TOWARDS A SHARED FUTURE IN DESIGN EDUCATION: A COLLABORATIVE DESIGN PEDAGOGY EXPERIMENT IN THE ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN STUDIO

Yıl 2025, Cilt: 15 Sayı: 3, 646 - 661, 01.07.2025

Emre Demirtaş

https://doi.org/10.7456/tojdac.1671254

Öz

This study investigates how collaborative design pedagogy affects students' learning experiences in an architectural design studio (AD VII) that aims to develop cross-scale and interdisciplinary thinking skills. The study considers an AD VII studio case study using quantitative research methods. Throughout the semester, individual and group work processes were monitored, and students' experiences were evaluated through survey questions. The responses indicate that the collaborative design method applied in AD VII provides significant advantages in terms of access to information, diversity of ideas, depth of research, efficiency, quality of presentation, memorability, understanding the relationships between interdisciplinary fields of knowledge, and developing strategies across scales — all in line with the essential motivations of the method, which are collective mind and collective labor. There is a need to test collaborative learning pedagogy in courses other than the design studio and across the curriculum for a more extended period. Additionally, this study's hybrid configuration and process design can guide future research and practice, considering the specific areas for improvement mentioned in the conclusion. Ultimately, this study reveals the potential of collective intelligence and labor power, laying the foundation for future interdisciplinary studies in education and professional life.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Collaborative Design Pedagogy , Collective Design , Collective effort , Design Education , Interdisciplinarity

TASARIM EĞİTİMİNDE ORTAK BİR GELECEĞE DOĞRU: BİR MİMARİ TASARIM STÜDYOSUNDA İŞBİRLİĞİNE DAYALI TASARIM PEDAGOJİSİ DENEYİMİ

Öz

Bu çalışma, işbirliğine dayalı tasarım pedagojisinin, ölçekler arası ve disiplinler arası düşünme becerilerini geliştirmeyi amaçlayan bir mimari tasarım stüdyosunda (AD VII) öğrencilerin öğrenme deneyimlerini nasıl etkilediğini araştırmaktadır. Çalışmada nicel araştırma yöntemleri kullanılarak bir AD VII stüdyosu vaka çalışması ele alınmaktadır. Dönem boyunca bireysel ve grup çalışma süreçleri izlenmiş ve öğrencilerin deneyimleri anket soruları aracılığıyla değerlendirilmiştir. Yanıtlar, AD VII'de uygulanan işbirliğine dayalı tasarım yönteminin bilgiye erişim, fikir çeşitliliği, araştırma derinliği, verimlilik, sunum kalitesi, akılda kalıcılık, disiplinler arası bilgi alanları arasındaki ilişkileri anlama ve ölçekler arası stratejiler geliştirme açısından önemli avantajlar sağladığını göstermektedir. Bulgular yöntemin temel motivasyonları olan kolektif akıl ve kolektif emek ile uyumludur. İşbirliğine dayalı öğrenme pedagojisinin tasarım stüdyosu dışındaki derslerde ve müfredat genelinde daha uzun bir süre boyunca test edilmesine ihtiyaç vardır. Ayrıca, bu çalışmanın hibrit yapılandırması ve süreç tasarımı, sonuç bölümünde belirtilen belirli iyileştirme alanları göz önünde bulundurularak gelecekteki araştırma ve uygulamalara rehberlik edebilir. Nihayetinde bu çalışma, kolektif zeka ve emek gücünün potansiyelini ortaya koyarak, eğitim ve profesyonel hayatta gelecekte yapılacak disiplinler arası çalışmalar için temel oluşturmaktadır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

İş birliğine dayalı pedagoji , Kolektif tasarım , Kolektif emek , Tasarım eğitimi , Disiplinlerarasılık

