Adaptation of architectural education pedagogy in addressing COVID-19 pandemic

Year 2022, Volume: 5 Issue: 4 - ICETOL 2022 Special Issue, 1094 - 1105, 10.12.2022

Pooya Lotfabadi , Soad Abokhamıs Mousavı

https://doi.org/10.31681/jetol.1150608

Cited By: 3

Abstract

In March 2020, the World Health Organization (WHO) proclaimed the COVID-19 outbreak a global pandemic. As a result, it has been mandated that all educational institutions complete the 2019-20 spring semester online. Despite the importance of distance education, it appears that online education has not assisted architecture education adequately. This is due to the fact that it has higher learning objectives, is taught via coaching approaches, and incorporates nonverbal communication. Architects are trained through a method focused on the ‘studio course’. In this environment, students’ decisions are unintentionally affected by the unanticipated backtalk and discussions that arise from the design development process. In other words, criticism, which is a graphic and oral communication between the students and the instructor, is one of the most frequent learning strategies utilized in the design studio. The necessity for new educational frameworks in architecture has been sparked by the pedagogically distinctive consequences of digital design. Thus, the primary aim of this study is to monitor and document current trends, benefits, and limitations of online architectural discourse and learning ecosystems from both students’ and tutors’ perspectives. It also investigates alternative pedagogical agendas in order to address the requirement to integrate different levels of students with online education. In this regard, the effects of the design medium, knowledge-based or theoretical courses, and practical courses are three common types of influences on educational system adaptability and inertia. Finally, in this research, authors attempt to formulate a theoretical framework and didactic principles for the modification of architectural online education by using multiple methods of data collection, primarily based on a systematic observation of the experiments, questioning the participants before and after the experiment, and evaluate of the descriptive results of the experiment.

