Share:


Criteria for the definition of indicators in architectural learning in the Design Studio through the use of the e-portfolio

Abstract

The objective of this research is to identify, within the context of teaching-learning through the Design Studio, factors and criteria which may support the construction of architectural indicators of learning in students. This may be achieved through the integrated analysis of the evidences of learning included in the e-portfolio, using the traditional learning process as a complement in the Design Studio. This research is of mixed type and includes an exploratory sequential design of longitudinal type that ran through a period of six consecutive semesters. The results obtained show the full potential of objectual and collaborative evidences contained in the e-portfolio, in order to reflect the presence of architectural learning elements, as well as the presence of factors and features specific to the context and dynamics of the learningteaching process, which may result in an approach to the construction of potential architectural indicators of learning.

Keyword : Design Studio, e-portfolio, evidence, learning process, indicators of learning, evidence of learning

How to Cite
Roco, M. ., & Barberà, E. (2020). Criteria for the definition of indicators in architectural learning in the Design Studio through the use of the e-portfolio. Journal of Architecture and Urbanism, 44(1), 52-62. https://doi.org/10.3846/jau.2020.11159
Published in Issue
Apr 17, 2020
Abstract Views
244
PDF Downloads
113
Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

References

Alba Dorado, M. I. (2016). La enseñanza de la Arquitectura. Iniciación al aprendizaje del proyecto arquitectónico. Revista Española de Pedagogía, 74(265), 445–460. https://dialnet.unirioja.es/servlet/articulo?codigo=5628247

Barberà, E., Bautista, G., Espasa, A., & Guasch, T. (2006). Portfolio electrónico: desarrollo de competencias profesionales en la red. Portfolio the Magazine of the Fine Arts, 3, 55–66. https://doi.org/10.7238/rusc.v3i2.287

Barrett, H. C. (2010). Balancing the two faces of ePortfolios. Computing, 3(1), 6–14.

Ben Youssef, A., & Dahmani, M. (2014). The impact of ICT on student performance in higher education: direct effects, indirect effects and organisational change. RUSC. Universities and Knowledge Society Journal, 5(1). https://doi.org/10.7238/rusc.v5i1.321

Blanch Gelabert, S., Fuentes Agustí, M., Gimeno Soria, X., González Monfort, N., Rifà Valls, M., & Santiveri Papiol, N. (2009). Relaciones entre aprendizaje, cognición y tecnologías en la construcción del e-portafolio [Relationships among learning, cognition and technologies in the construction of the e-portfolio]. RED, Revista de Educación a Distancia.

Carmel-Gilfilen, C., & Portillo, M. (2010). Developmental Trajectories in design thinking: an examination of criteria. Design Studies, 31(1), 74–91. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2009.06.004

Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2011). Designing and conducting mixed methods research. SAGE Publications.

Foqué, R. K. V. (2010). Building knowledge in architecture. ASP. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781107415324.004

Fuentealba, J., Reyes, M., & Schmidt, D. (2017). Architecture student performance. A research experience at the University of Bío Bío. Arquitectura y Urbanismo, XXXVIII(2), 31–43.

Gutiérrez, G., & Roco, M. (2013). Las TIC en la enseñanza de la arquitectura: el uso del ePortfolio. Universidad de Concepción.

Karamti, C. (2016). Measuring the impact of ICTs on academic performance: evidence from higher education in Tunisia. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 48(4), 322–337. https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2016.1215176

Kehoe, A., & Goudzwaard, M. (2015). ePortfolios, badges, and the whole digital self: how evidence-based learning pedagogies and technologies can support integrative learning and identity development. Theory into Practice, 54(4), 343–351. https://doi.org/10.1080/00405841.2015.1077628

Kurt, S. (2011, January). Use of constructivist approach in architectural education. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 15, 3980–3988. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2011.04.402

Mabardi, J.-F. (2012). Maestría del proyecto: apuntes para la práctica de la enseñanza del proyecto. Ediciones Universidad del Bío-Bío.

Masdéu, M., & Fuses, J. (2017). Reconceptualizing the design studio in architectural education: distance learning and blended learning as transformation factors. ArchNet-IJAR, 11(2), 6–23. https://doi.org/10.26687/archnet-ijar.v11i2.1156

Pasin, B. (2017). Rethinking the design studio-centered architectural education. A case study at schools of architecture in Turkey. The Design Journal, 20(sup1), S1270–S1284. https://doi.org/10.1080/14606925.2017.1352656

Pereira Pérez, Z. (2011). Los diseños de método mixto en la investigación en educación: una experiencia concreta. Revista Electrónica Educare, 15(1), 15–29. https://doi.org/10.15359/ree.15-1.2

Roberts, A. (2012). CEBE briefing guide series: recording and reflecting on. System.

Román, M., & Diéz, E. (2000). El curriculum como el desarrollo de los procesos cognitivos. Revista Enfoques Educacionales, 2(2), 22.

Sakar, S. (2012). The role of Information and Communication Technologies (ICTs) in higher education. International Journal of Scientific Research, 3(3), 83–85. https://doi.org/10.15373/22778179/march2014/28

Saldarriaga, A. (1996). Aprender arquitectura: un manual de supervivencia (1 ed). Corona.

Tobon, S. (2013). Formacion integral y competencias y pensamiento complejo currículo didactivo evaluación. In Desarrolo histórico del concepto de competencias (pp. 53–84).

Webster, H. (2004). Facilitating critically reflective learning: excavating the role of the design tutor. Art, Design & Communication in Higher Education, 2(3), 101–111. https://doi.org/10.1386/adch.2.3.101/0