Kaynakça

• Akinciturk, N., Erbil , Y. and Yucel, C. (2011), “Cooperative learning in an architectural design studio”, Uludag University Journal of the Faculty of Engineering, Vol. 16 No. 2, pp. 35-43.
• Anthony, K. H. (2002), Designing for diversity: Implications for architectural education in the twenty-first century. Journal of Architectural Education, 55(4), 257–267. https://doi.org/10.1162/104648802753657969
• Atlee, T. (2002), The Tao of democracy: using co-intelligence to create a world that works for all. North Atlantic Books.
• Bruffee, K. (1993), Collaborative learning: Higher education, interdependence, and the authority of knowledge. Baltimore, MD, and London, UK: Johns Hopkins University Press.
• Bruffee, K. (1994), The art of collaborative learning: making the most of knowledgeable peers. Change, 26(3), 39–44.
• Crosbie, M J (1995), The schools: How they're failing the profession (and what we can do about it), Progressive Architecture Vol 76 No 9 September 1995 pp 47-51, 94, 96
• Cuff, D. (1989), The social art of design at the office and the academy. Journal of Architectural and Planning Research, 6(3), 186–203.
• Demirtaş, E. (2021), Çıkış Ne Tarafta?, Arredamento Mimarlık, no 346, 86-87.
• Denton, H. G. (1997), Multidisciplinary Team-Based Project Work: Planning Factors. Design Studies, 18, 155 170. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0142-694X(97)85458-0
• Dillenbourg, P., Baker, M. J., Blaye, A., & O’Malley, C. (1996), The Evolution of Research on Collaborative Learning. In E. Spada, & P. Reiman (Eds.), Learning in Humans and Machine: Towards an Interdisciplinary Learning Science (pp. 189-211). Oxford, UK; New York: Pergamon.
• Dillenbourg, P. (1999), What do you mean by collaborative learning. Collaborative-learning: Cognitive and computational approaches, 1, 1-15. Oxford: Elsevier.
• Dutton, T. (1987), Design and studio pedagogy. Journal of Architectural Education, 41(1), 16–25. DOI: https://doi.org /10.1080/10464883.1987.10758461
• Emam, M., Taha, D. and ElSayad, Z. (2019), “Collaborative pedagogy in architectural design studio: a case study in applying collaborative design”, Alexandria Engineering Journal, Vol. 58 No. 1, pp. 163-170.
• Ismail, A. M., & Soliman, M. H. (2010), Integrating Multi-grade Collaborative Learning Pedagogy into Design Studios. ArchNet-IJAR: International Journal of Architectural Research, 4, 201-215.
• Ismail, A., Ramdani Musa, A., & Shaharuddin, S. (2023), Collaborative Design Pedagogy (CDP) for Cultivating Student-Centered Learning (SCL) in a Hybrid Architecture Design Studio During The Endemic Phase. Malaysian Journal Of Sustainable Environment, 10(1), 243-274. doi:10.24191/myse.v10i1.21261
• İPA (2021), Housing Problem Research: Current Situation and Recommendations in Istanbul, İBB Kültür A.Ş., İstanbul. Retrieved from https://ipa.istanbul/yayinlarimiz/genel/konut-sorunu-arastirmasi-istanbulda-mevcut-durum-ve-oneriler/
• Johnson, D.W., Johnson, R.T. and Smith, K.A. (2008), Active Learning: Cooperation in the College Classroom, 8th ed., Interaction Book Company, Edina, MN.
• Johnson, Z. (2017), Teachers as designers of context-adaptive learning experience. In S. Goldman & Z. Kabayadondo (Eds.), Taking design thinking to school (pp. 126142). New York: Routledge.
• Kamalipour, H. , Kermani, Z. and Houshmandipanah, E. (2014), Collaborative Design Studio on Trial: A Conceptual Framework in Practice. Current Urban Studies, 2, 1-12. 10.4236/cus.2014.21001.
• Kempenaar, A. (2021), “Learning to design with stakeholders: participatory, collaborative, and transdisciplinary design in postgraduate landscape architecture education in Europe”, Land, Vol. 10, p. 243, doi: 10.3390/land10030243.
• Kelly, R. (2017), Ikebana: a collaborative design pedagogy. The Design Journal, 20(sup1), S1093-S1105. King P.E. and Behnke R.R. (2005), Problems associated with evaluating student performance in groups.College Teaching, 53(2), 57-61.
• Koch, A., Schwennsen, K., Dutton, T. & Smith, D. (2002), The Redesign of Studio Culture, Studio Culture Task Force, The American Institute of Architecture Students-AIAS, Washington, DC, USA.
