Grant Recipients
Oscar Nespoli, Mechanical and Mechatronics Engineering
Ada Hurst, Management Sciences
Description
While studio-based teaching and learning of design is a central aspect of architecture programs, it is only now being investigated for fostering deep learning of design in engineering. In this pedagogy, practitioners from industry and professors both are invited to tutor students, however, there is insufficient knowledge of the impact of tutor’s background (i.e., whether they come from academia or design practice) on students’ learning experience in design courses. The project objective is to characterize the differences (if any) in the tutoring between academics and practitioners and determine if they result in any differences in students’ designed solutions and learned design processes. We will collect, process, and analyze empirical data from design sessions tutored by either academics or practitioners during a five-week-long engineering design project. This includes analyses of students and tutors’ natural verbalizations during designing, as well as comparison of students’ designed solutions at the end of the semester.
References
Attoe, W., & Mugerauer (1991). Excellent Studio Teaching in Architecture., Studies in Higher Education, Vol. 16, No. 1.
Cennamo K., & Brandt, C. (2012). The “Right Kind of Telling”: KNowledge Building in the Academic Design Studio. Education Tech Research Dev., Vol 60, pp. 839-858.
Engineers Canada (2020). Canadian Engineering Accreditation Board 2020 Accreditation Criteria and Procedures. https://engineerscanada.ca/sites/default/files/accreditation/2021-2022-cycle/accreditation-criteria-procedures-2020.pdf
Cho, J. Y., (2013). Customization and Autonomy: Characteristics of the Ideal Design Studio Instructor in Design Education. ARCHITECTURAL RESEARCH, Vol. 15, No. 3 (September 2013), pp. 123-132.
Crowther, P. (2013). Understanding the signature pedagogy of the design studio and the opportunities for its technological enhancement. Journal of Learning Design, 6(3), 18-28.
Eris, O. (2004). Effective inquiry for innovative engineering design (Vol. 10). Springer Science & Business Media.
Günther, J., & Ehrlenspiel, K. (1999). Comparing Designers from Practice and Designers with Systematic Design Education,, Design Studies, Vol. 20, pp. 439-451.
Lawson, B., & Dorst, K. (2013). Design expertise. Routledge.
Milovanovic, J., & Gero, J. (2018, May). Exploration of cognitive design behaviour during design critiques. In 15th International Design Conference (DESIGN 2018) (pp. 2099-2110).
Moore, K.D. (2001). The Scientist, The Social Activist, The Practitioner and The Cleric: Pedagogical Exploration Towards a Pedagogy of Practice., Journal of Architectural Planning and Research, Vol. 18, No. 1, (Spring 2001).
Roy, J., Wilson, C., Erdiaw-Kwasie, A., & Stupard, C. (2020). Engineering and Technology by the Numbers 2019. American Society for Engineering Education (ASEE), Washington, D.C.
Tavakoli, M. S. (2000),Total Design Studio, Paper presented at 2000 Annual Conference, St. Louis, Missouri. 10.18260/1-2--8779
Thompson, B.E. (2002). Studio Pedagogy for Engineering Design., Int. J. Engng Ed., Vol. 18, No. 1, pp. 29-49.
Schõn, D.A. (1984). The Architectural Studio as an Exemplar of Education for Reflection-in-Action., JAE Vol. 38, No. 1.
Schõn, D.A. (1985). The Design Studio An Exploration of its Traditions and Potentials, RIBA Publications Limited, London, England.
Vrcelj, Z. & Attard, M. M. (2007). Design Studios in Civil Engineering Education. Connected 2007 International Conference on Design Education, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia, 9-12 July 2007.