Highlighting Community and Identity through an Online Interior Architecture Studio Project: Ambassador’s Residence Project

Abstract

Within the confines of the COVID-19 pandemic, design educators were required to revisit tried and true ways of teaching and create original ways to connect with their students. In this paper, the aim is to achieve the sense of global interiors community in online teaching regarding teaching methods as well as project topics. Moreover, various means by which an enhanced studio experience may be provided is investigated. The year-long project with a focus on “concept building”, benefited from a variety of approaches and resources that is believed to enrich the overall experience. One of the first aims was to enable a sense of connection and community at a time of detachment. This was achieved in a number of ways; the first step was through requiring students to work in teams of two. The second step was to use the opportunities of online education to the full extent. In this sense, both national and international guests were invited to the studio for lectures and critiques. Lastly, on special days such as the IFI (International Federation of Interior Architects/Designers) World Interiors Day and juries, both national and international guests were invited to the studio to share experiences with students that were shared on international platforms. Through an ambassador’s residence project, second-year interior architecture students were able to experience aspects of their profession in an international environment. An enriched experience both in terms of structure and content was aimed to be achieved and the projects reflected these aims. The selected projects portrayed in the paper answer the requirements in full, are parallel to the context, and reflect the key criteria of the project. A questionnaire was applied to the participating students to gather deeper insight into their studio experience. Limitations include the number of participant students, and thus, further studies may include larger groups of students, national and international comparisons of experiences as well as studio output. Despite the large-scale catastrophe, findings show the benefits of increased online interiors community activity in the experience of the students as well as being reflected positively to their projects. These events have also benefited the instructors’ connection to the studio. Overall, the interior design studio is a dynamic environment that needs constant research into its pedagogy, content, and overall experience, as the educational environment moves swiftly to online direction.

Keywords

• Interior design studio
• Interiors community
• Internationality
• Sense of community
• Identity
• Virtual design studio
• Concept building

Thanks

Acknowledgements: The authors would like to thank the students of Izmir University of Economics, Faculty of Fine Arts and Design, Dept. of Interior Architecture and Environmental Design, whose projects are presented in this paper.

References

1. Abercrombie, S. (1990) Philosophy of Interior Design. Oxford: Westview
2. Afacan, Y. (2016) Exploring the effectiveness of blended learning in interior design education, Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 53:5, 508-518. Available at: DOI:10.1080/14703297.2015.1015595 (Accessed: 25 August 2021).
3. Akar, E. et al. (2012) Online studio in the industrial design education: the implications of Kibis as the organizational communication and knowledge management system, Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, Vol. 47, pp. 771–5.
4. Alawad, A. (2021, Evaluating Online Learning Practice in the Interior Design Studio. International Journal of Art & Design Education. 10.1111/jade.12365.
5. Broadfoot, O. & Bennett, R. (2003) Design studios: Online? Comparing Traditional face-to-face Design Studio Education With Modern Internet-based Design Studios, Apple University Consortium Academic and Developers Conference Proceedings, s. 9-21.
6. Chen, W. & You, M. (2010) Student response to an internet-mediated industrial design studio course, International Journal of Technology and Design Education, Vol. 20, No. 2, pp. 151–74.
7. Cheng, N. & Kvan, T. (2000) Design collaboration strategies. Timmermans, Harry (Ed.), Fifth Design and Decision Support Systems in Architecture and Urban Planning - Part one: Architecture Proceedings (Nijkerk, the Netherlands).
8. Ching, F. D. K. (2005), Interior Design Illustrated. NY: John Wiley & Sons.

