Transcending Boundaries of Creativity: Active learning in the Design Studio

Authors

  • Mohamed Gamal Abdelmonem Queen’s University Belfast, UK

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.15377/2409-9821.2014.01.01.5

Keywords:

Interactive learning, studio pedagogy, learning by doing, Creative thinking, architecture education.

Abstract

This essay investigates the changing dynamics of interaction and paradigm of communication in the design studio. It analyses the process of practical implementation of interactive tools in architectural education which placed the diversity of students’ cultural experiences, contextual awareness and individual interests as crucial resource for design innovation and inquiry. Building on Brian Lawson’s thesis on creativity in design thinking, this research project undertook comprehensive investigation of students’ satisfaction of their roles in the studio and the room for liberal thought they are given to elaborate on genuine approach to architectural matters. The cyclical development of interactive learning strategy is explored through two different settings: first, it analyses architectural students’ position as passive/active in the studio, considering their relationships with tutors’ ideals; second, it reports on empirical strategy of students-led workshops at British schools of architecture, during which students have taken the lead of their creative design agenda. The practical implementation of interactive learning tools proved influential in helping students to personalize their design direction and to build a sense of confidence and independence.

References

Lawson B. How designers think: The design process demystified. London: Elsevier 2006.

Abdelmonem MG. Portrush: Architecture for the North Irish coast. Belfast: Ulster Tatler 2013.

Cambridge Dictionary of American English.

Alexander C. Notes on the Synthesis of form. London: Harvard University Press 1979.

Till J. The negotiation of hope. In: Blundell Jones P, Till J, Petrescu D, editors. Architecture and participation. London: Taylor and Francis 2005; 23-42.

Abdelmonem MG. The architecture of home in Cairo. London: Ashgate 2015.

Prue Chiles in an interview in the Architect’s Journal (2008) referred to the complaints of local practices that the schools of architecture do not provide their graduates with essential skills to suit their future professional needs in real life practice

Crysler CG. Critical pedagogy and architectural education. JAE 1995; 48 (4): 208-217.

Akin Ö. Case-based instruction strategies in architecture. Design Studies 2002; 23 (4): 407-431. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0142-694X(01)00046-1

Royal Institute of British Architects (RIBA) is the Official Accreditation body for all architectural schools in the UK.

Lawson B. The language of space. London: The Architectural Press 2001.

Eisenbach R. Placing space: Architecture, action, dimension. JAE 2008; 61(4): 67-83.

Khan O & Hannah D. Performance/architecture (Interview of Bernard Tschumi). JAE 2008; 61 (4): 52-58

Lawson B. What designers know. Oxford: Architectural Press 2004.

Banham R. A Black Box: The Secret Profession of Architecture. In: A Critic Writes, editor Banham Berkeley: University of California Press 1996.

Metacognition also refers to a ‘level of thinking that involves active control over the process of thinking that is used in learning situations’. Planning the way to approach a learning task, monitoring comprehension, and evaluating the progress towards the completion of a task: these are skills that are metacognitive in their nature. For more details see: Janet Metcalfe & Arthur Shimamura, Metacognition: Knowing about Knowing. (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1994).

Groat LN. Ahrentzen S. Reconceptualizing architectural education for a more diverse future: perceptions and visions of architectural students. JAE 1996; 49 (3): 166-183.

White B, Shimoda TA, Frederiksen JR. Enabling students to construct theories of collaborative inquiry and reflective learning: Computer support for metacognitive development. IJAIED 1999; (10): 151-182.

Okada T, Simon H. Collaborative discovery in a scientific domain. Cognitive Science 1997; 21(2): 109-146. http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/s15516709cog2102_1

Torrington J. The development of group-working skills and role play in the first-year architecture course. In: Nicol D, Pilling S, editors. Architectural education and the profession: Preparing for the future, In Changing architectural education. London: Spon Press; 2000: 72-84.

Butler J. From didactic expert to partner in learning. In: O’Reilly C, Cunningham L, Lester S, editors. Developing the Capable Practitioner. London: Routledge; 1999: 33-42.

Nicol D, Pilling S. Architectural education and the profession: Preparing for the future, In Changing architectural education. London: Spon Press; 2000.

Abdelmonem MG. The Architecture of Home in Cairo: Sociospatial practice of the Hawari’s everyday life. London: Ashgate 2014.

Abdelmonem MG. Propagation of ideologies in architectural education. 2008 Annual PCHE Conference, Sheffield, United Kingdom. Sheffield: Sheffield School of Architecture 2009.

Worthington J. The changing context of professional practice. In: Nicol D, Pilling S, editors. Architectural education and the profession: Preparing for the future, In Changing architectural education. London: Spon Press 2000; 22-33

Interview with a second year coordinator at Sheffield School of Architecture. UK, during February 2009.

Within the dominant context within which the students are passive receivers, students do not appear to engage in any non-compulsory activity unless they know it could inform their design/assignments directly.

Asking for negative comments was ‘a brave act’, as the course coordinator states. It aimed to inform the students that negative comments are as important as the positives: and both should help develop the organization. It is on the implicit issues that feedback from students is critical, even if it is negative.

Kwan A. Problem-based Learning. In: Tight M, Mok KH, Huisman J, Morphew CC, editors. The Routledge International handbook of higher education. London: Routledge 2009; 91-108.

Okada T, Simon H. Collaborative discovery in a scientific domain. Cognitive Sciences 1997; 21(2): 109-146. http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/s15516709cog2102_1

Spronken-Smith R. Designing courses with strong links between teaching and disciplinary research. Un-published Workshop, (Sheffield: CILASS unit, the University of Sheffield) took place on 11th March 2009.

Refer to Peter HÜbner’s winning proposal for community housing and facilities competition in 1990s’ Germany. See, Blundell Jones P. Peter HÜbner: Building as a social process. London: Edition Axel Menges 2007.

Till J. Architecture Depends. Cambridge: MIT Press 2009.

Downloads

Published

2014-11-20

How to Cite

1.
Mohamed Gamal Abdelmonem. Transcending Boundaries of Creativity: Active learning in the Design Studio. Int. J. Archit. Eng. Technol. [Internet]. 2014Nov.20 [cited 2021Sep.25];1(1):38-49. Available from: https://www.avantipublishers.com/jms/index.php/ijaet/article/view/188

Issue

Section

Articles