The Architectural Design Studio: A Case in the Intersection of the Conventional and the New

  • Ozorhon G
  • et al.
N/ACitations
Citations of this article
13Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

This study investigated the evolution of the methods and tools used in the architectural design studio. The focus was on the MIM 201 Architectural Design Studio II course, based on a hybrid approach where conventional and new methods are used together. For this reason, the primary data sources of the study are student productions, observations, and comments of studio tutors. While presenting the data in the article, an approach that fragmented the studio was followed instead of a chronological path. Thus, all studio elements were discussed separately, and their potential was demonstrated. The study showed that conventional tools such as context-subject, critiques, and jury are still essential and effective studio components. On the other hand, it was observed that new tools (QD) joining the studio enriched the studio experience, but the potential of some of them (OB) needed to be developed. Study findings also showed that students preferred face-to-face and active communication in the studio. The learning space was one of the most important parts of the process as an atmosphere for student motivation and belonging.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Ozorhon, G., & Sarman, G. (2023). The Architectural Design Studio: A Case in the Intersection of the Conventional and the New. Journal of Design Studio, 5(2), 295–312. https://doi.org/10.46474/jds.1394851

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free