Design studio in a challenging period: Implications for a digitalized education

Abstract

The unexpected and extensive emergency caused by the Covid-19 pandemic between 2020-2022 created a test environment that incorporates valuable data for the digitalization of education. Using the data obtained from architecture and interior architecture students, this research focuses on one of the fundamental elements of architectural education, the design studio. Examining online design studio (ODS) students from three different schools of architecture, this research tries to identify the technical resources utilized, students’ social interactions, physical and emotional wellbeing, and how these factors and demographic variables effected their ODS evaluations. The findings acquired by both qualitative and quantitative methods show significant relations between the technical resources of the students with their overall satisfaction from the ODS experience, as well as the level of their social interactions, physical, and emotional status. While ease of reaching resources, watching recorded lectures and critics, presenting student projects digitally both for critics and juries are strengths of the ODS, technical challenges for digital sketching and differing social requirements depending on the student’s year of study (YofS) are observed as weaknesses. Although the research has substantial limitations, the findings are proposed to be valuable for the research on developing a digital design studio.

Keywords

• Architecture
• Covid-19
• Information technologies
• ICT
• Online design studio

Zorlu bir dönemde tasarım stüdyosu: Sayısal eğitim için çıkarımlar

Öz

Covid-19 salgının 2020-2022 yılları arasında neden olduğu ani ve geniş çaplı acil durum ortamı eğitimin sayısallaştırlmasına yönelik pek çok verinin elde edilebildiği deneysel bir ortam yaratmıştır. Mimarlık ve İç Mimarlık bölümü öğrencilerinden elde edilen verileri kullanan bu araştırma, mimarlık eğitiminin temel yapıtaşlarından birisini oluşturan tasarım stüdyosuna odaklanmaktadır. Üç farklı mimarlık fakültesinin çevrimiçi tasarım stüdyosu öğrencileri ele alınarak, kullanılan teknik ekipman, öğrencilerin sosyal etkileşimleri, fiziksel ve ruhsal iyilik durumları ve bu etkenlerle demografik değişkenlerin çevrimiçi tasarım stüdyosu deneyimlerini nasıl etkilediğinin ortaya konması amaçlanmıştır. Nicel ve nitel yöntemler kullanılarak elde edilen sonuçlar öğrencilerin kullandıkları teknik ekipmanla çevrimiçi tasarım stüdyosu memnuniyetleri, sosyal etkileşimleri, fiziksel ve ruhsal iyilik durumları arasında bağlantı olduğunu göstermektedir. Ders kaynaklarına erişim, stüdyo kayıtları ve kritiklerin tekrar izlenebilirliği, jüri ve kritiklerin sayısal ortamda yapılmasının olumlu etkileri çevrimiçi tasarım stüdyosunun güçlü yönlerini oluştururken, sayısal ortamda eskiz ve çizim yapmanın zorluğu, ve öğrencinin kaçıncı sınıfta olduğuna bağlı olarak değişkenlik gösteren sosyal gereksinimler çevrimiçi tasarım stüdyosunun zayıflıkları olarak tespit edilmiştir. Araştırmanın belli kısıtları olsa da bulguların sayısal tasarım stüdyosu derslerinin geliştirilmesi konusundaki araştırmalara katkı sunması beklenmektedir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Mimarlık
• Covid-19
• Bilgi ve İletişim Teknolojileri
• BİT
• Çevrimiçi Tasarım Stüdyosu

References

1. Ahmad, L., Sosa, M., & Musfy, K. (2020). Interior design teaching methodology during the global COVID-19 pandemic. Interiority, 3(2), 163–184. https://doi.org/10.7454/in.v3i2.100
2. Akçay Kavakoğlu, A., Güleç Özer, D., Domingo-Callabuig, D., & Bilen, Ö. (2021). Architectural design communication (ADC) in online education during COVID-19 pandemic: a comparison of Turkish and Spanish universities. Open House International. https://doi.org/10.1108/OHI-07-2021-0144
3. Alnusairat, S., al Maani, D., & Al-Jokhadar, A. (2021). Architecture students’ satisfaction with and perceptions of online design studios during COVID-19 lockdown: the case of Jordan universities. Archnet-IJAR, 15(1), 219–236. https://doi.org/10.1108/ARCH-09-2020-0195/FULL/PDF
4. Asadpour, A. (2019). Student challenges in online architectural design courses in Iran during the COVID-19 pandemic. E-Learning and Digital Media, 18(6), 511–529. https://doi.org/10.1177/20427530211022923
5. Broadfoot, O., & Bennett, R. (2003). Design Studios: Online? Comparing traditional face-to-face Design Studio education with modern internet-based design studios The Traditional Design Studio. Apple University Consortium Academic and Developers Conference Proceedings, 9–21. Retrieved April 15, 2022, from http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.124.3548&rep=rep1&type=pdf
6. Brzezicki, M. (2020). Strengths and weaknesses of architectural education on-line classes conducted during COVID-19. World Transactions on Engineering and Technology Education, 18(4). Retrieved March 25, 2022, from http://www.wiete.com.au/journals/WTE&TE/Pages/Vol.18,%20No.4%20(2020)/03-Brzezicki-M.pdf
7. Ceylan, S., Şahin, P., Seçmen, S., Somer, M. E., & Süher, K. H. (2021). An evaluation of online architectural design studios during COVID-19 outbreak. Archnet-IJAR, 15(1), 203–218. https://doi.org/10.1108/ARCH-10-2020-0230
8. Charters, M., & Murphy, C. (2021). Taking Art School Online in Response to COVID 19: From Rapid Response to Realising Potential. International Journal of Art and Design Education, 40(1), 723-735. https://doi.org/10.1111/jade.12384

