PurposeThis study aims to expose the various roles that teachers and students adopt in the architecture design studio. It highlights how these roles change over time, through three distinct phases, which relate to the stages of the design project. This understanding of how roles change over the semester will guide academics in understanding how to better relate to students.Design/methodology/approachThrough a series of interviews and surveys, this study utilised a modified Delphi method to establish a consensus of opinion, both within and across the three stakeholder groups of students, tutors and coordinators/lecturers. Two rounds of data collection were conducted, with “expert” perceptions of the three stakeholder roles being established.FindingsThe roles that are adopted and perceived by students, tutors and coordinators/lecturers vary over time and respond to the stages of the design project. While there is general agreement between the perceptions of students and their teachers, there are some notable differences at key times.Originality/valueThis research builds upon previous studies into the roles of students and their teachers in the architecture design studio. It provides a nuanced map of how roles change and how interactions happen, over the duration and through the phases, of the architecture design project.

No abstract

PurposeThis research argues that architecture knowledge is fragmented between the profession and academia as evidenced by long-standing conflicting opinions regarding desirable graduate attributes. Work-integrated learning (WIL) is one mode of education where these fragments should come together. This research seeks to address a missing part of that WIL model and understand the profession's view of what constitutes quality education as a United Nations (UN) Sustainability Development Goal (SDG).Design/methodology/approachUtilising a three round Delphi survey of the architecture profession engaged in WIL programs, this study reports on their perspectives of the key benefits and attributes of WIL and the value of WIL experiences as part of a quality higher education system.FindingsThe architecture profession confirmed the value of WIL programs as contributing to students developing an understanding of workplace culture and contexts. There was strong agreement that WIL experiences can be a valuable part of a quality education and enhance graduate employability. Challenges for practice included semester-based program timing, the length of engagement with practice and the lack of WIL program guidance by universities to prepare the profession for WIL experiences.Originality/valueWhile WIL has been extensively researched over the last decade, it is limited in the architecture discipline. Survey findings address the research gap in understanding the architecture profession's views as a key WIL stakeholder which is important given the rapidly changing practice environments, globalisation and the increasingly transdisciplinary context.

The Covid-19 condition has prompted serious questions about the challenges facing the established two-centuries old canons of education in architecture and urbanism. This paper establishes an evolutionary account on how design education in architecture and urbanism has arrived at the pre-Covid-19 condition, explores current challenges, and, in the process of encountering the Covid-19 condition asks the question of what the scope of opportunities to meet these challenges is. A chronological analysis of design pedagogy is undertaken to instigate a debate on its future in a post-pandemic environment. The paper captures the salient characteristics of the legacy model which is inherited from historical schools, demonstrates the influence of, and resistance to, this model (1960s), identifies the qualities of various alternatives including 10 ground-breaking alternative pedagogies (1970s-1990s), highlights strengths of further alternative approaches including critical inquiry, the process-based and learning-by-making pedagogies (2000s) and the social construction-based pedagogies (2010s). Scrutinising the consequences of the Covid-19 condition and the associated “Transitional Emergency Model,” the analysis articulates the persisting challenges and examines current adaptations while outlining the scope of future opportunities for a future responsive pedagogy for architecture and urbanism in a post-pandemic world.

No abstract