models of teaching_preseantation 123.pptx

models of teaching

1. Map - 213 ARCHITECTURE PEDAGOGY II Submitted by: Shuchi Jain M.Arch (AP) II Sem Content: The Participatory Model The Hidden Curriculum Model

2. TRADITIONAL APPROACH TO STUDIO TEACHING 1960 : Systematic process of design promoted by the design methodology movement SYSTEMATIC PROCESS (Analysis-Synthesis approach) ANALYSIS Information related to the problem is collected Analysis of the problem is done Phases of intuitive and creative synthesis SYNTHESIS Not very clear Unstructured P H A S E S CRITICISED: inadequate for complex design problems

3. ALTERNATIVE STUDIO TEACHING MODELS D ifferent models of studio teaching in architectural design education, and how they respond to the criticism of the traditional approach STRUCTURE Identifying the models Establishing a format for description Summarizing the description Identifying the underlying issues for comparison Conducting a content analysis Feedback and verification : The results of the study, which consist of a diagram and three comparative matrices, were mailed to the authors for feedback and verification, and modified accordingly .

4. IDENTIFICATION & DESCRIPTION OF THE MODELS THE EXPERIMENTAL MODEL (CASE PROBLEM) THE ANALOGICAL MODEL THE BUILDING TECHNOLOGY MODEL THE FORMAL VOCABULARY MODEL THE PARTICIPATORY MODEL ( COMMINITY DESIGN) THE HIDDEN CURRICULUM MODEL THE PATTERN LANGUAGE MODEL THE CONCEPT TEST MODEL THE DOUBLE LAYERED MODEL THE ENERGY CONCIOUS MODEL THE EXPLORATORY MODEL THE INTERACTIONAL MODEL

5. THE PARTICIPATORY MODEL(COMMUNITY DESIGN) The Conception of Architectural Design: Developed by: Henry Sanoff (in late 60’s) Format: Design Studio Idea of model: examine architecture through the direct involvement of client/user in design decision making. This model views architectural design as community architecture which represents an approach to shaping the environment through an understanding of the people who inhabit those environment. Attempts to provide participatory methods for solving design problems. There is a growing consensus among designers and scholars SANOFF (1981), FRANCIS (1983) AND WARD (1987) that the concept of participation is an established arena of design activity. The interaction is considered to be the key factor of the process of design.

6. ARGUMENTS SANOFF (1981): Participation in design and planning has come to be construed as an acceptable concept, in most instances serious demands and responsibilities are placed upon participants. FRANCIS (1983): Participatory design does have his historical roots in the civil rights and advocacy planning era of the 1960s WARD (1987): Design participation has now achieved the status of discrete discipline.

7. COMMUNITY DESIGN The model is concerned with communities that request assistance and can not afford professional designers or planners and do not have access to professional assistance. Sanoff argues that this situation sometimes makes the community powerless in responding to proposals that do not represent the best interest of their citizenry. Decisions are often made by a few that affect many. In this model, projects are the result of formal requests initiated by different client groups. The community development group is a service oriented field experience programme within the graduate programme of the school of design.

8. T HE DESIGN PROCESS OBJECTIVES To learn how to develop and apply techniques for involving people affected by design decisions in the process of making those decisions. To systematically and consciously articulate methods of transforming behavioural information into architecture form To directly experience the management of the design project from inception through programming, encountering users and environmental constraints. Four phases arranged in sequential manner: In this model students takes the role of the facilitator, enabling the user groups ability to reach decisions through a communicable procedure.

9. Survey of community needs Community resources Develop data base Evaluate community facilities Workshops Goal Setting Activities Site Analysis Generating Alternatives Community Discussion Schematic Design AWARENESS - PERCEPTION DECISION MAKING - IMPLIMENTATION The process of developing the student awareness begins with identifying the project objectives, conducting a survey of community needs, and developing data base. Students participate with clients/users in workshops to explore the activities and the community goals. Students enter a process of decision making through generating alternatives. The previous steps culminate in developing the design schematics.

10. T HE TEACHING STYLE The instructional simulation games used in this model aims that they engage real life conditions, provide a feedback mechanism to learner, and allow learning to occur under a controlled pedagogic orientation. In this method of learning, there is a need for structure, particularly in a group experience. According to S anoff structure is a label of those activities that focus the group process, control extraneous variables and increase the probability that certain learning will occur for the student participants According to this model once participants have learned the concepts, they can use them to understand their own situation and make appropriate choices. The conceptual framework is provided to encourage initial interdependency of the student/designer and client/user. The model encourages students to search for alternatives together, as the workshops are planned events where a high level of interaction occurs. Thus learning takes place during the process of exploring issues.

