Abstracts – Browse Results
Click on the titles below to expand the information about each abstract.
Viewing 12 results ...
Ahmed, V, Shaik, A and Aouad, G (2006) An ontology of construction education for e-learning via the semantic web. Architectural Engineering and Design Management, 2(01), 87–99.
Allan, S, Jones, K and Walker, S (2006) Retrofitting e-learning to an existing distance learning course. Architectural Engineering and Design Management, 2(01), 137–47.
Boyd, D (2006) Developing a knowledge centric approach to construction education. Architectural Engineering and Design Management, 2(01), 149–59.
Chinyio, E and Morton, N (2006) The effectiveness of e-learning. Architectural Engineering and Design Management, 2(01), 73–86.
Dowdle, D L (2006) Engaging learners. Architectural Engineering and Design Management, 2(01), 31–48.
Emmitt, S (2006) Investigating the synergy between teaching and research in a teaching-led university. Architectural Engineering and Design Management, 2(01), 61–72.
Gribble, S J, Scott, D, Mawdesley, M and Al-Jibouri, S (2006) Learning to be real engineers. Architectural Engineering and Design Management, 2(01), 101–14.
Hoxley, M and Rowsell, R (2006) Using video in the construction technology classroom. Architectural Engineering and Design Management, 2(01), 115–22.
Kumaraswamy, M M, Miller, C J, Rahman, M M, Pickernell, D G, Ng, S T and Wong, I P Y (2006) Developing web-based tools for teaching, training, learning and development. Architectural Engineering and Design Management, 2(01), 123–35.
Lowe, D J (2006) Supervised work experience. Architectural Engineering and Design Management, 2(01), 49–60.
Tucker, R and Rollo, J (2006) Teaching and learning in collaborative group design projects. Architectural Engineering and Design Management, 2(01), 19–30.
- Type: Journal Article
- Keywords: collaborative learning; group assessment; design andragogy
- ISBN/ISSN: 1745-2007
- URL: http://earthscan.publisher.ingentaconnect.com/content/earthscan/aedm/2006/00000002/F0020001/art00003
- Abstract:
The 200 years of apprentice/master tradition that underpins the atelier studio system is still at the core of much present-day architectural design education. Yet this tradition poses uncertainties for a large number of lecturers faced with changes in the funding of tertiary education. With reductions in one-to-one staff/student contact time, many educators are finding it increasingly difficult to maintain an atelier teaching model. If these deficiencies remain unchecked and design-based schools are unable to implement strategies to reduce the resource intensity of one-to-one studio teaching programmes, then, for many higher-education providers, current architectural education may be based on an untenable course structure. Rather than spreading their time thinly over a large number of individual projects, an increasing number of lecturers are setting group projects. This allows them to coordinate longer and more in-depth review sessions on a smaller number of assignment submissions. However, while the group model may reflect the realities of the design process in professional practice, the approach is not without shortcomings as a teaching and learning archetype for the assessment of individual student skill competencies. Hence, what is clear is the need for a readily adoptable andragogy for the teaching and assessment of group design projects. The following is a position paper that describes - with a focus on effective group structures and assemblage and fair assessment models - the background, methodology and early results of a Strategic Teaching and Learning Grant currently running at the School of Architecture and Building at Deakin University in Australia.
Wood, A (2006) Demystifying construction. Architectural Engineering and Design Management, 2(01), 5–18.