تبیین مفهوم کُرِکسیون در نظام آموزش‌‌ معماری

دوره 21، شماره 136
مهر 1403
صفحه 59-84

نوع مقاله : مقالۀ پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 کارشناس ارشد معماری، گروه معماری، دانشکدۀ معماری و شهرسازی، دانشگاه علم و صنعت ایران، تهران، ایران.

2 استادیار، گروه معماری، دانشکدۀ معماری و شهرسازی، دانشگاه علم و صنعت ایران، تهران، ایران.

3 دانشیار، گروه روش‌ها و برنامه‌های آموزشی و درسی، دانشکدۀ روانشناسی و علوم تربیتی، دانشگاه تهران، ایران.

4 استادیار، گروه معماری، دانشکدۀ معماری و شهرسازی، دانشگاه حکیم سبزواری، سبزوار، ایران.

چکیده
بیان مسئله: آموزشِ فرایندمدارِ دروس طراحی معماری که عمدتاً دربردارندۀ طیفی از فعالیت‌‌هاست و ماهیتاً شامل مضامینی نظیر تجرید و عینیت، مسئله‌‌یابی و استنباط و استقراء و نتیجه‌‌گیری است، بر بسترِ کرکسیون، هدایت و راهبری می‌‌شود. سنجش وضعیتِ دانش، بینش و توانش طراحی و ادراک دانشجویانِ معماری در دروس طراحی معماری، مبتنی‌بر دریافت مفاهیم مطلق از یک‌سو و روند نسبی‌‌سازی آن مفاهیم از سویی دیگر، بر اساس معیارهایی نظیر صورت‌‌بندی و اولویت‌‌‌‌دهی به نظام مسائل طراحی، تبیین رویکردهای حل مسئله و کیفیت پردازش ایده‌‌های خلاقانه در هر یک از موضوعات طراحی انجام می‌‌شود. روند جاری در نظام آموزش رشتۀ معماری در دانشکده‌‌های معماری ایران، شکل‌‌گیری نوعی از ابهام در مفهوم کرکسیون را در پی داشته است که نیازمند تحقیق، تعمیق و تدقیق در چگونگی نقد و ارزشیابی‌‌های برآمده از کرکسیون است.
هدف پژوهش: این پژوهش درصدد واکاوی مفاهیم نهفته در کرکسیون است تا ضمن تبیین، بررسی و نقد دیدگاه‌‌های حاصل از مصاحبه با خِبرگان، ارکان اصلی کرکسیون را برای سنجش توان طراحی دانشجویان صورت‌‌بندی کند.
روش پژوهش: این تحقیق با رویکرد کیفی به روش نظریه داده‌‌بنیاد و با ابزار مصاحبه‌‌های نیمه‌‌ساختاریافته انجام شده است. با بهره‌‌گیری از نظریۀ داده‌‌بنیاد، داده‌‌های حاصل از مصاحبه‌های اکتشافی با 21 نفر از خِبرگان حوزۀ آموزش دروس طراحی معماری در دانشگاه‌‌های ایران طی سه مرحلۀ کدگذاری باز (اولیه)، زیرمقوله‌‌ها و مقوله‌‌ها صورت گرفت. واحدهای معنایی شامل 312 عنوان و کدهای باز در قالب 42 گزاره، مفهوم‌‌سازی شد. همچنین زیرمقوله‌‌ها مشتمل بر 12 گزارۀ عمده بود که در مرحلۀ بعد، مقوله‌‌ها با 3 هسته استخراج شدند.
نتیجه‌گیری: نتایج این پژوهش حاکی از آن است که کرکسیون در نظام آموزش‌‌ معماری، مفهومی فراتر از تصحیحِ صِرف آثار دانشجویان است و بر سطوح سه‌‌گانه «ماهیت»، «راهبرد» و «شیوه‌‌های ‌‌راهبری» استوار می‌شود. 

کلیدواژه‌ها

عنوان مقاله English

Explaining the Concept of Critique Sessions in Architectural Education System

نویسندگان English

Vahid Majidi 1
Mitra Ghafourian 2
keyvan Salehi 3
Vahid Sadram 4
1 M.A. in Architecture, Department of Architecture, School of Architecture & Environmental Design, Iran University of Science & Technology, Tehran, Iran.
