Engaging with site-specific design through experiential learning and case-based learning

Andrea Moneta

The exposition presents findings and outputs from a trans-disciplinary research project involving students and tutors of level 5 BA Architecture and Theatre design courses of NTU. The process of reading, understanding and interpreting the inner character and performative attributes of architecture, and in-depth exploration and expression of spatial practice, are essential aspects for any design intervention on existing buildings for site-specific performance, but they are not enough used for architectural design. The originality of the action research lies in its trans-disciplinary approach and methodology derived from theatre and performance design, aimed at helping Architecture students to engage with the character of architectural spaces as a propaedeutic step of their design. The final goal was not just the resolution of a specific didactic need, but also the realisation of a resource for educators and practitioners, so to fill a gap in the literature of site-specific design methodology. The academic literature regarding site-specific performance, in fact, is more oriented in depicting its historical background, describing past and current practice, than summoning up its methodologies and applications. For this research Moneta designed and planned a series of multidisciplinary learning activities (perception lab, mapping, dramaturgy of the place) using a constructivist approach, within a collaborative design project with level 5 BA Architecture and Theatre design students, involving the exploration of an historical building in Worksop (UK). The research utilised a combination of Active Learning approach, based on Kolb's Experiential Learning and Case-based learning (CBL); a final questionnaire measured the impact of the research: 87.4% of students agreed that this new methodology helped them to design for site-specific places. Moneta summoned the research in a resource for colleagues in the form of a Poster that explained its methodology, identifying nodal points and learning activities to improve design for site-specific in BA level design courses. The research was peer-reviewed as part of PGCAP final assessment, and the Poster was exhibited at TILT showcase 2019.

Design

To answer my research question, I designed and planned a series of learning activities using a constructivist approach, for level 5 BA (Hons) Architecture students, utilising the aforementioned collaborative pilot project; the aim was to help Architecture students to engage with the character of architectural spaces for site-specific design, and to test the validity of this methodology –partly derived from theatre- in a different discipline.

In constructivism, the learner is an information constructor; for this successful learning theory in fact, the learning process is not a passive, top-down process, but an active process of constructing knowledge (rather than acquiring it) through personal contextualised experiences, replacing or adapting their existing knowledge.

To design and plan learning activities I utilised a combination of Active Learning approach, based on Experiential learning (Kolb, 1984) and Case-based learning (CBL) to ‘bridge the gap between theory and practice, between declarative and functioning knowledge’ (Biggs, 1999).

The integration of these two learning theory approaches was needed to broaden the range of on-site and in-class activities and to foster ‘collaborative learning, self-reflection and critical reflection, integrating knowledge and practice (Williams, 2005).

The final goal was to totally immerse the students into a case study involving the exploration of an historical building in Worksop and using this ‘concrete, here-and-now experience to test ideas and use of feedback to change practices and theories’ (Kolb, 1984).

The activities had been informed also by my professional practice as an architect and site-specific theatre designer, inspired to Situationism and Debord’s Psychogeography centred on the interaction between space (architecture) and people (student); I then designed all learning activities following Kolb’s four-stage learning cycle as follows:

a) Perception Mapping (experience a)

b) Session on site-specific (experience b)

c) Peer review (reflection)

d) Workshop (conceptualisation)

e) Presentation (experimentation)

To measure the impact of all the learning activities on the students’ experience, I designed an anonymous questionnaire with sixteen questions and I used data collected to assess key elements of the methodology and its overall effectiveness.

These learning activities have been summoned into a resource for academic staff with the aim to extend this methodology to a wider context of academic practice, including design for heritage, psychology, social sciences, geography and urban planning.

Tip

Tip