9. Demirbas, O. O., & Demirkan, H. (2007). Learning styles of design students and the relationship of academic performance and gender in design education. Learning and Instruction, 17(3), 345–359. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.LEARNINSTRUC.2007.02.007
10. Dinç Uyaroğlu, İ. (2021). Resilience in interior architecture education: Distance universal design learning in the COVID-19 pandemic. Journal of Design for Resilience in Architecture and Planning, 2(2), 234–249. https://doi.org/10.47818/drarch.2021.v2i2022
11. Fleischmann, K. (2020). Online design education: Searching for a middle ground. Arts and Humanities in Higher Education, 19(1), 36–57. https://doi.org/10.1177/1474022218758231
12. Hacıhasanoğlu, O. (2019). Architectural Design Studio Culture. Journal of Design Studio, 1(1), 5–15. Retrieved March 15, 2022, from https://dergipark.org.tr/en/download/article-file/775310
13. Hassanpour, B., & Şahin, N. P. (2021). Technology adoption in architectural design studios for educational activities. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 30(4), 491–509. https://doi.org/10.1080/1475939X.2021.1897037
14. Iranmanesh, A., & Onur, Z. (2021). Mandatory Virtual Design Studio for All: Exploring the Transformations of Architectural Education amidst the Global Pandemic. International Journal of Art and Design Education, 40(1), 251–267. https://doi.org/10.1111/jade.12350
15. Iulo, L. D., Gorby, C., Poerschke, U., Kalisperis, L. N., & Woollen, M. (2013). Environmentally conscious design - educating future architects. International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education, 14(4), 434–448. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJSHE-09-2011-0065/FULL/HTML
16. IZTECH. (2021). IZTECH IV. Training Workshop. Retrieved March 15, 2022, from https://hdl.handle.net/11147/10799
17. James, D. E., Schraw, G., & Kuch, F. (2015). Using the sampling margin of error to assess the interpretative validity of student evaluations of teaching. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 40(8), 1123–1141. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2014.972338
18. Kararmaz, Ö., & Ciravoğlu, A. (2017). A research on the integration of the experience based approaches into the early period architectural design studio. Megaron, 12(3), 409-419. https://doi.org/10.5505/megaron.2017.05925
19. Kasalı, A., Doğan, F., & Akış, T. (2020). Is disaster blessing? Notes on distance education. Mimarlık Journal, 414, 24–27. Retrieved April 16, 2022, from http:/www.mimarlikdergisi.com/index.cfm?sayfa=mimarlik&DergiSayi=429&RecID=5079
20. Kennedy, G. E., Judd, T. S., Churchward, A., Gray, K., & Krause, K. L. (2008). First year students’ experiences with technology: Are they really digital natives? Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 24(1), 108–122. https://doi.org/10.14742/AJET.1233
21. Levent Kasap, T. (2023). Evaluation of the views of the interior architecture undergraduate program faculty members on the education process in the covid-19 epidemic process. Online Journal of Art and Design, 11(1). Retrieved April 20, 2022, from http://adjournal.net/articles/111/11110.pdf
22. Marshalsey, L. (2021). Talking to art and design students at home: Evaluating the differences in student engagement online. International Journal of Art and Design Education, 40(4), 702–713. https://doi.org/10.1111/jade.12382
23. Masdéu, M., & Fuses, J. (2017). Reconceptualizing the design studio in architectural education: Distance learning and blended learning as transformation factors. Archnet-IJAR, 11(2), 6–23. https://doi.org/10.26687/ARCHNET-IJAR.V11I2.1156
24. Milovanović, A., Kostić, M., Zorić, A., Dordević, A., Pešić, M., Bugarski, J., Todorović, D., Sokolović, N., & Josifovski, A. (2020). Transferring COVID-19 challenges into learning potentials: Online workshops in architectural education. Sustainability, 12(17). https://doi.org/10.3390/su12177024
25. NIH (2005) Sample size calculations for the modular grant application process outcome evaluation study. US Department of Health and Human Services, National Institute of Health. Retrieved September 22, 2022, from https://grants.nih.gov/grants/funding/modular/eval/ sample_mgap.doc
26. Powell, A. (2009). Educational possibilities of humanitarian architecture. Field, 3(1), 113–124. Retrieved March 22, 2022, from http://field-journal.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/field_03_9_Educational_Possibilities_of_Humanitarian_Architecture.pdf
27. Şekerci̇, Y., Mutlu Danaci, H., Kaynakci Eli̇nç, Z. (2021). Uzaktan eğitimin uygulamalı derslerde sürdürülebilirliği: Mimarlık bölümleri örneği. The Journal of Graduate School of Natural and Applied Sciences of Mehmet Akif Ersoy University, 12(1), 54–68. https://doi.org/10.29048/MAKUFEBED.874055
28. UNAI (2020). COVID-19 and Higher Education: Education and Science as a Vaccine for the Pandemic | United Nations. United Nations Academic Impact Webinar Series. Retrieved March 10, 2022, from https://www.un.org/en/academic-impact/covid-19-and-higher-education-education-and-science-vaccine-pandemic
29. Yazıcıoğlu Halu, Z., & Kula Say, S. (2021). Can new pathways be opened for architectural education following the ordeal of the pandemic period? Or is distance architectural education only to be in digital medium? Mimarist Journal, 70, 60–67. Retrieved March 20, 2022, from https://www.mimarist.org/wp-content/uploads/yayinlar/mimarist/pdf/70.pdf
30. Yu, R., Ostwald, M. J., Gu, N., Skates, H., & Feast, S. (2021). Evaluating the effectiveness of online teaching in architecture courses. Architectural Science Review, 65(2), 89-100. https://doi.org/10.1080/00038628.2021.1921689