Author: maryamashkan

The improvement of instruction has been a goal of educators as far back as the teachings of the Greek philosopher Socrates. Lueddeke (2003) pointed out that the professionalization of teaching practice in higher education is becoming more important as universities try to respond to an increasing diverse and discerning student population, issues relating to standards and quality, growing international competition, and generally “doing more with less.”

Although there are a wide variety of individualized approaches, in most cases instruction can be characterized by the following tasks: setting objectives, teaching content based on these objectives, and evaluating performance. This formula is indeed the most common; however, there have been many advocates of using alternative approaches. There is a focus on a more individualized approach to instruction in teaching design (especially in art-based discipline like architecture), where the traits of the individual learner are given more consideration. In the design studio, each approach to individualizing instruction might be different, but they all seek to manipulate the three following fundamental variables:

• Pace:the amount of time given to a architecture student to learn the content
• Method:the way that the instruction is structured and managed
• Content:the material to be learned

Lueddeke, George R. “Professionalizing Teaching Practice in Higher Education: a study of disciplinary variation and ‘teaching-scholarship’.” Studies in Higher Education 28, no. 2 (2003): 213-228.

It is important to mention that “creativity” and “creative” are frequently used words in schools of architecture. Teaching design is mainly focused on creativity while it does not provide any foundation about what it means by creativity in different aspects of teaching as a professional practice.

Needless to say, we are still using an old paradigm of the Ecole des Beaux Arts in France in the eighteenth century. This is seeking brilliance only in architectural design while not looking for the creativity of the quality of teaching in design studio.

Therefore, it is very narrow, and educators almost miss a numbers of opportunities in educating students.

BUT how to increase some pedagogical capacity and creativity of studio instructors?

I would say valuing diversity is one of the principles of the Motivation framework for culturally responsive teaching. It is an essential part of active learning as well. It is important because being an effective instructor requires a willingness to understand that student’s differing perspective and to construct with that student a motivating educational experience.

In order to enforce expectations and realize learning outcomes, instructors must understand how learners learn and what motivates them.  The motivational framework is “a way to plan for and reflect on teaching that is respectful of different cultures. It comprises four motivational conditions and associated questions:

Establishing inclusion: How do we create or affirm a learning atmosphere in which we feel respected by and connected to one another? (best to plan for the beginning of the course)

Developing attitude: How do we create or affirm a favorable disposition toward learning through personal relevance and choice? (best to plan for the beginning of the course)

Enhancing meaning: How do we create engaging and challenging learning experiences that include students’ perspectives and values? (best to plan throughout the course)

Engendering competence: How do we create or affirm an understanding that students have effectively learned something they value and perceive as authentic to their real world? (best to plan for the end of the course)