Analysis of Views on Digitalization of Design Studios

Abstract

Design studios, one of the most important components of architectural education had to move to digital environments urgently and independent of space with the Covid-19 pandemic. This study aims to evaluate whether design studios can be digitized according to the views of students and instructors in two different architecture schools (Firat and Balikesir University) by considering this compulsory experience. The views of 71 students and 5 academicians were taken with a purposeful sampling method. Content and descriptive analyses were performed on the views collected from the participants. As a result, the biggest problem in moving design studios to a digital environment is the disappearance of physical environments in which collaboration, idea sharing, and discussions will occur. In addition, the advantages of online education continued their attraction for some students in the digitalization of design studios. In terms of instructors, games, simulations, modeling, and virtual reality can be used for successful digital studio applications and the infrastructures of these applications can be improved with support from mobile devices.

Keywords

• Design studio
• digital design studio
• face-to-face education
• architecture education

Project Number

--

References

1. Sternberg RJ, Lubart TI. The concept of creativity: prospects and paradigms. In Handbook of creativity. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999.
2. Sidawi B. Correction: the impact of social interaction and communications on innovation in the architectural design studio. Buildings 2012; 2(3):203-217.
3. Piplani P, Brar TS. Traditional building knowledge: contemporary relevance for architecture education in India. Int J Des Educ 2020; 14(2): 89-109.
4. Peters OR, Olabode, O. Comparative analysis between art and architecture. Online Journal of Art and Design, 2018; 6(2):15-32.
5. Al-Saidi AZM. Artistic skills and scientific abilities in architectural education. Journal of Design Studio 2020; 2(2): 143-152.
6. Mizia M. Architecture as an art of understanding. Pol Rev 2014; 59(4): 81-92.
7. Ord DY, Harris JJ. The elusive definition of creativity. J Creat Behav 1992; 26(3): 186-198.
8. Doheim RM, Yusof N. Creativity in architecture design studio assessing students’ and instructors’ perception. J Cleaner Prod 2020; 249: 1-24.

