Abstract
Spatial design at interior, site, city and regional scales is increasingly complex, and will continue to be so with the uncertainty of the climate crisis and the growing place-based intricacies of pluralist societies. In response to this complexity, professional design practice has pursued new ways of working. More design projects are becoming more interdisciplinary and less hierarchically structured, involving more collaborative project teams with a variety of backgrounds in architecture, urban design, landscape and interior architecture, engineering, ecological sciences and art. At universities, the design-learning studio which pedagogically champions the authentic replication of design practice projects, has also bifurcated. While teaching design through the traditional disciplinary-based problem-solving processes of an individual project is still understandably commonplace, a new type of studio has emerged, led by group work and interdisciplinary collaborations, and framed by the complexity of a seemingly irreconcilable problematic subject. This emergent domain warrants more research into pedagogical structures, teaching techniques and learning activities; and this paper explains such investigations undertaken through the live educational practice of two interdisciplinary studios in two years, drawing conclusions from student feedback gathered via questionnaires and focus group interviews. The findings suggest that teaching formats in this type of studio need to facilitate a balance between trusting relationships and immersive experiences; and that effective teaching techniques entail the development of more accessible communication techniques in conceptual diagramming and linguistic idiom.
Highlights
The results showed that the quality of student work was not jeopardised by the constraint, that poorer students tended to benefit most, and that working partly individually and partly collaboratively was motivating
The statement ‘collaborating with another discipline makes me understand my own discipline better’ showed stronger agreement at the end; while ‘designing on my own is better than designing with others’, and ‘my individuality is stifled by interdisciplinary collaboration’ showed stronger disagreement
Many confirmed with overwhelming enthusiasm that interdisciplinary collaboration positively influenced their own work
Summary
The antipathy between Nature and Fortune may persist in spatial design’s dilemmas that Stan Allen dissected when he proposed three important tasks for spatial design schools today [3] One of these tasks is transformative: the diminishing traditional domain of spatial designers warrants educators to find the potential of alternative disciplinary practices. The third is critical: accompanying the proliferation of information and access, learning requires a very mature capacity for judgement and discernment in a world of unlimited choices These transformative, divergent and critical skillsets may be essential in today’s complexity, but they are not altogether new to spatial design teaching. As Kathryn Moore explains, these processes help the student to question seemingly unequivocal disciplinary logic, draw out inherent ambiguities in normative practices, and speculate on sets of alternative criteria to frame design [6]
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