Keywords

Architectural Pedagogy, Distance Education, Digital Education

References

• Abdellatif, R., & Calderon, C. (2007). SECONDLIFE: A Computer-Mediated Tool for Distance-Learning in Architecture Education?. 3rd Int’l ASCAAD Conference on Em‘body’ing Virtual Architecture (pp. 17-34). Alexandria: ASCAAD-07.
• Akoury, C. "(2020). Apprehending the creative process through drawing in the foundation design studio. International Journal of Art & Design Education, 1, 113–25.
• Althaus, S.L. (2009). Computer-Mediated Communication in the University Classroom: An Experiment with On-line Discussions. Communication Education, 46(3), 158-174. https://doi.org/ 10.1080/03634529709379088
• Aranda, B., & Lasch, C. (2006). Tooling. Princeton Architectural Press.
• Bermudez, J., & Agutter, J. (2005). Data architecture studio: premises pedagogy and results. Proceedings of the 9th Iberoamerica Congress of Digital Graphics, (pp. 720-724). Lima: SIGRADI.
• Brown, B., & Bell, M. (2004). CSCW at Play: 'There' as a Collaborative Virtual Environment. Proceedings of CSCW'04. (pp 350-359). Chicago: ACM2004.
• Cross, N. (2001). Designerly Ways of Knowing: Design Discipline versus Design Science. Design Issues, 17(3), 49–55. http://www.jstor.org/stable/1511801
• Cuff, D. (2001). Digital pedagogy. Architectural Record, 9, 200-206.
• Drexler, A., & Chafee, R. (1977). The architecture of the Ecole des Beaux-Arts. Secker & Warburg.
• Dutton, T. A. (1987). Design and studio pedagogy. Journal of Architectural Education, 1, 19-25. https://doi.org/10.2307/1424904
• Giovannella, C., Passarelli, M., & Persico, D. (2020). The Effects of the Covid-19 Pandemic on Italian Learning Ecosystems: the School Teachers’ Perspective at the steady state. Interaction Design and Architecture(s) Journal, 45, 264-286. https://doi.org/10.1111/jade.12223
• 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, 10(3), 251-267. https://doi.org/10.1111/jade.12350
• Iranmanesh, A., & Onur, Z. (2022). Generation gap, learning from the experience of compulsory remote architectural design studio. Int J Educ Technol High Educ 19(40). https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-022-00345-7
• Kalay, Y. E. (2004). Architecture's new media: Principles, theories and methods of computer-aided design. MIT Press.
• Kalay, Y. E. (2004). Virtual Learning Environments. ITcon, 9, 195-207.
• Kemp, J., & Livingstone, D. (2006). Putting a SecondLife "Metaverse" Skin on Learning Management Systems. Proceedings of the Second Life Education Workshop at the SecondLife Community Convention. (pp 13-18). SanFrancisco: The University of Paisley.
• Khogali, H. A. (2020). The Effect of COVID-19 CORONA VIRUS on Sustainable Teaching and Learning in Architecture Engineering. Modern Applied Science, 14(8), 1-15. https://doi.org/10.5539/mas.v14n8p44
• Kieran, S., & Timberlake, J. (2004). Refabricating architecture: how manufacturing methodologies are poised to transform building construction. McGraw-Hill.
• Knight, T. (1999). Shape grammars in education and practices: history and prospects. International Journal of Design Computing (IJDC), 2, 1-7.
• Knight, T., & Stiny, G. (2001). Classical and non-classical computation. Architectural Research Quarterly Cambridge Journals, 5, 355-372. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1359135502001410
• Kolarevic, B. (2003). Architecture in the digital age. Spon Press.
• Kolarevic, B., & Malkawi, A. M. (2005). Performative architecture: beyond instrumentality. Spon Press.
• Kuhn, S. (1988). The Software Design Studio: an exploration. IEEE Software, 65-71. https://doi.org/10.1109/52.663788
• Kuhn, S. (2001). Learning from the Architecture Studio: Implications for Project-Based Pedagogy. International Journal of Engineering Education, 17, 349-352.
• Kvan, T. (2001). The pedagogy of virtual design studios. Automation in Construction, 10, 345-353. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0926-5805(00)00051-0
• Kvan, T., Mark, E., Oxman, R., & Martens, B. (2004). Ditching the dinosaur: redefining the role of digital media in education. International Journal of Design Computing (IJDC), 1-7.
• Lawson, B. (1997). How designers think: the design process demystifie. Architectural Press.
• Leh, A. S. (2001). Computer-Mediated Communication and Social Presence in a Distance Learning Environment. International Journal of Educational Telecommunications, 7(2), 109-128. https://www.learntechlib.org/primary/p/8470/
• Lynn, G. (1999). Animate form. Princeton Architectural Press.
• Manley, S., & Johnson, A. G. (2013). Towards Inclusion: Rethinking Architectural Education. Construction Management and Economics, 31(8), 914-927. https://doi.org/10.1080/01446193.2013.797093
• Mark, E., Martens, B., & Oxman, R. (2003). Preliminary stages of CAAD education. Automation and Construction, 6, 661-670. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0926-5805(03)00045-1
• Noddings, N. (2019). Philosophy of education. Routledge.
• Oxman, R. (2006). Digital design thinking: ‘Is the new design is the new pedagogy’. Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Computer Aided Design Research in Asia. (pp 37-46) Kumamoto: CAADRIA.
• Oxman, R. (2006). Theory and design in the first digital age. Design Studies, 27(3), 229-265. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.DESTUD.2005.11.002
• Oxman, R. (2008). Digital architecture as a challenge for design pedagogy: theory, knowledge, models and medium. Design Studies, 29(2), 99-120. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2007.12.003
• Oxman, R. (2008). Digital Architecture as a challenge for design pedagogy: Theory, knowledge, models and Medium. Design Studies, 29(2), 99–120. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2007.12.003
• Oxman, R., & Oxman, R. (1994). Computability of architectural knowledge. The electronic design studio: architectural knowledge and media in the computer era, 171-187.
• Ozkar, M. (2007). Learning by doing in the age of design computing. CAAD Futures, Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Computer Aided Architectural Design Futures, (pp. 99-112). Sydney: Springer.
• Pektaş, Ş. T. (2015). The virtual design studio on the cloud: a blended and distributed approach for technology mediated design education. Architectural Science Review, 58(3), 255-65. https://doi.org/10.1080/00038628.2015.1034085
• Rashid, H., & Couture, L. A. (2002). Asymptote: flux. Phaidon.
• Reffat, R. (2007). Revitalizing architectural design studio teaching using ICT: reflections on practical implementations. International Journal of Education and Development Using ICT, 3(1), 39–53.
• Rosa, J. (2003). New generation architecture. Rizzoli.
• Russell, P. (2001). Creating place in the virtual design studio. Computer Aided Architectural Design Futures 2001, 231–242. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-010-0868-6_18
• Sass, L., & Oxman, R. (2006). Design Studies. A Special Issue on Digital Design, 27(3), 325-355.
• Schnabel, M. A., & Kvan, T. (2001). Implementing the first virtual environment design studio, in Architectural Education for the Asian Century. Proceedings of the 1st ACAE Conference on Architectural Education (pp. 157–66). Singapore: EAAE.
• Schodek, D. (2000). New technologies in architecture, digital design and manufacturing techniques. Harvard University Press.
• Schodek, D., Bechthold, M., Griggs, J. K., Kao, K., & Steinberg, M. (2005). Digital design and manufacturing: CAD/CAM applications in architecture and design. John Wiley & Sons.
• Schön Donald A. (2014). Educating the reflective practitioner: Toward a new design for teaching and learning in the professions. Jossey-Bass.
• Schön, D.A., & Wiggins, G.E. (1992). Kinds of seeing and their functions in designing. Design Studies, 13, 135-156. https://doi.org/10.1016/0142-694X(92)90268-F
• Spuybroek, L. (2004). NOX: machining architecture. Thames and Hudson.
• Strojan, T. Z., & Mullins, M. (2002). The identity of place in virtual design studios. Journal of Architectural Education, 56(1), 15-21. https://doi.org/10.1162/104648802321019137
• Talamo , A., & Ligorio, M. B. (2000). Identity in the Cyberspace:The Social Construction of Identity Through On-Line Virtual Interactions. 1st Dialogical Self Conference. (pp 1-17). Netherlands: Nijmegen.
• UNESCO's education response to covid-19. UNESCO. (2022, June 20). Retrieved October 18, 2020, from https://en.unesco.org/covid19/educationresponse/support
• Webster, H. (2007). The Analytics of Power. Journal of Architectural Education, 60(3), 21-27. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1531-314X.2007.00092.x
• Wojtowicz, J. (1995). Virtual design studio. Hong Kong University Press.
• Zaero-Polo, A., & Moussavi, F. (2003). Morphogenesis: FOA’s ark. Actar.
• Zellner, P. (1999). Hybrid space: new forms in digital architecture. Thames and Hudson.