The paper addresses the shift in architectural education regarding the need to develop new approaches in teaching methodology, improve curricula, and make advancements in new learning arenas and digital environments. The research is based on the assumption that online workshops could offer a unique learning experience for students in higher education. Accordingly, workshops are considered an essential element in teaching emergency design. As a result, this can produce broader and more innovative solutions to COVID-19 challenges regarding social distancing, limited movements, regulated use of public space, and suspended daily activities. The theoretical notions of emergency design and education for sustainable design enabled the identification of research perspectives and spatial levels to be taken as a starting point of the workshop “COVID-19 Challenges: Architecture of Pandemic” that was conducted by the University of Belgrade—Faculty of Architecture in April 2020. The critical review of the workshop’s procedural and substantial aspects led to identifying four main COVID-19 design challenges perceived in performance, innovation, alteration, and inclusion. Additionally, the paper’s findings concern the identification of learning potentials and limitations arising from a current topic affecting global society, for which neither solutions nor adequate answers in the field of architecture and urbanism have been found.

This paper addresses the challenges of architectural higher education to cope with a state of continuous change within the relationship between heritage and sustainability. The initial assumption is that research activities based on design taxonomies—terms used in architectural discourse of heritage and sustainability—followed by fruitful analysis and discussion can contribute to the advancements in curricula design and development. Accordingly, the paper aims to develop a new methodological framework for addressing sustainability and heritage, enriching curricula design and assessment strategy. Data collection on identification and analysis of terms was carried out within the Erasmus+ Strategic Partnership titled Enhancing of Heritage Awareness and Sustainability of Built Environment in Architectural and Urban Design Higher Education (HERSUS). After the process of filtering, interpretation, and comparison of project findings, a three-fold comprehensive analysis was conducted: (a) learning outcome quantitative analysis, (b) cross-cutting analysis of spatial scales and course types, and (c) synthesis. The paper results in the methodological framework that reinforces different pedagogical approaches to heritage and sustainability derived as a result of the applied research process. The main conclusions are concerned with the applicability of the methodological framework, designed for the improvement of existing and development of new comprehensive courses and programme contents.

This study aims to bridge the fields of urban morphology and land use/land cover (LULC) mapping through a systematic analysis of their integration in recent research. The research employs systematic literature review (SLR) methodology combining quantitative and qualitative methods through four methodological steps: data search, data selection, data analysis, and data clustering. The analysis performed three distinct clustering patterns: (1) methods and tools, (2) data types, and (3) urban morphology aspects. The results reveal five distinct methodological approaches—Data-Driven Typological Decoding Approach, Quantitative Structural Metrics Approach, Predictive Spatiotemporal Transition Approach, Temporal Change Detection and Performance Approach, and Spatial Configuration and Density Analysis Approach—each contributing unique insights to urban form analysis. The findings demonstrate the multidimensional nature of urban form analysis, incorporating both social and temporal dimensions, while highlighting the essential role of change detection in understanding urban pattern evolution. This systematic review establishes a comprehensive framework for understanding the relationship between urban morphology and LULC mapping, providing valuable insights for future research integration.

This study investigates the intersection of digital tools and methods with the built environment disciplinary framework, focusing on Urban Planning and Development (UPD), Architecture, Engineering, and Construction (AEC), and Cultural Heritage (CH) domains. Using a systematic literature review of 29 solution-oriented documents, the research applies both bibliometric and in-depth content analysis to identify methodological patterns. Co-occurrence mapping revealed four thematic clusters—Data Integration and User-Centric Analysis, Advanced 3D Spatial Analysis and Processing, Real-Time Interaction and Digital Twin Support, and 3D Visualization—each corresponding to distinct stages in a digital workflow, from data acquisition to interactive communication. Comparative and interdependency analyses demonstrated that these clusters operate in a sequential yet interconnected manner, with Data Integration forming the foundation for analysis, simulation, and visualization tasks. While current solutions are robust within individual stages, they remain fragmented, indicating a need for systemic interoperability. The findings underscore the opportunity to develop integrated digital platforms that synthesize these clusters, enabling more comprehensive observation, management, and planning of the built environment. Such integration could strengthen decision-making frameworks, enhance public participation, and advance sustainable, smart city development.

Design studios remain a core component of architectural education, yet their pedagogical structure, alignment with international standards, and contribution to professional formation are often insufficiently examined. This study evaluates master-level design studios using a three-track analytical framework that integrates pedagogical innovation, alignment with the UNESCO-UIA Charter for Architectural Education, and the development of professional capabilities specified in the UNESCO-UIA Validation System. The methodology combines qualitative profiling and quantitative benchmarking, employing a structured six-parameter innovation framework, an ordinal evidence scale, and a cross-track correlation analysis. Learning and professional capabilities were assessed and analyzed through Pearson correlation matrices in JASP (0.95.4). Findings reveal that all studios share a common grounding in heritage- and environment-responsive learning, yet demonstrate distinctive pedagogical signatures shaped by thematic focus, design scale, and temporal orientation. Strong positive alignments emerge between context-driven learning and applied professional readiness, while structural gaps indicate capability areas insufficiently supported by studio pedagogies. The study demonstrates that bridging policy frameworks with pedagogical and professional capability assessments provides a replicable method for evaluating architectural curricula, offering insights for improving design-studio models and strengthening evidence-based educational practice.

Within this research, the exhibitions are considered primarily as institutions, and as a place of interaction among different identities through choice of exhibits, their presentation, spatial layout and the selection and use of the accompanying texts. The context of the research thus put into place will attempt to answer the question of how it is possible to construct a history of the exhibitions-which are forgotten, often without sufficient documentation or records about them. In addition, it will be reconsidered in which manner the exhibitions helped to create and promote the idea of architecture during the 20th century, overlapping with the shifting of discourses, broader philosophical debates and technological innovations.