Critical Pedagogy in Architectural Design Course (case study: postgraduate design course (1) of Islamic Azad university of Gorgan)

Sardashti, S.; Shafaie, M.; Mozaffar, Farhang

doi:10.22061/jte.2018.886

Document Type : Original Research Paper

Authors

¹ Faculty of Architecture and Urbanism, Isfahan University of Art, Isfahan.Iran

² Faculty of Architecture and Urbanism, Iran University of Science and Technology, Tehran

https://doi.org/10.22061/jte.2018.886

Abstract

Background and Objective:Creating a learning environment rich in social relationships in which peer interaction and collective learning can be developed is the core of the studio-based education for teaching architectural design. The social dimensions of the studio and the opportunities it provides for collaboration and participation serve as a stimulus for learning, and it is the culture of the studio that means sustainability to students. One of the interactive teaching methods that seems to be in line with the multiplicity of today's world and the different nature of architecture and the workshop education system is the critical pedagogy method invented by the Brazilian thinker Paolo Freire. Freire considers the main purpose of education to be the development of creative and critical human beings who look critically at all the thoughts, ideas and values in society, as well as the actions of individuals and the way they deal with various events and happenings to find their roots. Freire's model in critical education mostly includes critical dialogue in which students (whole class) present their views and review evaluations and critiques. Participate in evaluating the thoughts of others and together with them, by combining views and examining arguments, take a more accurate and comprehensive approach to the issue and discover effective solutions. Therefore, it can be inferred that the critical education methodwith its special characteristics has the potential to improve the quality of architectural design classes.
The aim of this study is to illustrate the procedure of applying critical pedagogy in Iran higher education context –architecture discipline- to identify challenges and improve the method in the selected environment.
Methods:The qualitative method (interpretation) was selected as research method and content analysis was performed on the collected data. 24 postgraduate architecture students were selected as the sample, and by using a bipartite subject, comparison between two methods (traditional and critical) become possible. To verify and extend the model, the experiment was repeated next year with 22 different students.
Findings: The results indicated that the effects of critical pedagogy have been perceived by students in eight categories: (1) improving intrinsic motivation (2) improving social skills, oral skills and self-confidence, (3) improving the speed and quality of development process of architectural ideas, (4) creating diversity and cheerfulness, (5) reducing stress and anxiety, (6) waste of time and vain discussions, (7) educational marginalization, and (8) self-censorship. The first 5 categories are positive feedbacks and the other three are negative feedbacks considered as challenges of applying critical pedagogy. At the end, some strategies are purposed to overcome these challenges and improve the quality of the classes.
Conclusion:Some solutions to overcome the challenges are suggested including: students choosing an external reality topic, phasing group corrections, continuing the method to institutionalize it, changing students' view of the teacher as the source of information or the professor as a superior and miraculous person and change the view and reduce students' distrust of themselves. Characteristics for the critical teacher are also mentioned, such as humility, humor, high capacity of the teacher against laughter and jokes, great patience of the teacher in the face of useless discussions, and familiarity of the critical teacher with theories of psychology and psychoanalysis.

Keywords

20.1001.1.20080441.1398.13.3.6.1

Main Subjects

Modern Educational Approaches

COPYRIGHTS
©2019 The author(s). This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY 4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, as long as the original authors and source are cited. No permission is required from the authors or the publishers.

References

[1] Gorji Mahlabani Y. Architectural education and future challenges. Journal of Technology of Education. 2010; 4(3): 223-234. Persian.

[2] Hashemi R. Architecture is art. Abadi. 1995; 16: 2. Persian.

[3] Alaei A. An overview of diversity of knowledge in architecture. Soffeh. 2001; 11(32): 104-117. Persian.

[4] Hojjat I. A Word of Time. Fine Arts. 2002; 12: 50-58. Persian.

[5] Prosser M, Trigwell T. Understanding learning and teaching: The experience in higher education. Buckinghamshire: Open University Press; 1999.

[6] Ramsden, P. Learning to teach in Higher Education. London & New York: Routledge Falmer.

[7] Biggs J. Teaching for quality learning at university. Maidenhead, Berkshire: Open University Press; 2003.

[8] Webster H. Facilitating reflective learning: Excavating the role of the design tutor. Journal of Art, Design and Communication in Higher Education. 2004;2(3): 101-111.

[9] https://www.researchgate.net/publication/250968064_Facilitating_critically_reflective_learning-excavating_the_role_of_the_design_tutor

[10] Boyer EL. Building community: A new future for architecture education and practice: a special report. Princeton, N.J.: Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching; 1996.

[11] Schön DA. Architecture and the higher learning; the design studio, an exploration of its traditions and potentials. London: RIBA Publications. 1985.

[12] Quinlan A, Corkery L, Marshall N. Positioning the design tutor’s presence in the design studio for successful student design learning. Paper presented in Connected International Conference onDesign Education. University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia; 2007.

[13] Nicol D, Pilling S. Changing architectural education: Towards a new professionalism. London: E & F Spon Press; 2000.

[14] Parnell R. It’s Good to Talk: managing disjunction through peer discussion. Architectural Education Exchange; 2001.

[15] Koch A., Schwennsen K, Dutton TA, Smith D. AIAS Studio Culture Task Force Report. Washington DC: AIAS; 2002.

[16] Bergman Ramos M. [Translation of Pedagogy of the Oppressed]. Freire P (Author). Harmondsworth: Penguin Books; 1972.