2 Assistant Professor, Department of Architecture, School of Architecture & Environmental Design, Iran University of Science & Technology, Tehran, Iran.
3 Associate Professor, Department of Methods, Educational Planning, and Curriculum, Faculty of Psychology & Education, University of Tehran, Iran.
4 Assistant Professor, Department of Architecture, Faculty of Architecture & Urbanism, Hakim Sabzevari University, Sabzevar, Iran.
چکیده English

Problem statement: The process-oriented teaching of architectural design courses, which includes mainly a range of activities and essentially involves themes such as subjectivity and objectivity, problem-finding and inference, and induction and conclusion, is guided using critique. Measuring the level of knowledge, insight, design ability, and perception of architecture students in architectural design courses based on understanding absolute concepts on the one hand and the process of relativizing the concepts, on the other hand, is done considering such criteria as formulating and prioritizing the system of design problems, the explanation of problem-solving approaches, and the quality of processing creative ideas in each of the design subjects. The current procedure used in the education system of architecture in the architectural faculties of Iran has led to a kind of ambiguity in the concept of critique, which necessitates researching and scrutinizing the way of criticism and assessments of critique.
Research objective: The current research aimed to analyze the concepts hidden in critique to formulate the main elements of critique for measuring students’ design ability while explaining, examining, and criticizing the views obtained from interviews with experts.
Research method: This research is qualitative employing the grounded theory method and semi-structured interviews. By using the grounded theory, the data obtained from exploratory interviews with 21 experts in the field of teaching architectural design courses in Iranian universities were analyzed in three stages of open (initial) coding and extracting subcategories and categories. The semantic units including 312 headlines and open codes in the form of 42 propositions were conceptualized. Additionally, the subcategories consisted of 12 major propositions, and the categories including 3 cores were extracted in the next step.
Conclusion: The results of the research indicated that critique in the architectural education system is a concept beyond just correcting students’ works. It is based on the three levels of “essence”, “strategy”, and “management methods”.

کلیدواژه‌ها English

  • Critique
  • Architectural Design Studio
  • Design Process
  • Grounded Theory
  • Architectural Education
اکبری ‌‌شلدره‌‌ای، فریدون؛ قاسم‌‌پور مقدم، حسین و علیزاده، فاطمه صغری. (1388). روش‌‌های نوین یاددهی- یادگیری و کاربرد آن ها در آموزش. فرتاب.
انصاری، حمیدرضا. (1386). نسبت نظر و عمل در طراحی معماری بهره‌گیری از روش تحلیل پروتکل جهت بررسی و تفسیر نقش مولد‌های اولیه در برقراری نسبت میان نظر و عمل در طراحی معماری [پایان‌نامۀ دکتری معماری، دانشگاه تهران]، پایگاه اطلاعات علمی ایران (گنج).https://elmnet.ir/doc/10023625-2401
پناهی، سیامک؛ هاشم پور، رحیم و اسلامی، سید غلامرضا. (1393). معماری اندیشه، از ایده تا کانسپت. هویت شهر، 8(17)، 25-34. https://sid.ir/paper/154493/fa
حجت، عیسی. (1382). آموزش معماری و بی‌‌ارزشی ارزش‌‌ها. هنرهای زیبا، 14(14)، 63-70. https://sid.ir/paper/419996/fa
حجت، عیسی. (1383). آموزش خلاق- تجربه. هنرهای زیبا، 18(18)، 25-36. 
حجت، عیسی. (1389). مشق معماری. دانشگاه تهران.
حجت، عیسی. (1401). سنت و بدعت در آموزش معماری. دانشگاه تهران.
حجت، عیسی و انصاری، حمیدرضا. (1389). بازاندیشی در رفتارهای آموزشی معماری برپایه آسیب‌‌شناسی آموزش متوسطه. هنرهای زیبا، 2(44)، 15-25. https://dorl.net/dor/20.1001.1.22286020.1389.2.44.2.5
رؤوف، علی. (1385). سهم معلم، شیوه معلم (نگاهی به حرفه‌‌مندی‌های معلم). آستان قدس رضوی.
