Skip to content
1981
Design and Interdisciplinarity
  • ISSN: 2055-2106
  • E-ISSN: 2055-2114

Abstract

Studio coursework that focuses on real-world problems and stakeholder collaboration is an integral component of interdisciplinary design education. In the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic and increased interest in flexible models of content delivery, we conceptualize the studio course as central to interdisciplinary undergraduate education. Leveraging the pandemic as an opportunity, we argue that changes to studio coursework have created new modalities for design education. By focusing on adaptive, iterative studio coursework during each year of the undergraduate degree, we allow for hybridization of undergraduate design coursework. We present an example of the studio-centred model in action at a large polytechnic university in the United States. Our results may be beneficial to educators and practitioners interested in anchoring undergraduate curricula within interdisciplinary studio work, and for ensuring that interdisciplinary studios are able to respond to the twenty-first-century life skills essential for producing competitive graduates on the global market. We present studio-centred coursework as a model for hybridizing design education. We emphasize collaboration and discovery as key skills to develop in undergraduates. We develop this model through: (1) collaborating with industry partners to determine problem spaces and mentor students; (2) building interdisciplinary teams of students and faculty and (3) hybridizing lecture-based disciplinary coursework. We anchor our results with three years of programme assessment data. By integrating faculty, students and industry partners within the studio-centred model, this study demonstrates how hybridized design-led education can equip students for interdisciplinary collaboration as they progress towards their career goals. Furthermore, we provide discussion on how these competencies are evaluated by stakeholders as desirable skills. Students’ overall positive responses to the studio-centred coursework are captured in our quantitative data. Stakeholder responses come via focus groups held once per semester. Using studio coursework to centre design curricula allows for increased hybridization of the curriculum, as students use studio courses and capstones to apply knowledge, develop projects and attain professional mentorship. Emphasis on societal impact guides students to emphasize the broader impacts of their designs. Using quantitative and qualitative data, we provide a model that integrates research and education in undergrad curricula using a studio-centred model.

© 2023 Intellect Ltd
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1386/dbs_00048_1
2023-04-25
2026-04-17

