Urban Design as a Catalyst for Advancing Architectural Education by Joongsub Kim

 Architecture

This paper underlines the potential urban design has for architectural curricula. It also explains why an urban design course is a better choice for the experimental study of architectural blended learning as online technology enables the inclusion of a greater number of resources and stakeholders to be part of the learning process.

 

Urban design (replaced ‘civic design’ in 1960’s) plays a role in not only establishing the infrastructure and the underpinnings for building design, but also in bridging the gap between architecture and other disciplines that apply principles of urbanism in various ways (…) Urban design is an interdisciplinary profession, integrating urban planning, architecture, landscape architecture, environmental studies, and the social sciences (…) Urban design is, arguably, more process-oriented

 

Four approaches to advancing architectural education and pedagogy:

  • facilitating: promoting consensus about design/place making (place  intended a. as a set of visual attributes/ b. as product/ c. as process/ d. as meaning) is inherently multi-faceted, urban design incorporates more players and interests and UD is more likely to offer diverse tools to handle such a process/ place as meaning deals with subjective perceptions as translated from group experiences/ many scattered views maybe combined into a more unified, shared vision through consensus-based design, architects act as facilitators rather than directors
  • grounding: promoting logical underpinning, inquiry by design, and evidence-based design/ managing and making sense of complex information (process based)/ studying how a place looks-functions-is influenced, how it makes people feel (the spirit of a place)/ basic techniques of grounding are to be found in contextualised findings (infrastructure-networksbuilt env.-biogenic env.)/ designers in this case respond to questions asked during study-they keep searching for a design rationale
  • convening: promoting social design/ desirable places provide us with public meaning and positive environmental sociability/ it pointedly addresses the needs of underrepresented individuals in design- service learning and thinking of architecture as public art/ this approach envisions place as a final ‘product’ with tangible attributes
  • designing therapeutically: promoting a holistic environmental sensibility/ desirable places foster the holistic well-being of place users, urban designers reduce environmental stresses/ New Urbanism and Green Building/ a desirable sustainable design or sustainable urbanism goes beyond dealing with physical and environmental considerations, rating systems, and energy concerns to address social and psychological concerns

 

References

  • Joongsub Kim, Urban Design as a Catalyst for Advancing Architectural Education, in ARCC Journal Vol 6, issue 1

Image available here

3rd International Conference on ‘Changing Cities’_Paper: Mapping connections in online learning communities: architectural knowledge creation in the ‘connectivist’ paradigm

THEORY

The paper contributes to the understanding of social learning in architectural education through the examination of online collaborative practices and the connectivist paradigm in particular. Urban research conducted by NTUA educators and PhD students was used to create the body of content for a postgraduate course that ran for two consecutive years. The course format was hybrid; beside the traditional in-class meetings, an online platform was used to share content and exchange information between teachers and students. Students also were requested to establish their personal blogs. Their interactivity was monitored and evaluated in regard to their submitted projects and their overall performance. The way individual learners appropriated the information and the way they collaborated in a learning community with shared goals opens up to another form of knowledge creation and sharing between individuals.

Keywords: learning community; interactivity; analytics; data contextualization; connectivity; learning patterns.

The ‘University Networks’ project by George Siemens

Networks

It involves working with a small number of universities, or specific faculties and departments, that are committed to rethinking and redesigning how they operate. 30 universities over a period of 4 years will rethink and redesign university operations to align with the modern information and knowledge ecosystem. The intention is to offer innovative teaching and learning opportunities, utilizing effective learning analytics models, integrating learning across all spaces of life, and creating a digital and networked mindset to organization operations

  • cohort model where universities learn from each other
  • centralized consultancy
  • universities working with a fraction of the investment needed in working with a traditional corporation or consultancy firm
  • serve the advancement of science through modern universities while actively researching systemic transformation in higher education

Full text available here/ Image available here

OEB Mid-Summit_Donald Clark’s 10 recommendations

oebmidsummit

  1. HE must lower its costs and scale
  2. Develop different and digital HE model for developing world
  3. Stop talking past each other, talk to each other: Higher Ed has a widespread and deep anti-corporate culture
  4. Don’t lecture me!: ognitive psychology and educational research showed the redundancy of the lecture as a core pedagogic principle (…) we learn through the correction of errors, yet teaching methods fail to recognize this core cognitive fact
  5. Research is not a necessary condition for teaching – break the link: Research skills require systematic thinking, attention to detail, understanding of methods and analysis. Teaching skills require social skills, communication skills, the ability to hold an audience, keep to the right level, avoid cognitive overload, good pedagogic skills and the ability to deliver constructive feedback
  6. Build less. Balance out the capital budget with a substantial digital budget: It is perhaps time to consider, what John Daniel called, a ‘default to digital’ for some courses.
  7. Open up to outside, not just with technology but culturally: there’s some good and real change happening within HE but they tend to be, and remain, outliers; the core system is in stasis
  8. Embrace transformative technology: the complexity of the problems we face and the need for smart, technological solutions in education
  9. Strategic, costed initiatives with change management: recognizing the issues and taking a strategic approach to solutions
  10. Rebalance academic and vocational: pleas for more learning by doing and more apprenticeship