زینلی نصرآبادی، فوزیه و فرحزا، نریمان. (1401). مروری بر روش‌‌های آموزش سازه برای معماران رهیافتی جهت انسجام آموزه‌‌های سازه با طراحی معماری. اندیش‌‌نامۀ معماری، 2(3)، 113-132. https://doi.org/10.30480/arcand.2022.4187.1028
سیف، علی اکبر. (1386). روان شناسی پرورشی: روانشناسی یادگیری و آموزش. آگاه.
شریعت‌راد، فرهاد و ندیمی، حمید. (1395). قاب‌بندی مسئله؛ راه طراحانۀ رویارویی با مسئلۀ طراحی. صفه، 26(3), 5-24. https://dorl.net/dor/20.1001.1.1683870.1395.26.3.1.8
شریف، حمیدرضا و ندیمی، حمید. (1392). تعامل بین ایده‌‌یابی و پردازش ایده در تفکر طراحی معماری. صفه، 23(3)، 19-26. https://dorl.net/dor/20.1001.1.1683870.1392.23.3.2.8
صدرام، وحید و ندیمی، حمید. (1394). نقش دست نگاری استاد در آموزش طراحی. صفه، 25(1)، 5-18. https://dorl.net/dor/20.1001.1.1683870.1394.25.1.1.7
صدرام، وحید. (1396). تقلید درست، پیشنیاز خلاقیت یادگیری تقلیدی در آموزش فرایند طراحی معماری. صفه، 27(1)، 5-16. https://dorl.net/dor/20.1001.1.1683870.1396.27.1.1.1
صدرام، وحید. (1400). وجوه تقلید دوسویۀ معلم و شاگرد در جلسۀ کُرکسیون طراحی معماری. صفه، 31(2)، 5-22. https://dorl.net/dor/20.1001.1.1683870.1400.31.2.1.1
صفوی، امان الله. (1384). کلیات روش‌ها و فنون تدریس. نشر معاصر.
عارفی، محبوبه؛ خزایی، ثریا و خزایی، آذر. (1399). بهره‌گیری از راهبردهای تکیه‌گاه سازی آموزشی و تعیین میزان اثربخشی آن بر یادگیری و انگیزه پیشرفت دانش‌آموزان با اختلال یادگیری ریاضی پایه پنجم ابتدایی. تدریس پژوهی، 8(1)، 198-217. https://doi.org/10.34785/J012.2020.927
علیزاده میاندوآب، آیناز؛ اکرمی، غلامرضا و نجاتی، پوریا. (1401). نقد و بررسی آموزش نقدمحور در طراحی معماری. باغ نظر، 19(111)، 37-50. https://doi.org/10.22034/bagh.2022.310531.5020
فراستخواه، مقصود. (1388). ارزیابی کیفیت آموزش عالی در ایران: کاربردی از نظریه مبنایی (GT) (ویرایش ندا رضائی). موسسه پژوهش و برنامه‌‌ریزی آموزش عالی.
فیضی، محسن و دژپسند، ساحل. (1397). واکاوی سبک‌‌های یادگیری دانشجویان برای ارتقای آموزش معماری (مطالعه موردی: دانشجویان معماری دانشگاه ارومیه). مطالعات معماری ایران، 7(14)، 149-169. https://doi.org/10.22052/1.14.149
معماریان، حسین. (1398). یاددهی و یادگیری 50 راهکار برای بهبود کیفیت آموزش مهندسی. دانشگاه تهران.
ندیمی، حمید. (1389). روش استاد و شاگردی، از نگاهی دیگر. هنرهای زیبا، 2(44)، 27-36. https://dorl.net/dor/20.1001.1.22286020.1389.2.44.3.6
نوری مکرم، امیر؛ جانی پور، بهروز و تقوایی، ویدا. (1402). بررسی مؤلفه‌های شکل‌گیری کانسپت (طرح‌مایه) در آموزش طراحی معماری با رویکرد پیشینه‌محور. باغ نظر، 20(120)، 29-42. https://doi.org/10.22034/bagh.2022.332886.5186
مندگاری، کاظم؛ ندیمی، ضحی و تفضلی، زهره. (1400). مسئلۀ انسجام در آموزش معماری بازاندیشی مسئله از طریق مدل «موقعیت رتوریکال». فصلنامۀ آموزش مهندسی ایران، 23(92)، 107-130. https://dorl.net/dor/20.1001.1.16072316.1400.23.92.5.1
Abdalla, S. B., Rashid, M., & Ara, D. R. (2021). Plausibility of CAAD in Conceptual Design: Challenges in Architectural Engineering for Early-Stage Digital Design Tools. Journal of Architectural Engineering, 27(2), 04021004. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)AE.1943-5568.0000457
Abdelhameed, W. (2011). Architectural form creation in the design studio: Physical modeling as an effective design tool. ArchNet-IJAR: International Journal of Architectural Research, 5(3), 81. 