11. Title : Collaborative and participatory design approach in architectural design studios ( R. Shanthi Priya et al., Elsevier 2020) The paper discusses a participatory design approach in architectural design studios, focusing on a case study involving primary school design by IV semester students at PRIMENEST College of Architecture and Planning, Tiruchirappalli, India. Aim : To introduce a new method in architectural design studio teaching through a participatory approach. To enhance students’ skills and knowledge by involving them in a dynamic design process that includes user participation . Objective : To bridge the gap between users/communities and designers from the concept stage to the final design stage. To train students to incorporate cultural and social elements into user-centric designs. Methodology : The study utilized both qualitative and quantitative approaches, including documentation, analysis, and a questionnaire survey among students and faculty. A new educational structure was proposed and applied to the design studio, emphasizing user involvement in the design process . Inference : The participatory design studio process enabled students to make design decisions that are sensitive to the context and user needs. It suggests that involving users in the design process from an early stage can lead to more effective and culturally relevant architectural solutions . RESEARCH PAPER https:// www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S259029112030022X

12. THE HIDDEN CURRICULUM MODEL The Conception of Architectural Design: Developed by: Thomas Dutton (1987) Format: Design Studio Idea of model: design as a process of acquiring knowledge under certain conditions According to this model, architecture is not a neutral entity, like any other commodity it is produced and distributed according to particular voices situated in relations of power. Dutton (1987) argues that architecture is not capable of totally reproducing its own existence. Architecture design is an activity that is not free of th politicl and economic trends. This model views design as an activity in which designers/students are engaged intellectually and socially, shifting between analytic, synthetic and evaluative modes of thinking in different sets o activities.

13. T HE DESIGN PROCESS Hidden curriculum refers to those unstated values, attitudes and norms which stem tacitly from the social relation of the school and classroom as well a the content of work. Three basic facts of the model: Studios are not neutral sites. Studios are integral part of the socil , political, economic and cultural relations of the society. This set of relations plays a significant role in the selection, organization and distribution of knowledge in the design studio social relations and practices.

14. Developing the Program/ students’ subjectivity Selecting the site and Evaluating the Program Group Dynamics For Consensus Decision Making Developing The Schematic Design Peer and Instructor Evaluation The instructor acts like a facilitator of the process The process begins with developing the program according to the students subjectivity. Group dynamics are established to reach consensus in decision making. The next steps leads to the development of design solutions, and then evaluating the proposals by the peers and the instructors.

15. THE TEACHING STYLE Through the concept of Hidden Curriculum, instructors interpret the relation between knowledge and power. The modes of thinking in this model is analytic, synthetic and evaluative as the students are engaged in these modes intellectually and socially. This facilitates equal deliberations in all areas of the studio life: the conditions of work, programmatic considerations, the scope of readings and the even studio scheduling. The model involves conditions whereby students are encouraged to take on the primary responsibility to critique one another, where students learn to make decisions with others who disagree with their values and by necessity, develop the mechanisms, both verbal and graphic, to expose and explore differences in opinion. According to this model, competition is the major motivation in he studio and it keep alive the myth that design is a self-indulgent activity. In Sum, students should utilize each other as resources s much as they can, and they should work in groups during their creative moments. The studio setting should not be an instructor centered experience.

16. Title : An analysis of the motivating factors underlying the hidden curriculum components through the lens of the Iranian students of architecture: A qualitative study ( Hadi   Shahamat   et al., Elsevier 2019) The paper discusses the hidden curriculum in architectural education. Here’s a brief overview: Aim : To examine the hidden curriculum in architectural education and analyze its motivating factors. Objective : To understand how ‘knowledge’, ‘vision’, ‘preparation’, and ‘observation’ contribute to the formation of the hidden curriculum. Methodology : Qualitative content analysis of the experiences of 21 undergraduate architecture students in Iran. Inference : The study identifies the significant role of the four motivating factors in shaping both positive and negative aspects of the hidden curriculum. It suggests that these findings could be relevant to other disciplines as well . RESEARCH PAPER https:// www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0742051X18316779

17. THANK YOU