Online Studio in the Industrial Design Education: The Implications of Kibis as the Organizational Communication and Knowledge Management System

Akar, Evren; Turhan, Senem; Ozgen, Dalsu; Coşkun, Aykut; Oraklibel, Renk Dimli

doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.06.732

Cited by 4 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 1 publication

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Nevertheless, researchers have stated there are disadvantages to the online studio: there is no customisable environment (Akar et al 2012;Fleischmann 2019); there is a need to develop more interactive spaces (Andia 2001); face and body language reactions are not available (Fleischmann 2019;Niculae 2011); there is a difficulty understanding the iterative design process in presenting design projects online (Fleischmann 2019); and there is a higher chance of audiences becoming distracted online (Andia 2001). In addition to network problems, the data transmission rate and communication issues (Niculae 2011), there is a lack of 3D projects in online learning, as well as the loss of real-time discussion between students and teachers and the increased effort required to write and upload comments on the works (Akar et al 2012). Moreover, social learning environments and promoting social and emotional variables have been shown to improve the overall learning experience of the learner (Weidlich & Bastiaens 2019).…”

Section: Online Design Studiomentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Questionnaires are used to collect the opinions of others, and their advantages include their ability to obtain several opinions with little time and money and that the anonymity of respondents may encourage more honesty (Gray & Malins 2016). Many researchers have used questionnaires to identify student trends (Akar et al 2012;Fleischmann 2019).…”

Section: Instrument and Data Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

“…With numerous studies conducted on the use of online learning in the blended design studio, many have shown that there are still problems to be solved to ensure their effective use (Chen & You 2010), while others have revealed that online learning is sufficient to support traditional learning but not replace it (Akar et al. 2012; Niculae 2011). Wragg (2019) argued that attending a campus for design education in 2019 clearly differs from the learning experience of previous decades as a result of technology’s impact on changes regarding the nature of work, social environments and the tools used by designers.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…It has also supported the transfer, sharing and creation of knowledge, and cooperation has become possible regardless of time and place (Akar et al. 2012; Niculae 2011). The online design studio is a virtual space in which the teacher and students meet; that is, it often involves group communication and not a single connection.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In addition to network problems, the data transmission rate and communication issues (Niculae 2011), there is a lack of 3D projects in online learning, as well as the loss of real‐time discussion between students and teachers and the increased effort required to write and upload comments on the works (Akar et al. 2012). Moreover, social learning environments and promoting social and emotional variables have been shown to improve the overall learning experience of the learner (Weidlich & Bastiaens 2019).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Evaluating Online Learning Practice in the Interior Design Studio

Alawad¹

2021

Int J Art Design Ed

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The COVID-19 pandemic has led most countries to adopt precautionary isolation measures to prevent the spread of the virus. In this context, teaching through online studios has become a necessity. This study aimed to identify students' practical experiences in fully online interior design studios and determine whether these experiences differ according to students' educational levels to help improve and ensure the quality of online design education. The participants were 69 female interior design students. A questionnaire was applied using five axes, namely virtual learning environment, curriculum and illustration tools, students' experiences, interaction with the teacher, and overall satisfaction and hopes. The results showed that the newer students had a positive experience with the online design studio, while there were statistically significant differences between the answers of students at different levels. It was noticeable that the students' experience on all axes was different, and the level of satisfaction among the new students in Studio 2 was higher than among the students nearing graduation in Studio 6. The findings of this study will benefit the academic programme and technology developers in creating a suitable online learning environment for each profession.

show abstract

Section: Online Design Studiomentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Instrument and Data Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Evaluating Online Learning Practice in the Interior Design Studio

Alawad¹

2021

Int J Art Design Ed

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

An Unexpected Shift to an Online Design Studio Course: Student Insights on Design Critiques

Tüfek

2022

Int J Art Design Ed

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Online education is not a common practice in design education. As the cornerstone of design education, the design studio incorporates a hands‐on approach that stems from its materiality. This tactile character of the design studio has been challenged by the recent pandemic since many design schools and departments decided to proceed with their education online. Consequently, some fundamental pedagogical mechanisms that rely on the distinct habitat of the design studio were moved to the online context. Design critiques, a crucial activity in communicating design knowledge, were also carried to online channels. This shift from the physical to the online environment caused some changes in both the communication and understanding of design critiques. In the light of recent developments, this article reflects on students’ perceptions of design critiques in an online studio setting. In‐depth interviews were conducted with six industrial design students who started their semester in a physical studio environment but continued online. The study demonstrates that the students’ impressions of design critiques have been affected by several factors that can be grouped under three categories: crit actors, crit process and crit context.

show abstract

Digital Making

Hai-Jew

2020

Advances in Human and Social Aspects of Technology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the same way there are generic physical “maker spaces,” people may benefit from having access to digital maker spaces to generate various types of contents for sharing. These may involve contents for intercommunications, artful expression, storytelling, socializing, teaching, learning, research, entertainment, social change, political activism, and other endeavors. Expanding digital making may provide channels for human exploration and creativity and social interchanges, while limiting their consumption of common hobbyist physical materials (wood, paper, metals, and other consumables). This work explores some necessary and desirable features of open online studio spaces for digital making.

show abstract

Online Studio in the Industrial Design Education: The Implications of Kibis as the Organizational Communication and Knowledge Management System

Cited by 4 publications

References 1 publication

Evaluating Online Learning Practice in the Interior Design Studio

Evaluating Online Learning Practice in the Interior Design Studio

An Unexpected Shift to an Online Design Studio Course: Student Insights on Design Critiques

Digital Making

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About