Metrics

Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Anthony, B.,, Kamaludin, A.,, Romli, A.,, Raffei, A. F. M.,, Phon, D. N. A.,, Abdullah, A., and Ming, G. L.. ( 2020;), ‘ Blended learning adoption and implementation in higher education: A theoretical and systematic review. ’, Technology, Knowledge and Learning, 27, pp. 531–78.
     [Google Scholar]
  2. Arnold, A. J.,, Keyel, J.,, Soysal, A.,, Kretser, M.,, Sagheb, S., and Rikakis, T.. ( 2021;), ‘ Toward an integrative professional and personal competency-based learning model for inclusive workforce development. ’, The Journal on Systemics, Cybernetics and Informatics (JSCI), 19:6, pp. 22–29.
     [Google Scholar]
  3. Bailey, M.,, Chatzakis, E.,, Spencer, N.,, Adey, K. L.,, Sterling, N., and Smith, N.. ( 2019;), ‘ A design-led approach to transforming wicked problems into design situations and opportunities. ’, Journal of Design, Business & Society, 5:1, pp. 95–127.
     [Google Scholar]
  4. Børte, K.,, Nesje, K., and Lillejord, S.. ( 2020;), ‘ Barriers to student active learning in higher education. ’, Teaching in Higher Education, pp. 1–19.
     [Google Scholar]
  5. Bradbury, H.. ( 2015), The Sage Handbook of Action Research, London:: SAGE publications;.
     [Google Scholar]
  6. Cameron, B.,, Crawley, E., and Selva, D.. ( 2016), Systems Architecture: Strategy and Product Development for Complex Systems, Hoboken, NJ:: Pearson Education;.
     [Google Scholar]
  7. Clarke, E., and Ashhurst, C.. ( 2018;), ‘ Making collective learning coherent: An adaptive approach to the practice of transdisciplinary pedagogy. ’, in D. Fam,, L. Neuhauser,, and P. Gibbs. (eds), Transdisciplinary Theory, Practice and Education, Cham:: Springer;, pp. 151–65.
     [Google Scholar]
  8. Coughlan, P., and Coghlan, D.. ( 2002;), ‘ Action research for operations management. ’, International Journal of Operations & Production Management. 22:2, pp. 220–40.
     [Google Scholar]
  9. Ellström, P.-E.. ( 2007;), ‘ Knowledge creation through interactive research: A learning perspective. ’, HHS-07 Conference, Jönköping University, May, pp. 8–11, https://www.ltu.se/cms_fs/1.24923!/per-erik%20ellstr%C3%B6m.pdf. Accessed 24 March 2023.
     [Google Scholar]
  10. Halverson, L. R., and Graham, C. R.. ( 2019;), ‘ Learner engagement in blended learning environments: A conceptual framework. ’, Online Learning, 23:2, pp. 145–78.
     [Google Scholar]
  11. Hokanson, B., and Hendrickson, M.. ( 2020;), ‘ Case study: Online in the studio during the pandemic ... but significant challenges still exist. ’, Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 21:3, pp. 51–53.
     [Google Scholar]
  12. Iranmanesh, A., and Onur, Z.. ( 2021;), ‘ Mandatory virtual design studio for all: Exploring the transformations of architectural education amidst the global pandemic. ’, International Journal of Art & Design Education, 40:1, pp. 251–67.
     [Google Scholar]
  13. Jussila, J.,, Raitanen, J.,, Partanen, A.,, Tuomela, V.,, Siipola, V., and Kunnari, I.. ( 2020;), ‘ Rapid product development in university-industry collaboration: Case study of a smart design project. ’, Technology Innovation Management Review, 10:3, pp. 49–59.
     [Google Scholar]
  14. Mann, L.,, Chang, R.,, Chandrasekaran, S.,, Coddington, A.,, Daniel, S.,, Cook, E.,, Crossin, E.,, Cosson, B.,, Turner, J., and Mazzurco, A.. ( 2021;), ‘ From problem-based learning to practice-based education: A framework for shaping future engineers. ’, European Journal of Engineering Education, 46:1, pp. 27–47.
     [Google Scholar]
  15. Martin, F.,, Chen, Y.,, Moore, R. L., and Westine, C. D.. ( 2020;), ‘ Systematic review of adaptive learning research designs, context, strategies, and technologies from 2009 to 2018. ’, Educational Technology Research and Development, 68:4, pp. 1903–29.
     [Google Scholar]
  16. Mathiassen, L.. ( 2002;), ‘ Collaborative practice research. ’, Information Technology & People, 15:4, pp. 321–45.
     [Google Scholar]
  17. NASA ( 2017), Nasa: Systems Engineering Handbook, Washington, DC:: NASA;.
     [Google Scholar]
  18. Petersen, K.,, Gencel, C.,, Asghari, N.,, Baca, D., and Betz, S.. ( 2014;), ‘ Action research as a model for industry-academia collaboration in the software engineering context. ’, Proceedings of the 2014 International Workshop on Long-Term Industrial Collaboration on Software Engineering (WISE ‘14), Vasteras, Sweden, 16 September, New York:: Association for Computing Machinery;, pp. 55–62, https://doi.org/10.1145/2647648.2647656.
     [Google Scholar]
  19. Raes, A.,, Detienne, L.,, Windey, I., and Depaepe, F.. ( 2020;), ‘ A systematic literature review on synchronous hybrid learning: Gaps identified. ’, Learning Environments Research, 23:3, pp. 269–90.
     [Google Scholar]
  20. Reason, P., and Bradbury, H.. ( 2007), The SAGE Handbook of Action Research: Participative Inquiry and Practice, London:: SAGE Publications;.
     [Google Scholar]
  21. Rowe, P.. ( 2002;), ‘ Professional design education and practice. ’, in A. Salama,, W. O’Reilly, and K. Noschis. (eds), Architectural Education Today: Cross-Cultural Perspectives, Lausanne:: Comportements;, pp. 25–30.
     [Google Scholar]
  22. Sandberg, A.,, Pareto, L., and Arts, T.. ( 2011;), ‘ Agile collaborative research: Action principles for industry-academia collaboration. ’, IEEE Software, 28:4, pp. 74–83.
     [Google Scholar]
  23. Sannö, A.,, Öberg, A. E.,, Flores-Garcia, E., and Jackson, M.. ( 2019;), ‘ Increasing the impact of industry–academia collaboration through co-production. ’, Technology Innovation Management Review, 9:4, pp. 37–47.
     [Google Scholar]
  24. Schön, D. A.. ( 2017), The Reflective Practitioner: How Professionals Think in Action, London:: Routledge;.
     [Google Scholar]
  25. Thakker, U., and Shrivastav, S.. ( 2022;), ‘ Overcoming pedagogical challenges in product design education during the pandemic. ’, Proceedings of the Design Society, 2, pp. 2393–402.
     [Google Scholar]
  26. van Kampen, S.,, Galperin, A.,, Jager, K.,, Noel, L.-A., and Strube, J.. ( 2022;), ‘ Where do we go from here? Rethinking the design studio after the COVID-19 pandemic. ’, in D. Lockton,, P. Lloyd, and S. Lenzi. (eds), DRS2022, Bilbao, Spain, 25 June–3 July, London:: Design Research Society;.
     [Google Scholar]
  27. Wallin, J.,, Isaksson, O.,, Larsson, A., and Elfström, B.-O.. ( 2014;), ‘ Bridging the gap between university and industry: Three mechanisms for innovation efficiency. ’, International Journal of Innovation and Technology Management, 11:1, https://doi.org/10.1142/S0219877014400057.
     [Google Scholar]
  28. Westberg, L., and Polk, M.. ( 2016;), ‘ The role of learning in transdisciplinary research: Moving from a normative concept to an analytical tool through a practice-based approach. ’, Sustainability Science, 11:3, pp. 385–97.
     [Google Scholar]
  29. Wrigley, C., and Mosely, G.. ( 2022), Design Thinking Pedagogy: Facilitating Innovation and Impact in Tertiary Education, Abingdon:: Taylor & Francis;.
     [Google Scholar]
  30. Sagheb, Shahabedin,, Walkup, Katie, and Smith, Robert. ( 2023;), ‘ Studio-centred coursework as a model for hybridized design education. ’, Journal of Design, Business & Society, Special Issue: ‘Design and Interdisciplinarity’ , 9:1, pp. 103–25, https://doi.org/10.1386/dbs_00048_1
     [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1386/dbs_00048_1
Loading
Studio-centred coursework as a model for hybridized design education
Journal of Design, Business & Society 9, 103 (2023); https://doi.org/10.1386/dbs_00048_1
/content/journals/10.1386/dbs_00048_1
/content/journals/10.1386/dbs_00048_1
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Article
Keyword(s): action research; cross-sector collaboration and communication; hybrid learning environment; interdisciplinary research; iterative prototyping; project-based learning; sociotechnical innovation; studio-centred curricula

Most Cited Most Cited RSS feed

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a success
Invalid data
An error occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error
Please enter a valid_number test