Abdelhamid, T. G. (2020). A 10-Step Design Process for Architectural Design Studios. In Sustainable Development and Social Responsibility (Vol. 1). Proceedings of the 2nd American University in the Emirates International Research Conference, AUEIRC’18–Dubai, UAE 2018 (pp. 1-11). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-32922-8_1
Acici, F. K. (2015). A Studio Study on Re-Interpret the Comments of a Brand in the Design Training. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 182, 295-300. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.04.769
Adams, R. S., Forin, T., Chua, M., & Radcliffe, D. (2016). Characterizing the work of coaching during design reviews. Design Studies, 45, 30-67. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2015.12.007
Alonso Schokel, L., & Maria Bravo, J. (1998). A manual of hermeneutics. Bloomsbury Academic
Anderson, L. W., & Krathwohl, D. R. (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: A revision of Bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives: complete edition. Addison Wesley Longman, Inc. 
Anthony, K. H. (1991). Design juries on trial: The renaissance of the design studio. Van Nostrand Reinhold. 
Antoniades, A. C. (1990). Poetics Of Architecture Theory Of Design. Van Nostrand Reinhold.
Asojo, A., & Vo, H. (2021). Pedagogy+ Reflection: A Problem-Based Learning Case in Interior Design. International Journal of Designs for Learning, 12(2), 1-14. https://doi.org/10.14434/ijdl.v12i2.25372
Ateş Akdeniz, A. (2023). Exploring the impact of self-regulated learning intervention on students’ strategy use and performance in a design studio course. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 33(5), 1923-1957. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-022-09798-3
Ayiran, N. (2015). Designerly way of understanding the role of theory. A/Z ITU Journal of the Faculty of Architecture, 12(2), 145-157. https://www.az.itu.edu.tr/index.php/jfa/article/view/425/420
Azevedo, R., Moos, D. C., Greene, J. A., Winters, F. I., & Cromley, J. G. (2008). Why is externally-facilitated regulated learning more effective than self-regulated learning with hypermedia?. Educational Technology Research and Development, 56, 45-72. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-007-9067-0
Brandt, C. B., Cennamo, K., Douglas, S., Vernon, M., McGrath, M., & Reimer, Y. (2013). A theoretical framework for the studio as a learning environment. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 23, 329-348. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-011-9181-5
Brophy, V., & Lewis, J. O. (2012). A green vitruvius: principles and practice of sustainable architectural design. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781849776929
Brown, A. G. (2001). Architectural critique through digital scenario-building: Augmenting Architectural Criticism and Narrative. In Computer Aided Architectural Design Futures 2001: Proceedings of the Ninth International Conference held at the Eindhoven University of Technology. Eindhoven, The Netherlands, on July 8–11, 2001 (pp. 697-709). Springer Netherlands. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-010-0868-6_52
Budge, K. (2016). Learning to be: The modelling of art and design practice in university art and design teaching. International Journal of Art & Design Education, 35(2), 243-258. https://doi.org/10.1111/jade.12060
Budiman, H., Numan, I., & Idham, N. C. (2021). Freehand Drawing and Architectural Expression. Journal of Architectural Research and Design Studies, 5(1), 45-54. https://doi.org/10.20885/jars.vol5.iss1.art5
Cabas, M. (2017). La maqueta: herramienta esencial en el proceso de diseno de Richard meier. EGA Expresion Grafica Arquitectonica, 22(29). https://doi.org/10.4995/ega.2017.7354
Carless, D., Salter, D., Yang, M., & Lam, J. (2011). Developing sustainable feedback practices. Studies in Higher Education, 36(4), 395-407. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075071003642449
Cennamo, K., Douglas, S. A., Vernon, M., Brandt, C., Scott, B., Reimer, Y., & McGrath, M. (2011). Promoting creativity in the computer science design studio. Proceedings of the 42nd ACM technical symposium on Computer science education. https://doi.org/10.1145/1953163.1953344
Chomsky, N. (1968). Linguistic Contributions to the Study of mind: Future. Language and thinking, 323-364. 