9. Ramaraj A. Art of facilitating ‘problem-driven outcomes’ in an architectural design studio. New Trends and Issues Proceedings on Human & Social Sciences 2017; 4(11): 93-106.
10. Del Rosario Z, Aggarwl R, Coffey C, Sadler A, Matsumoto S, Wood A, Ruvolo P, Woodard CJ. Crafting a virtual studio: some models and implementations. In: 2021 ASEE Virtual Annual Conference; 26-29 July 2021; Virtual conference.
11. Maghool SAH, (Iradj) Moeini SH, Arefazar Y. An educational application based on virtual reality technology for learning architectural details: challenges and benefits. International Journal of Architectural Research ArchNet-IJAR 2018; 12(3): 246-272.
12. Boucharenc CG. Research on basic design education: an international survey. Int J Technol Des Educ 2006; 16 (1):1-30.
13. Ismail, AS, Mohidin HHB, Bauzi NBN. Sustainable architectural design studio towards the development of creative learning environment. Adv Sci Lett 2017; 23(9): 9259-9264.
14. Le Cornu R, Peters J. Towards constructivist classrooms: the role of the reflective teacher. Journal of Educational Enquiry 2005; 6(1): 50-64.
15. Alnusairat S, Al Maani D, Al-Jokhadar, A. Architecture students’ satisfaction with and perceptions of online design studios during covid-19 lockdown: the case of Jordan universities. International Journal of Architectural Research ArchNet-IJAR 2020; 15(1): 219-236.
16. P. L. O. Lueth. The architectural design studio as a learning environment: a qualitative exploration of architecture design student learning experiences in design studios from first-through fourth-year. PhD. Iowa State University, Ames, Iowa, USA, 2008.
17. Akincitürk N, Erbil Y, Yücel Ç. Cooperative learning in an architectural design studio. Uludağ University Journal of Faculty of Engineering and Architecture 2011; 16(2): 35-43.
18. Iranmanesh A, Onur Z. Mandatory virtual design studio for all: exploring the transformations of architectural education amidst the global pandemic. Int J Art Des Educ, 2021; 40(1): 251-267.
19. Al-Ayash A, Hussein MF. Distance education technology tools in interior design during covid-19 pandemic (UOP & UOG students as a case study). PalArch's Journal of Archaeology of Egypt / Egyptology 2020; 17(7): 13184-13202.
20. Ahmad L, Sosa M, Musfy K. Interior design teaching methodology during the global covid-19 pandemic. Interiority 2020; 3(2): 163-184.
21. Aristovnik A, Keržič D, Ravšelj D, Tomaževič N, Umek L. Impacts of the covid-19 pandemic on life of higher education students: a global perspective. Sustainability 2020; 12(20): 1-34.
22. Bircan H, Eleroglu H, Arslan R, Ersoy M. Cumhuriyet üniversitesi ögrencilerinin uzaktan eğitimde sunulan derslere yönelik bakış acısı. Eurasian Journal of Researches in Social and Economics (EJRSE) 2018; 5(12): 91-100.
23. Bingol B. Landscape architecture students' views on emergency remote teaching system in the covid-19 process: the case of Burdur Mehmet Akif Ersoy University, Turkey. Eur J Sci Technol 2020; 20: 890-897.
24. Ceylan S, Şahin P, Seçmen S, Somer ME, Süher KH. An evaluation of online architectural design studios during covid-19 outbreak. International Journal of Architectural Research ArchNet-IJAR 2020; 15(1): 203-218.
25. Dilmac S. Students’ opinions about the distance education to art and design courses in the pandemic process. World Journal of Education 2020; 10(3): 113-126.
26. Elrawy S, Abouelmagd D. Architectural and urban education in Egypt in the post covid-19 pandemic. European Journal of Sustainable Development 2021; 10(2): 91-112.
27. Eygu H, Karaman S. A study on the satisfaction perceptions of the distance education students. Kırıkkale University Journal of Social Sciences 2015; 3(1): 35-59.
28. Gautam P. Advantages and disadvantages of online learning, Available: https://elearningindustry.com /advantages-and-disadvantages-online-learning, Accessed: March 20, 2022.
29. Allu ELA, Allu-Kangkum ELA. Covid-19 and sustainable architectural education: challenges and perceptions on online learning. IJRDO-Journal of Education Research 2021; 6(2): 7-13.
30. Gursul F, Keser H. The effects of online and face to face problem based learning environments in mathematics education on student’s academic achievement. Procd Soc Behv, 2009; 1(1): 2817–2824.
31. Horzum MB. Michael Graham Moore: eğitim teknolojisi alanına önemli katkılar sağlayan kişi. Sakarya University Journal of Education 2013; 3(1): 113-119.
32. Masdéu M, Fuses J. Reconceptualizing the design studio in architectural education: distance learning and blended learning as transformation factors. International Journal of Architectural Research ArchNet-IJAR 2017; 11(2): 6-23.