• Kolb, D.A. (1984), Experiential Learning – Experience as the Source of Learning and Development, Prentice Hall,Inc, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
• Kvan, T. (2000), Collaborative Design: What Is It? Automation in Construction, 9, 409-415. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0926-5805(99)00025-4
• Liebman, J. (1997), Promote Active Learning During Lectures, Lionheart Publishing Inc, Atlants, GA, USA.
• Miller, C., Burke, L., & Glick, W. (1998), Cognitive diversity among upper-echelon executives: Implications for strategic decision processes. Strategic Management Journal, 19, 39–58. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI) 1097-0266(199801)19:1<39::AID-SMJ932>3.0.CO;2-A
• McPeek, T (2009), Collaborative Design Pedagogy: A Naturalistic Inquiry of Architectural Education, Dissertation, Architecture, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX
• McPeek, K. T., & Morthland, L. (2010), Collaborative design pedagogy: An examination of the four levels of collaboration
• Mills-Jones, A. (1999), “Active learning in IS education: choosing effective strategies for teaching large classes in higher education”, Proceedings of the 10th Australasian Conference on Information Systems, Vol. 10, pp. 5-9, available at: https://ir.canterbury.ac.nz/bitstream/handle/10092/100782/Mills%201999%20ACIS%20%28Active%20learning%20in%20IS%20education%29.pdf?sequence52&isAllowed5y (accessed 23 March 2023).
• Mumford, E. and Henshall, D. (1979) A participative approach to computer systems design, Associated Business Press, UK, ISBN 0-85227-221-9.
• Nováková, K., Achten, H., & Matějovská, D. (2010), A design studio pedagogy for experiments in collaborative design. Paper presented at the FUTURE CITIES [28th eCAADe Conference Proceedings/ISBN 978-0-9541183-9-6].
• Qureshi, H. (2019), "Collaborative architectural design studio environment: An experiment in the studio of Architectural Design-I", Archnet-IJAR, Vol. 14 No. 2, pp. 303-324. https://doi.org/10.1108/ARCH-12-2018-0049
• Sainsbury E.J. and Walker R.A. Assessment (2008), as a vehicle for learning: Extending collaboration into testing. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 33(2), 103-107.
• Salama, A.M. (2010), “Delivering theory courses in architecture: inquiry based, active, and experiential learning integrated”, International Journal of Architectural Research: ArchNet-IJAR, Vol. 4 Nos 2-3, pp. 278-295.
• Springer, L. (1999), “Effects of small-group learning on undergraduates in science, mathematics, engineering, and technology: a meta-analysis”, Review of Educational Research, Vol. 6 No. 2, pp. 21-51.
• Srivastava, M. (2020), Cooperative learning in design studios: a pedagogy for net-positive performance. Buildings and Cities, 1(1), pp. 594–609. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5334/bc.45
• Soliman, M. H., & Okba, E. M. (2006), Teamwork as a New Sustainable Pedagogy for Teaching Architectural Design. The Ain Shams University International Conference, Cairo, 11-16 September 2006, 181-192.
• Sukkar, A., Yahia, M.W., Mushtaha, E., Maksoud, A., Buhashima Abdalla, S., Nasif, O. and Melahifci, O. (2024), "Applying active learning method to improve teaching outcomes in architectural engineering courses", Open House International, Vol. 49 No. 1, pp. 205-220. https://doi.org/10.1108/OHI-10-2022-0259
• Tan, L., Kocsis, A., Burry, J., Kyndt, E. (2023), Performance of architectural teams: The role of team learning, reflexivity, boundary crossing and error communication, Design Studies, Volume 87,https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2023.101190.
• Vowles, H., Low, J., & Doron, H. R. (2012), Investigating architecture studio culture in the UK: A progress report. Journal for Education in the Built Environment, 7(2), 26–49. https://doi.org/10.11120/jebe.2012.07020026 Webb J. and Miller N. (2006), Some preparation required: The journey to successful studio collaboration. Journal of Interior Design, 31(2), 1-9.