9. Cho, J.Y. & Cho, M.H. (2014) Student perceptions and performance in online and offline collaboration in an interior design studio. International Journal of Technology and Design Education. 24. 473-491. 10.1007/s10798-014-9265-0.
10. De Chiara, J. et al. (2001) Time-Saver Standards for Interior Design and Space Planning. New York: McGraw-Hill.
11. Deasy, C. M. & Laswell, T. E. (1985) Designing Places for People: A Handbook on Human Behavior for Architects, Designers and Facility Managers. Broadway, New York
12. Demirbas, O. O. (2001) The relation of learning styles and performance scores of the students in interior architecture education. Unpublished Ph.D. Dissertation. Ankara: Bilkent University
13. Demirbas, O. O. & Demirkan, H. (2003) Focus on architectural design process through learning styles. Design Studies. 24. 437-456. 10.1016/S0142-694X(03)00013-9.
14. Demirkan, H. & Hasirci, D. (2009) Hidden Dimensions of Creativity Elements in Design Process. Creativity Research Journal, Vol. 21, No. 2-3, 294-301
15. Dreamson, N. (2020) Online Design Education: Meta‐Connective Pedagogy. International Journal of Art & Design Education. 39. 10.1111/jade.12314.
16. Fleischmann, K. (2019) From studio practice to online design education: can we teach design online? Canadian Journal of Learning and Technology, Vol. 45, No. 1, pp. 1–19.
17. Hasirci, D. & Demirkan, H. (2003). Creativity in Learning Environments: The Case of Two Sixth Grade Art-Rooms. The Journal of Creative Behavior. vol. 37, no.1. pp.17-42.
18. Hasirci, D. & Demirkan, H. (2007). Understanding the effects of cognition in creative decision making: A creativity model for enhancing the design studio process. Creativity Research Journal, 19(2-3), 259–271.
19. Hennessy, S. & Murphy, P. (1999). The Potential for Collaborative Problem Solving in Design and Technology. International Journal of Technology and Design Education. 9. 1-36. 10.1023/A:1008855526312.
20. 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 & Design Education. 40. 10.1111/jade.12350.
21. Jones, D. & Lotz, N. (2021). Design Education: Teaching in Crisis. Design and Technology Education: an International Journal, 26(4) pp. 4–9.
22. Jones, D. & Lotz, N. & Holden, G. (2021). A longitudinal study of virtual design studio (VDS) use in STEM distance design education. International Journal of Technology and Design Education. 31. 1-27. 10.1007/s10798-020-09576-z.
23. Kilmer, W. O. et al. (2001) Construction Drawings and Details for Interiors: Basic Skills. NJ: John Wiley & Sons.
24. Kusumowidagdo, A. & Prihatmanti, R. (2022). ‘Sense of Place’ in Virtual Design Studio (VDS): A Review. Review of Urbanism and Architectural Studies. 20. 65-73. 10.21776/ub.ruas.2022.020.01.7.
25. Laseau, P. (2001) Graphic Thinking for Architects and Designers. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
26. Lotz, N., Jones, D., & Holden, G. (2015). Social engagement in online design pedagogies. In R. VandeZande, E. Bohemia, & I. Digranes (Eds.), Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference for Design Education Researchers (pp. 1645–1668). Aalto University, Finland.
27. McGowan and M. Kruse, K. (2004) Interior Graphic Standards. Hoboken, N.J.: J. Wiley.
28. Mitton, M. (2004) Interior Design Visual Presentation: A Guide to Graphics, Models and Presentation Techniques. NY: John Wiley.
29. Niculae, R. L. (2011) The virtual architectural studio – an experiment of online cooperation, Review of Applied Socio- Economic Research, Vol. 1, No. 1, pp. 38–46.
30. Northcote, M. (2008). Sense of place in online learning environments. ASCILITE 2008 -The Australasian Society for Computers in Learning in Tertiary Education, (January 2008), 676–684.
31. Park, J. (2011) Design Education Online: Learning Delivery and Evaluation. International Journal of Art & Design Education. 30. 176 - 187. 10.1111/j.1476-8070.2011.01689.x.
32. Pile, J. F. (1997) Color in Interior Design. New York: McGraw-Hill.
33. Pile, J. F. (2003) Interior Design. NJ: Prentice Hall.
34. Pile, J. F. (1989) Perspective for Interior Designers. NY: Watson-Guptill.
35. Riggs, J. R. (2007) Materials and Components of Interior Architecture. NJ: Prentice Hall.
36. Rodriguez, C., Hudson, R., & Niblock, C. (2018). Collaborative learning in architectural education: Benefits of combining conventional studio, virtual design studio and live projects: Collaborative Learning in Architectural Education. British Journal of Educational Technology, 49(3), 337–353.
37. Sagun, A. & Demirkan, H. (2007) On-line critiques in collaborative design studio. International Journal of Technology and Design Education. 19. 79-99. 10.1007/s10798-007-9036-2.
38. Sagun, A. & Demirkan, H. (2009) On-line critiques in collaborative design studio. International Journal of Technology and Design Education. 19. 79-99. 10.1007/s10798-007-9036-2.
39. Sagun, A. et al. (2001) A Framework for the Design Studio in Web‐Based Education. Journal of Art & Design Education. 20. 332 - 342. 10.1111/1468-5949.00282.
40. Saghafi, M. R., Franz, J., & Crowther, P. (2012). Perceptions of physical versus virtual design studio education. Archnet-IJAR, 6(1), 6–22.
41. Schön, D.A. (1981) Intuitive thinking? A metaphor underlying some ideas of educational reform (working paper 8). Unpublished manuscript. Cambridge: Division for Study and Research in Education, MIT.
42. Schön, D.A. (1985) The design studio: An exploration of its traditions and potentials. RIBA Publications for RIBA Building Trust, London.
43. Spruce, J. (2007). Examining the role of the studio environment within design education. DS 43: Proceedings of E and PDE 2007, the 9th International Conference on Engineering and Product Design Education. pp. 331-336.
44. Winters, T. (2021). Emergency Remote Studio Teaching: Notes from the Field. Journal of Teaching and Learning With Technology, 10(1). https://doi.org/10.14434/jotlt.v10i1.31580