Design studios play a significant role to train the students in architecture programs. Studios call as core modules in programs that are supposed to apply the knowledge, skills, and abilities of the students for the design’s topic, process, and project. However, the design process follows a tradition in studios based on project design than research activities. The research applied the qualitative content analysis method to analyze the design studio modules' descriptions. The finding of the research identifies that the content of the modules' descriptions does less adapt to research activities. Despite the inductive content explanations, the analysis activities are far from a comprehensive research approach due to the missing aspects in the content of the modules descriptions in the curriculum. In conclusion, research activity is an essential segment of architecture education that has been missing in the curriculum due to the time and location. However, complexity, uncertainty, and variety in the design context remind the necessity of integrating design studio with real-world studio activities through research orientation.

<p>The students learn through critical thinking and commenting on the design works of other students. This paper aims to demonstrate the students' learning process in a peer-jury activity through both mind engagement and practical activities in the architecture design studio. The methodology of the research was based on qualitative methods with the application of semi-structured observation, photography, sketching, and graphical analysis techniques. The findings of the analysis reveal that the students participated in the peer-jury activity with five attitudes including passive, reactive, active, interactive, and engaged. The peer-jury groups’ applied four approaches to comment on the peer presenters' design outputs, including the design process, task response, idea of the design, and design outputs. In conclusion, the students learn through peers effectively to enhance their skills and abilities in a structured communication. The students improve critical thinking skills through practice, personalization, and communication. </p>

The aim of this paper is to address the behavioral patterns of the students in peer-jury exercise and the learning outcomes in the landscape design studio. Despite the design studios run based on the relation of the master of the studio with the students, changing this relationship to the peer-learners experiments through this research. A Likert questionnaire was applied to ask the opinion of the students at the end of the semester, the data analyzed through a factor analysis test in SPSS. The findings of the analysis identified that the students addressed effective aspects of the exercise in five clusters including communication, interaction, presentation, innovation, and interpretation. The students learn through peer-jury to communicate with classmates through comments, critics, and recommendations, which is improved presentations. The comments of the peer-jury as an idea of design result in innovation in the design conceptualization. In conclusion, the students design their own style of communication in the position of peer-jury through an interpretation of the design projects. The results of the exercise shift the learning process from the instructor toward the peer-students and the peer-learners.

No abstract