Understanding the signature pedagogy of the design studio and the opportunities for its technological enhancement

There is a significant amount of research into gender differences in academic performance in the science, technology, engineering and maths (STEM) fields. This has identified important differences between the academic achievement of men and women as measured through grade point averages and time to completion. However, the specific STEM fields of design have not been thoroughly explored. This research investigates the long‐term academic performance of a large group of architecture, industrial design, interior design and landscape architecture students at a major Australian university. The study followed the progress of 472 students over an 11‐year period. In most fields the academic achievement of students follows expected patterns; the difference in academic grades for male and female students reduces over time. However, in interior design, there are significant differences that increase with time, to the favour of women. A range of social, cultural and contextual influences are discussed including the signature pedagogy of the design studio and the hidden curriculum of design education.

Purpose: This research argues that architecture knowledge is fragmented between the profession and academia as evidenced by long-standing conflicting opinions regarding desirable graduate attributes. Work-integrated learning (WIL) is one mode of education where these fragments should come together. This research seeks to address a missing part of that WIL model and understand the profession's view of what constitutes quality education as a United Nations (UN) Sustainability Development Goal (SDG).Design/methodology/approach: Utilising a three round Delphi survey of the architecture profession engaged in WIL programs, this study reports on their perspectives of the key benefits and attributes of WIL and the value of WIL experiences as part of a quality higher education system.Findings: The architecture profession confirmed the value of WIL programs as contributing to students developing an understanding of workplace culture and contexts. There was strong agreement that WIL experiences can be a valuable part of a quality education and enhance graduate employability. Challenges for practice included semester-based program timing, the length of engagement with practice and the lack of WIL program guidance by universities to prepare the profession for WIL experiences.Originality/value: While WIL has been extensively researched over the last decade, it is limited in the architecture discipline. Survey findings address the research gap in understanding the architecture profession's views as a key WIL stakeholder which is important given the rapidly changing practice environments, globalisation and the increasingly transdisciplinary context.

Purpose: This study aims to expose the various roles that teachers and students adopt in the architecture design studio. It highlights how these roles change over time, through three distinct phases, which relate to the stages of the design project. This understanding of how roles change over the semester will guide academics in understanding how to better relate to students.Design/methodology/approach: Through a series of interviews and surveys, this study utilised a modified Delphi method to establish a consensus of opinion, both within and across the three stakeholder groups of students, tutors and coordinators/lecturers. Two rounds of data collection were conducted, with “expert” perceptions of the three stakeholder roles being established.Findings: The roles that are adopted and perceived by students, tutors and coordinators/lecturers vary over time and respond to the stages of the design project. While there is general agreement between the perceptions of students and their teachers, there are some notable differences at key times.Originality/value: This research builds upon previous studies into the roles of students and their teachers in the architecture design studio. It provides a nuanced map of how roles change and how interactions happen, over the duration and through the phases, of the architecture design project.

The construction industry is responsible for a significant portion of the solid waste that industrialised nations dispose of each year. One reason for this is the low rates of reuse and recycling, largely due to the difficulties in deconstructing buildings and an inability to easily separate materials and components. If buildings were designed to facilitate deconstruction and the easier separation of the parts, then future material and component recovery would be easier. Previous research into historic examples of deconstruction has identified numerous principles for design for disassembly. This paper presents research that expands on this understanding of design for disassembly though the application of these principles in architectural design projects. A methodology of ‘research through designing’ is implemented to explore the principles and assess their suitability for integration into mainstream construction practice. Several domestic scaled architectural projects were used to trial the principles and the overarching philosophy. This experimentation and research through creative practice, has confirmed the value of the principles of design for disassembly as strategies for the potential reduction of future demolition waste. Further to this, it has made explicit some of the otherwise unrealised consequences or constraints of designing for future disassembly.