33. Metin AE, Karaman A, Aksoy Sastim Y. Student perspectives on distance education and the assessment of the efficiency of distance education english courses: Banaz Vocational College. Karabük University Journal of Institute of Social Sciences 2017; 7(2): 640-652.
34. Moore M, Kearsley G. Distance education: A systems view of online learning. 3rd ed. California: CENGAGE learning, 2011.
35. Oz Ceviz N, Tektas N, Basmacı G, Tektas M. Unıversity students’ perspective on distance education during the covid-19 pandemic period: the case of Turkey. Ulakbilge - Journal of Social Sciences 2020; 52: 1322-1335.
36. Purbo OW. Online teaching and experience art & culture during coronavirus and beyond. 2020. Available: https://lms.onnocenter.or.id/pustaka/docs/art/OWP-20201003-Experience-art-and-culture-during-covid19 -lockdown.pdf. Accessed: June19, 2022.
37. Reimers A, Schleicher A. A frame work to guide an education response to the Covid - 19 pandemic of 2020. Paris: OECD Publishing, 2020.
38. Qureshi JA. Advancement in massive open online courses (MOOCs) to revolutionize disruptive technology in education: a case of Pakistan. Journal of Education and Educational Development 2019; 6(2): 219-234.
39. Sakarya K. Suggestions of distance education models for interior design education. Journal of Cukurova University Institute of Social Sciences 2019; 28(2): 388-401.
40. Sidawi B. The use of e-learning system in learning about architecture: obstacles and opportunities. In: 2015 Fifth International Conference on e-Learning; 18-20 October 2015; (econf). pp 117–124.
41. Schwarz M, Scherrer A, Hohmann C, Heiberg J, Brugger A, Nuñez-Jimenez A. Covid-19 and the academy: it is time for going digital. Energy Res Social Sci 2020;68:101684.
42. Milovanović A, Kostic M, Zoric A, Dordevic A, Pesic M, Bugarski J, Todorovic D, Sokolovic N, Josifovski A. Transferring Covid-19 challenges into learning potentials: online workshops in architectural education. Sustainability 2020; 12(17): 1-22.
43. Sen O, Kizilcalioglu G. Determining the views of university students and academics on distance education during the covıd-19 pandemic. International Journal of 3d Printing Technologıes And Digital Industry 2020; 4(3): 239-252.
44. Toquero CM. Challenges and opportunities for higher education amid the Covid-19 Pandemic: the Philippine context. Pedagogical Research 2020; 5(4): 1-5.
45. Varma A, Jafri MS. Covid-19 responsive teaching of undergraduate architecture programs in India: learnings for post-pandemic education. International Journal of Architectural Research ArchNet-IJAR 2020; 15(1): 189-202.
46. Jones MA, Bubb S. Student voice to improve schools: perspectives from students, teachers and leaders in ‘perfect’ conditions. Improving Schools 2021; 24(3): 233-244.
47. Ibrahim NLN, Utaberta N. Learning in architecture design studio. Procd Soc Behv 2012; 60: 30-35.
48. Vyas D, van der Veer G, Nijholt, A. Creative practices in the design studio culture: Collaboration and communication. Cognit Technol Work 2013; 15(4): 415-443.
49. Bittencourt II, Costa E, Silva M, Soares E. A computational model for developing semantic web-based educational systems. Knowledge-Based Syst 2009; 22(4): 302-315.
50. Jasper MA. Issues in phenomenology for researchers of nursing. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 1994; 19(2): 309-314.
51. Miller S. Analysis of phenomenological data generated with children as research participants. Nurse Researcher 2003; 10(4): 68-82.
52. Yıldırım A, Simsek H. Qualitative research methods in the social sciences. 5th ed. Ankara: Seckin Publishing, 2006.
53. Christensenn LB, Johnson B, Turner LA. Research Methods, Design, and Analysis. 12th ed. Pearson Education Limited, 2014.
54. Patton MQ. Qualitative Research & Evaluation Methods: Integrating Theory and Practice. 4th ed. Sage Publications, 2014.
55. Creswell JW. Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches. Sage Publications, 2013.
56. Miles MB, Huberman AM. Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook. California: Sage Publications, 1994.
57. Gliner JA, Morgan GA, Leech NL. Research methods in applied settings: An integrated approach to design and analysis. New York: Routledge, 2011.
58. Dumbauld B. 13 Great Benefits of Online Learning. https://www.indiaeducation.net/onlineeducation /articles/10-benefits-of-online-learning.html, Accessed: 20 February 2020.
59. Paker Kahvecioglu N. Architectural design studio organization and creativity, A| Z - ITU Journal of the Faculty of Architecture 2007; 4(2): 6-26.
60. Cantürk Akyıldız E. Design studio a learning environment: experience of Maltepe university design studio 1. The Turkish Online Journal of Design Art and Communication 2020; 10(4): 389-407.