[17] Bryzzheva AL. Toward a philosophy of the liberating act: Implications of Bakhtin, Freire, and Vygotsky for bilingual and multicultural education, (doctoral dissertation). Pennsylvania State University, US; 2002.

[18] Saffar Heidari H. Critical examination of the basics of postmodernist approach to education. Daneshvar Raftar. 2007; 14(27): 29-38. Persian.

[19] Edwards R, Usher, R. Postmodernism and Education. New York: Routledge; 1994.

[20] Beheshti S. Explaining and criticizing postmodernism in the philosophy of contemporary education, Educational Sciences (Special Issue; in memory of Ali Mohammad Kardan). Tehran: Samt; 2005. Persian.

[21] Burbules N. Postmodern doubt and philosophy of education. Philosophy and Education, Discussion Group: University of Illinois; 1995.

[22] Rorty R. Contingency, Irony and solidarity. New York: Cambridge University press; 1989

[23] Ahanchian M. Education in Postmodern Circumstances. Tehran: Tahoori; 2003. Persian.

[24] Hynka P. Handbook of research for educational communications and technology. US: Routledge; 2001.

[25] Khalili S, Hoseini A. Explaining the place of creativity in postmodernist education. New Thoughts on Education. 2010;6(4): 9-22. Persian.

[26] Giroux H. Towards a Postmodern Pedagogy, From Modernism to Postmodernism: An Anthology. Oxford: Blackwell; 1996.

[27] Bartlett L. Dialogue, knowledge, and teacher-student relations: Freirean pedagogy in theory and practice. Comparative Education Review. 2005; 49(3): 344-364.

[28] Haj Hoseini M, Mehran G. Vygotsky and Freire in dialogue based education, Foundations of Education. 2011; 1(2): 21-38. Persian.

[29] Fritze C. The Theory of Paulo Freire; 2004.

[30] Shor I. Critical Teaching and Everyday Life, Chicago: University of Chicago Press; 1987.

[31] McLaren P, Leonard P. Paulo Freire: A Critical Encounter (Eds.), New York: Routledge; 1993.

[32] Freire P. Education for critical consciousness. New York: Continuum; 2009.

[33] Broadfoot O, Bennett R. Design studios: Online. Paper presented in the Apple University Consortium Academic and Developers Conference. University of Wollongong. New South Wels, Australia; 2003.

[34] Kuhn, S. Learning from the architecture studio: Implications for project-based pedagogy. International Journal of Engineering Education. 2001; 17(4,5): 349-352.

[35] Morkel J. Facebook-enhanced face to face learning: The architecture studio. Paper presented in the 5^th International Computer & Instructional Technologies Symposium. Fırat University, Elazig, Turkey; 2011.

[36] Cuff, D. Architecture: the story of practice. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press; 1991.

[37] Schön DA. Educating the reflective practitioner: Toward a new design for teaching and learning in the professions. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass; 1987.

[38] Dutton TA. (Ed.). Voices in architectural education: Cultural politics and pedagogy. New York, London: Bergin and Garvey; 1991.

[39] Bourdieu P. In E. Rooksby and J. Hillier (Eds.) Habitus: A sense of place (pp. 43-49). London: Routledge; 2005.

[40] Webster H. Architectural education after Schön: Cracks, blurs, boundaries and beyond. Journal for Education in the Built Environment. 2008;3(2): 63-74.

[41] McClean D, Hourigan N. (2013). Critical dialogue in architecture studio: peer interaction and feedback, Journal for Education in the Built Environment. 2013; 8(1): 35-57.

[42] Karimi Moshaver M. Student position in architectural design education process; By producing design knowledge approach. Paper presented in the 3^rd Conference of Architecture Education. University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran; 2008. Persian.

[43] Utaberta N, Hassanpour B, Handryant AN, Ani A. Upgrading education architecture by redefining critique session in design studio. Proc. of the 6^th International Forum on Engineering Education (pp. 42–47). University of Sharjah, Abu Dhabi, Dubai; 2013.

[44] Abbasian Q, Belanian N. (2008). Creating Experimental Atelier in order to Improve Architecture Education System. Paper presented in the 3^rd Conference of Architectural Education. Tehran, Iran; 2008. Persian.

[45] Utaberta N, Hassanpour B, Usman I. Redefining critique methods as an assessment tools inarchitecture design studio. WSEAS transaction on advances in engineering education, 359-364; 2010.

[46] Denzin N, Lincoln Y. Strategies for qualitative inquiry. US: Sage Publication; 1998.

[47] Schwandt T. Qualitative inquiry: A dictionary of terms. US:Sage Publication; 1998.

[48] Deci EL, Ryan RM. Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human behavior. New York: Plenum; 1985.

[49] Cunningham A. Notes on education and research around architecture. The Journal of Architecture. 2005; 10(4): 415-441.

[50] Aghdasi S, Kiamanesh A, Mahdavi M, Safarkhani, M. Teacher-student interaction in successful and unsuccessful classes, Quarterly Journal of Education. 2014; 30)3(: 93-120. Persian.

[51] Prochaska JO, Norcross JC. Systems of psychotherapy: A trans theoretical analysis. Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole Pub; 2003.

[52] Shahabi M. Critical thinking and critical education. Social Sciences Education Growth. 2005; 27: 10-16. Persian.