Full article available here/ Image available here

On the importance of social learning in architectural studies

SOCIAL LEARNING

  • Cuff, 1991/Nicol-Pilling, 2000: rich social dynamic and socialized learning in a learning setting form a central plank of the studio-based pedagogy for arch design. Although studio learning has historically utilized the cohort, peer interaction has further potential to alleviate the detrimental effects of power that can manifest themselves in tutor-student relationships.
  • Parnell, 2001: The social dimensions of the studio and the opportunity for collaboration and sharing act as stimulants to learning
  • Fisher, 1991: fraternity culture, it is the culture of the studio that acquires lasting significance for students
  • Costa-Kallick, 1991: critical friend_it enables a form of peer to peer dialogue that directly parallels the kinds of conversation that occur between students in the learning process
  • Dutton, 1991: peer to peer relationships are relatively free from the symptoms of power asymmetries
  • Schaffer, 2003: learning takes place through the internalization of social processes of evaluation and that the norms of the community become a framework for individual thinking and individual identity
  • Boud, 2001: peer learning promotes other facets of learning such as team working, the management of personal learning and judgment and the ability to critique both self and others
  • Anthony, 1991: informal dialogue and formalized learning offers the students the possibility to obtain multiple perspectives and opportunity for continuous discourse. The nature of the studio means that students are exposed to numerous, frequently conflicting perspectives which can present challenges, especially during the early stages of study.
  • Klebesadel-Kornetsky, 2009: critique, as a mode of offering structured and unstructured feedback is a mode that is shared by all the creative arts
  • Bruffee, 1999: constructive conversation as a means to harness peer interaction, socialization and critical dialogue
  • Piaget, 1985: co-operation as central to the development of reflection, discourse and critical abilities
  • Vygotsky, 1986: zone of proximal development term that described how social interaction constitutes a necessary component for full cognitive development to be achieved
  • Flavell, 1985-Stahl, 1992: cognitive and meta-cognitive processes of knowledge construction contradict the common assumption that knowledge is effectively conveyed from tutor to student in feedback processes. Student learning  was found to be conditioned by the individuals’ existing knowledge and understanding, against which new information is aligned creating either a deepening of knowledge or leading to previous knowledge being revised. 
  • Askew, 2000: power has a profound relationship to feedback, whether formative or summative
  • Nicol & Macfarlane-Dick, 2006: peer interaction occurs where student progress generates dialogue and criticism
  • Mezirow, 1997: there are instances when students actively seek the authority of the tutor and points where power can be constructively channelled to challenge and stretch students through shifting their frames of reference in ways that peer dialogue is unlikely to achieve
  • Rowntree, 1977: feedback is fundamental to effective learning

 

References

David McClean & Neasa Hourigan, 2013. Critical Dialogue in Architecture Studio: Peer
Interaction and Feedback. In Journal for Education in the Built Environment, 8:1, 35-57

Image of Macquarie University Social Learning Space / Bennett and Trimble is available here

Design Studio Education in the Online Paradigm: Introducing Online Educational Tools and Practices to an Undergraduate Design Studio Course

educon-logo

Abstract— the architectural design studio, the prevailing form of design education, has resisted opening up to online educational tools and practices. Yet its affinities to the newest theories of learning such as connectivism are many. This paper describes an experimental configuration of multiple learning environments in diverse mediums for an undergraduate design studio at the School of Architecture of the National Technical University of Athens. The aim of the studio’s layout transformation has been to explore its physical boundaries and to create a collaborative milieu between peers that facilitated communication and thus, the exchange of information and knowledge.

Keywords—design studio; design research; collaborative design; online education; complexity theory; connectivism

Embodied Action & Enaction

ENACTION

  • embodied action

embodied: cognition depends upon the kinds of experience that come from having a body with various sensorimotor capacities and that these individual sensorimotor capacities are themselves embedded in a more encompassing biological, psychological and cultural context/ action: sensory and motor processes, perception and action, are fundamentally inseparable in lived cognition.

  • enaction

it consists of two points: a. perception consists in perceptually guided action (how the perceiver can can guide his actions in his local situation) and b. cognitive structures emerge from the recurrent sensorimotor patterns that enable action to be perceptually guided (since the situations an individual is found in constantly change, the reference point for understanding perception is no longer a pregiven, but the sensorimotor structure of the perceiver-the way in which the nervous system links sensory and motor surfaces). The overall concern for the enactive approach to perception is to determine the common principles or lawful linkages between sensory and motor systems.

Merleau-Ponty:

The properties of the object and the intentions of the subject . . . are not only intermingled; they also constitute a new whole (…) Since all the movements of the organism are always conditioned by external influences, one can, if one wishes, readily treat behavior as an effect of the milieu. But in the same way, since all the stimulations which the organism receives have in tum been possible only by its preceding movements which have culminated in exposing the receptor organ to external influences, one could also say that behavior is the first cause of all the stimulations.

Piaget:

The laws of cognitive gevelopment, even at the sensorimotor stage, are an assimilation of and an accommodation to that pregiven world.

One of the most fundamental cognitive activities that all organisms perform is categorization. By this means the uniqueness of each experience is transformed into the more limited set of learned, meaningful categories to which humans and other organisms respond (…) In the enactive view, although mind and world arise together in enaction, their manner of arising in any particular situation is not arbitrary (…) The basic level of categorization appears to be the point at which cognition and environment become simultaneously enacted.

Johnson:

kinesthetic image schemas: for example, the container schema, the part-whole schema, and the source-path-goal schema

 

References

Francisco J. Varela, Evan Thompson and Eleanor Rosch, 1993. The embodied mind: Cognitive Science and Human Experience, MIT Press, pp. 172-180

Image available here