Christensen, B. T., & Ball, L. J. (2016). Dimensions of creative evaluation: Distinct design and reasoning strategies for aesthetic, functional and originality judgments. Design Studies, 45, 116-136. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2015.12.005
Chrzanowska, O. (2019). The role of sketching within the process of creative maturation of an architect in 21 century–sketching from nature in cognitive development. Interdisciplinary Context of Special Pedagogy, 26(1), 443-458.
Cilella, S., Berman, C., & Rheinfrank, J. (2010). Experience definition through storyboarding. In Proceedings of the fourth international conference on Tangible, embedded, and embodied interaction. https://doi.org/10.1145/1709886.1709966
Crolla, K., Hodgson, P., & Ho, A. W. Y. (2019). ‘Peer critique’in debate: A pedagogical tool for teaching architectural design studio. International Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 13(3), 8. https://doi.org/10.20429/ijsotl.2019.130308
Cross, N. (1982). Designerly ways of knowing. Design Studies, 3(4), 221-227. https://doi.org/10.1016/0142-694X(82)90040-0
Cross, N. (2004). Expertise in design: an overview. Design Studies, 25(5), 427-441. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2004.06.002
Cunningham, A. (1980). Educating around architecture. Studies in Higher Education, 5(2), 131-147. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075078012331377176
Dannels, D., Gaffney, A. H., & Martin, K. N. (2008). Beyond content, deeper than delivery: What critique feedback reveals about communication expectations in design education. International Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 2(2), 12. https://doi.org/10.20429/ijsotl.2008.020212
Dannels, D. P. (2005). Performing tribal rituals: A genre analysis of “crits” in design studios. Communication Education, 54(2), 136-160. https://doi.org/10.1080/03634520500213165
Darke, J. (1979). The primary generator and the design process. Design studies, 1(1), 36-44.‏ https://doi.org/10.1016/0142-694X(79)90027-9
Dempsey, M., & Brennan, A. (2018). Empowering learners with self-selecting learning tools. INTED2018 Proceedings. https://doi.org/10.21125/inted.2018.1842
Dorta, T., Kinayoglu, G., & Boudhraa, S. (2016). A new representational ecosystem for design teaching in the studio. Design studies, 47, 164-186. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2016.09.003
Duerk, D. (1993). Architectural Programming: Information Management for Design. Van Nostrand Reinhold.
Earl, L., & Timperley, H. (2015). Evaluative thinking for successful educational innovation. OECD Education Working Papers. https://doi.org/10.1787/19939019
Eissa, D. (2019). Concept generation in the architectural design process: A suggested hybrid model of vertical and lateral thinking approaches. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 33, 100589. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2019.100589
El-Latif, M. A., Al-Hagla, K. S., & Hasan, A. (2020). Overview on the criticism process in architecture pedagogy. Alexandria Engineering Journal, 59(2), 753-762. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aej.2020.01.019
Sönmez, B. E. (2020). Different Educational Approaches in Design Studio.‏ International Journal of Architecture and Planning, 8(2). https://doi.org/10.15320/ICONARP.2020.134
Eslinger, E., White, B., Frederiksen, J., & Brobst, J. (2008). Supporting inquiry processes with an interactive learning environment: Inquiry Island. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 17, 610-617. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-008-9130-6
Feizbakhsh, H., Salehi, K., & Javadipour, M. (2023). Expected Learning Outcomes of Undergraduates in the Field of Educational Sciences: A Qualitative Study. Journal of Higher Education Curriculum Studies, 14(27), 305-336. https://doi.org/10.22034/hecs.2023.178422
Fleischmann, K. (2021). Hands-on versus virtual: Reshaping the design classroom with blended learning. Arts and Humanities in Higher Education, 20(1), 87-112. https://doi.org/10.1177/1474022220906393
Gheorghe, A. (2019). Digital Design Thinking in Architectural Education Testing Idea-Driven and Science-Driven Design Processes Towards Researching Polymer/Wood Composite Structures. Digital Wood Design: Innovative Techniques of Representation in Architectural Design, 1355-1393. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-03676-8_54
Glasser, W. (1990). The quality school: Managing students without coercion. Perennial Library.
