Necessary and Desirable Software Studio Framework Para-

The participants in this series of interviews discussed many aspects of studio edu- cation which they felt contribute to studio education, as seen earlier in Table 4.4. Following the same logic as the previous chapter, certain parameters that fall above

Table 4.6: The software studio framework’s dominant parameters

Categories Occurrences Parameters Study 1* _{Study 2}†

Physical environment

14 - Open environment

14 10 Flexible space (Reconfigurable furniture)

5 - Students control aesthetic factors (lighting, heating) 15 8 Shared spaces 8 - Individual spaces 7 - Social spaces 7 6 Private spaces - 8 Multiple spaces Facilitation of studio

8 - Studio belongs to the students 6 - Staff do not dictate use of space 7 - 24 hour access

6 - Food and drink allowed

5 8 Availability of multiple expert staff 5 - Small group size (about 10) - 6 Expected time spent in the studio - 5 Define own projects

- 5 Learning to learn - 10 Flexible facilitation Modes of

education

13 9 Flexible learning/Switch approach based on activity 11 12 Mentoring/coaching

12 10 Peer-learning 5 - Impromptu teaching - 13 Project-based learning - 13 Real-world projects Awareness 13 - Visual work

13 10 Externalising thinking/Displaying work 6 - Visual history of progress

12 10 Peer’s experiences/Easily observe other people’s work 8 8 Social interactions

Critique 12 8 Direct feedback 11 11 Developing ideas

11 14 Multiple formats (formal/informal, individual/group) 10 - Peer-coaching

- 13 Peer critique - 10 Continuous critique Culture 10 7 Sharing

14 8 Social

6 - Treated like second home 10 8 Good work ethic

6 7 Peer-support 8 - Serendipity - 7 Permission to fail Individual’s characteristics 9 - Personalisation of space 10 5 Private and quiet spaces Inspiration 13 - Proximity to other people

5 - Relevant available media 5 - Library of liked/fun things 5 - Playful space

Collaboration 6 7 Impromptu collaborative spaces 7 10 Supporting equipment

- 12 Group size considerations - 11 Soft skills

- 7 Equal effort

* _{Parameters that arose from the analysis of the first interview-based study}

in chapter 3: interviews with designers, architects, and artists.

a two-thirds majority threshold could be considered as essential by the interview participants. Those that fall below that threshold could be considered desirable. These parameters are highlighted in Table 4.6. The parameters in this table high- lighted because the majority of the participants discussed them, however, that does not entail that they are necessarily critical to studio education, just that they were popular discussion points. Aspects that the participants did explicitly state as the most important aspect are presented below in section 4.3.4.

4.3.2 Relationships Between Parameters

This section focuses on relationships between parameters found in this chapters analysis alone. A comparative look between this chapter and the previous one follows in the next section (4.3.3).

Real projects:

The participants in this chapter put a lot of emphasis into ‘Project-based learning’ (B1-B13). Of these, almost all (B1-B12, B14) also talked about how these should

simulate or replicate ‘Real-world projects’, which are projects intended to simulate real-world practice on some dimension (e.g. scale of project, simulated or real clients etc.). Further to this, many of the participants stated that ‘Private spaces’, are important to these real-world projects, to support the students if they have sensitive projects or are meeting with a client, for example.

Students Justifying Work:

Some participants discussed how the development of students’ soft skills was im- portant (B1-B3, B5, B7-B8, B10-B12, B14-B15). It was frequently discussed in prox-

imity to the use of critiques to ‘Develop ideas’ and part of building up a culture of critique amongst the students through ‘Peer critique’. During critiques of various types, students are expected to learn to be able to effectively communicate their ideas, problems, and solutions.

Counteracting Noisy Environments:

Similar to the previous chapter’s interview participants, this chapter’s participants discussed how larger environments can suffer from noise when too many people are co-located in a small space.

To counteract this, some participants suggested the use of ‘Private and quiet spaces’ (B1, B4, B6, B9-B10), enabling students to get on with quiet or individual

work if they required it. One participant made the observation that his students are already working around this problem by wearing earphones if it gets too noisy in the studio space (B4).

Flexible Collaboration:

Discussions with the participants about the flexibility of a studio space were quite common (B2, B4-B7, B10-B11, B13-B15). At the same time, most of those parti-

cipants also talked about ‘Supporting equipment’ for collaboration (B4-B7, B10-

B11, B13, B15). A common example within these participants was their discussions

around a piece of equipment: whiteboards (B4-B5, B7, B11-B13, B15). Another

example includes the use of moveable partitions (B4, B10), which can be set up

and taken down as needed.

Culture of Critique:

When the participants implicitly or explicitly discussed the use of ‘Continuous critique’ (B1-B3, B5-B6, B8-B9, B11-B12, B14), it was in conjunction with the use of

Design Reviews and Desk Critiques (see section 2.2.3 for more information on the types of critique). Design Juries happened infrequently, or at the end of a project (if at all). Participants often discussed encouraging a culture of critique amongst their students, with the intention that ‘Peer critique’ would occur autonomously and frequently within the studio (B1-B3, B5-B6, B8-B9, B14).

These participants also discussed the use of ‘Multiple formats’ of critique (B1-B3,

Making ‘Permission to fail’ Feasible:

A somewhat common parameter was providing the students ‘Permission to fail’ (B1, B3-B4, B9, B11-B13). The goal for students is normally not to fail at what they

are doing, but these participants acknowledged that this was actually an important step to learning when working with complex ideas or projects. The participants often stated that if you know why you have failed at something, then that in itself is a success.

This notion was often discussed by participants that discussed the importance of ‘Mentoring/coaching’. To better facilitate this notion of giving permission to fail, the continuously critiquing work and coaching the students should catch problems earlier and provide he students with a valuable learning experience as they navigate around this problem.