Anteet, Q and Binabid, J (2025) Investigating the discourse on pedagogical effectiveness in the architectural design studio. Architectural Engineering and Design Management, 21(1), pp. 17-34. ISSN 1745-2007
Abstract
The purpose of this paper is to investigate the discourse on pedagogical effectiveness in architecture design studios to inform the future development of teaching and learning. Through a narrative literature review, the study explores articles published over a five-year period to investigate the shifts in design studio pedagogies and their effectiveness. After a subtle filtering process, we narrowed the analysis to thirty-eight articles by searching three keywords: pedagogy, evaluation, and effectiveness in the design studio. Twelve themes emerged from an iterative reviewing process and were discussed against the established theoretical origins of architectural studio pedagogies. The studies consolidated each other by mostly agreeing on the positive impact of implementing student-centered pedagogies. Robust evidence of effectiveness is captured from the literature on collaboration: interdisciplinary environment, teamwork, and group work (Theme 1). Furthermore, the findings reported in Theme 4, immersive technology, present a promising potential to incorporate technology with student-centered pedagogies. The study contributes to the discourse on design studio pedagogies and offers a platform to inform future teaching and learning strategies. It concludes with recommendations for researchers, studio instructors, and academic institutions to align emerging design studio pedagogies, their theoretical origins, and technology in agile organizational climates.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | architectural studio; effectiveness; narrative review; pedagogy; student-centered |
| Index terms: | studio, collaboration, platform, literature review, immersive technology, evidence, student-centered, design studio, teamwork, effectiveness, pedagogy, instructor, strategy, student-centered pedagogy, narrative, architectural design |
| Subjects: | qualitative and interpretive research, teaching methods, design practice, practitioner, construction type, student experience, performance management, management, digital design, evaluation and assessment methods, data analysis and analytics, virtual reality |
| Topics: | Quality Management, Design Practice, Research Practice, Construction Technology, Education, Business Strategy, Organizational Design, Digital Applications, Roles and Professions |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCTA |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here