Goldschmidt, G., Hochman, H., & Dafni, I. (2010). The design studio “crit”: Teacher–student communication. Ai Edam, 24(3), 285-302. https://doi.org/10.1017/S089006041000020X
Gray, C. M. (2013). Informal peer critique and the negotiation of habitus in a design studio. Art, design & communication in higher education, 12(2), 195-209. https://doi.org/10.1386/adch.12.2.195_1
Gunday Gul, C. G., & Afacan, Y. (2018). Analysing the effects of critique techniques on the success of interior architecture students. International Journal of Art & Design Education, 37(3), 469-479. https://doi.org/10.1111/jade.12145
Habibullah, K. M., Musa, H., & Tijjani, M. (2022). Towards Improving the Students’ Learning in First Year Architecture Design Studio-The Critique Session. Iconic Research and Engineering Journal, 5(8), 187-191. 
Hamza, T. S., & Hassan, D. K. (2016). Consequential creativity: Student competency and lateral thinking incorporation in architectural education. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 26(4), 587-612. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-015-9321-4
Hansen, C. T., & Andreasen, M. M. (2004). A mapping of design decision-making. In DS 32: Proceedings of DESIGN 2004, the 8th International Design Conference, Dubrovnik.
Haskell, R. (2001). Transfer of learning: Cognition. Instruction, and Reasoning. Academic Press. 
Hassanpour, B., & Şahin, N. P. (2021). Technology adoption in architectural design studios for educational activities. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 30(4), 491-509. https://doi.org/10.1080/1475939X.2021.1897037
Helmi, F., & Khaidzir, K. A. B. M. (2016). Analyzing the critical role of sketches in the visual transformation of architectural design. ArchNet-IJAR: International Journal of Architectural Research, 10(2), 219. http://dx.doi.org/10.26687/archnet-ijar.v10i2.958
Hennink, M. M., Kaiser, B. N., & Marconi, V. C. (2017). Code saturation versus meaning saturation: how many interviews are enough?. Qualitative Health Research, 27(4), 591-608. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732316665344
Hettithanthri, U., & Hansen, P. (2022). Design studio practice in the context of architectural education: A narrative literature review. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 32(4), 2343-2364. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-021-09694-2
Heylighen, A., Martin, W. M., & Cavallin, H. (2007). Building stories revisited: unlocking the knowledge capital of architectural practice. Architectural Engineering and Design Management, 3(1), 65-74. https://doi.org/10.1080/17452007.2007.9684630
Hokanson, B. (2012). The design critique as a model for distributed learning. In The next generation of distance education: Unconstrained learning (pp. 71-83). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-1785-9_5
Huet, G., Culley, S. J., McMahon, C. A., & Fortin, C. (2007). Making sense of engineering design review activities. Ai Edam, 21(3), 243-266. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0890060407000261
Jakaitis, J. (2015). Problem-based learning: formation of material environment design in urban spaces/Probleminis mokymas: daiktines aplinkos dizaino miesto erdvese formavimo raidos ypatumai. COACTIVITY: Philology, Educology, 23(1), 50-50. 
Khalil, M. H. (2020). Students’ consciousness of their problem solving approaches as a key to creativity in design. European Journal of Formal Sciences and Engineering, 3(2), 1-22. https://doi.org/10.26417/ejef.v4i1.p93-109
Knight, J., Fitton, D., Phillips, C., & Price, D. (2019). Design thinking for innovation. Stress testing human factors in ideation sessions. The Design Journal, 22, 1929-1939. https://doi.org/10.1080/14606925.2019.1594950
Kvan, T., & Jia, Y. (2005). Students’ learning styles and their correlation with performance in architectural design studio. Design studies, 26(1), 19-34. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2004.06.004
Lang, J. (1987). Creating architectural theory. The role of the behavioral sciences in environmental design. Van Nostrand Reinhold Company.
Lawrence, A., & Xavier, S. A. (2013). Lateral Thinking of Prospective Teachers. Online Submission, 1(1), 28-32. 
Lawson, B. (2006). How designers think: The design process demystified. Routledge. 
Lebahar, J.-C. (1983). Le dessin d’architecte: simulation graphique et réduction d’incertitude [Architectural drawing: graphic simulation and uncertainty reduction]. Editions Parenthèses.
Liu, Y., Castronovo, F., Messner, J., & Leicht, R. (2020). Evaluating the impact of virtual reality on design review meetings. Journal of Computing in Civil Engineering, 34(1), 04019045. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)CP.1943-5487.0000856
Livingston, E. (2006). Ethnomethodological studies of mediated interaction and mundane expertise. The Sociological Review, 54(3), 405-425. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-954X.2006.00623.x
Maciel, I. M., Felicio, G., da Silva, E. T., Villani, E., Krus, P., & Pereira, L. (2021). Mental Imagery for Multisensory Designers: Insights for Non-visual Design Cognition. In International Conference on Research into Design (pp. 109-118). Springer.‏ https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-16-0041-8_10
Majidi, V., Seddighikavidak, S., Khanmohammadi, M. A., Salehi, K., Azad Armaki, M., & Majidi, M. (2023). The Effect of Visual Notes on the Rate of Learning Theoretical Courses in the Field of Architecture. ACSA/EAAE Teachers Conference: Educating the Cosmopolitan Architect, Reykjavik. https://doi.org/10.35483/ACSA.Teach.2023.68
McClean, D., & Hourigan, N. (2013). Critical dialogue in architecture studio: Peer interaction and feedback. Journal for Education in the Built Environment, 8(1), 35-57. https://doi.org/10.11120/jebe.2013.00004
McDonald, J. K., & Michela, E. (2019). The design critique and the moral goods of studio pedagogy. Design studies, 62, 1-35. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2019.02.001
Megahed, N. (2018). Reflections on studio-based learning: assessment and critique. Journal of Engineering, Design and Technology, 16(1), 63-80. https://doi.org/10.1108/JEDT-08-2017-0079
Mewburn, I. (2012). Lost in translation: Reconsidering reflective practice and design studio pedagogy. Arts and Humanities in Higher Education, 11(4), 363-379. https://doi.org/10.1177/1474022210393912
Murphy, K. M., Ivarsson, J., & Lymer, G. (2012). Embodied reasoning in architectural critique. Design studies, 33(6), 530-556. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2012.06.005
Oh, Y., Ishizaki, S., Gross, M. D., & Do, E. Y.-L. (2013). A theoretical framework of design critiquing in architecture studios. Design studies, 34(3), 302-325. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2012.08.004
Parker, E. C. (2018). A grounded theory of adolescent high school women’s choir singers’ process of social identity development. Journal of Research in Music Education, 65(4), 439-460. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022429417743478
Percy, C. (2004). Critical absence versus critical engagement. Problematics of the crit in design learning and teaching. Art, Design & Communication in Higher Education, 2(3), 143-154. https://doi.org/10.1386/adch.2.3.143/0
Pourshanazari, A. A., Roohbakhsh, A., Khazaei, M., & Tajadini, H. (2013). Comparing the long-term retention of a physiology course for medical students with the traditional and problem-based learning. Advances in Health Sciences Education, 18, 91-97.‏ https://doi.org/10.1007/s10459-012-9357-0
Priya, R. S., Shabitha, P., & Radhakrishnan, S. (2020). Collaborative and participatory design approach in architectural design studios. Social Sciences & Humanities Open, 2(1), 100033.‏ https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssaho.2020.100033
Roberts, A. (2006). Cognitive styles and student progression in architectural design education. Design Studies, 27(2), 167-181.‏ https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2005.07.001
Roman, D. J., Osinski, M., & Erdmann, R. H. (2017). The construction process of grounded theory in administration. Contaduria y administracion, 62(3), 985-1000. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cya.2016.06.012
Sachanowicz, T. (2019). Creativity and use of physical models in architectural design. IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering. https://doi.org/10.1088/1757-899X/471/8/082072
Sahin, M. (2019). Contextual learning strategies in the early stages of architecture education. New Trends and Issues Proceedings on Humanities and Social Sciences, 6(1), 313-320. http://hdl.handle.net/10679/9295
Santos, R. S., do Vale, C. P., Bogoni, B., & Kirkegaard, P. H. (2022). Freehand drawing as a didactic instrument. 
Scagnetti, G. (2017). A dialogical model for studio critiques in design education. The Design Journal, 20, S781-S791. https://doi.org/10.1080/14606925.2017.1353024
Schön, D. A. (1985). The design studio: An exploration of its traditions and potentials. RIBA Publications.
Senske, N. (2017). Evaluation and impact of a required computational thinking course for architecture students. In Proceedings of the 2017 ACM SIGCSE Technical Symposium on computer science education. 525-530. https://doi.org/10.1145/3017680.3017750
Seo, H.-S. (2022). A Study on the Improvement for Bidet Product-Service Design for Seniors by PSS-based 4D Double Diamond Design Process Model. Science of Emotion and Sensibility, 25(1), 29-40. https://doi.org/10.14695/KJSOS.2022.25.1.29
Shaqour, E. N. (2021). Using Modern Teaching Strategies to Improve Architectural Design Studio Pedagogy in West Bank. MEJ. Mansoura Engineering Journal, 46(1), 46-53. http://dx.doi.org/10.21608/bfemu.2021.158858
Sholanke, A., Adeboye, A., Alagbe, O., Fadipe, D., & Iyoha, J. (2018). Universal Design Framework for the Development of Adaptable Architectural Studios for Learning Environments. IATED, 8213-8224. https://doi.org/10.21125/inted.2018.1998
Shoop, B. L. (2014). Developing critical thinking, creativity and innovation skills. IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/InnoTek.2014.6877362
Sung, E., Kelley, T. R., & Han, J. (2019). Influence of sketching instruction on elementary students’ design cognition: a study of three sketching approaches. Journal Of Engineering Design, 30(6), 199-226. https://doi.org/10.1080/09544828.2019.1617413
Suwa, M., & Tversky, B. (1996). What architects see in their sketches: Implications for design tools. Conference Companion on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 
Thurlow, L., Ford, P., & Hudson, G. (2019). Skirting the sketch: An analysis of sketch inhibition within contemporary design higher education. International Journal of Art & Design Education, 38(2), 478-491. https://doi.org/10.1111/jade.12207
Úbeda Blanco, M., Villalobos Alonso, D., Pérez Barreiro, S. (2019). Little Big Models. The Tools of Japanese Architect Studios. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-93749-6_88
Uluoǧlu, B. (2000). Design knowledge communicated in studio critiques. Design Studies, 21(1), 33-58. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0142-694X(99)00002-2
Utaberta, N., Hassanpour, B., Ani, A. C., & Surat, M. (2011). Retracted: Reconstructing the idea of critique session in architecture studio.‏ Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2011.05.014
Utaberta, N., Hassanpour, B., Handryant, A. N., & Ani, A. I. C. (2013). Upgrading education architecture by redefining critique session in design studio. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 102, 42-47. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.10.711
Utaberta, N., Hassanpour, B., & Usman, I. (2010). Redefining critique methods as an assessment tools in architecture design studio. WSEAS transaction on advanced education, 359. 
Webster, H. (2005). The architectural review: A study of ritual, acculturation and reproduction in architectural education. Arts and Humanities in Higher Education, 4(3), 265-282. https://doi.org/10.1177/1474022205056169
Wong, H. L. H. (2011). Critique: A communicative event in design education. Visible Language, 45(3), 221-247.
Yew, E. H., & Goh, K. (2016). Problem-based learning: An overview of its process and impact on learning. Health Professions Education, 2(2), 75-79. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hpe.2016.01.004
Yorgancıoğlu, D., & Tunali, S. (2020). Critique’s Role in the Development of Design Literacy in Beginning Design Education. RChD: creación y pensamiento, 5(8), 49-62. 
Yurtkuran, S., Kırlı, G., & Taneli, Y. (2013). An Innovative approach in architectural education: Designing a utopia. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 89, 821-829. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.08.939