Investigating Architecture Studio Culture in the UK: A Progress Report

Figures & data

Table 1 Characteristics of millennials Adapted from Brown (2000); Frand (2000); Oblinger (2003); Raines (2002); in Jonas-Dwyer and Pospisil (2004)

Millennial Characteristics	Learning Preferences	Communications Preferences	Teaching & Learning Strategy
Confident “Computers aren't technology”	Technology	Electronic	e.g. Include opportunities for e-communication and interaction
Hopeful-optimistic “Reality no longer real”	Entertainment & excitement	Positive	e.g. Include opportunities for experiential and authentic learning activities
Inclusive (team-oriented) “Staying connected” “Zero tolerance for delays”	Teamwork	Mutual respect — being treated with respect	e.g. Include group activities Allow friends to work together
Goal & achievement oriented “Doing rather than knowing”	Structure	Motivational and goal focused	e.g. Include opportunities for experiential and authentic learning activities Set goals and provide frequent feedback
Civic-minded	Experiential activities	Respectful — treating others with respect	e.g. Build in opportunities for community related learning

Table 2 Institutions where interviews and focus groups were carried out

Mission Group	Programme Provision & Structure	Interview	Focus Group(s)	Studios	Faculty
1 Million +	Parts1,2 & 3;UG-3 FT & 4PT;PG-2FT & 3PT		▯	Studios allocated by daily timetable; open 07:00–23:00	Art & Design
2 University Alliance	Parts1,2 & 3;UG-3 FT & 5/6 PT; PG — 2 FT & 3/4 PT	▯	▯	Separate UG and PG studios; 24 hr access	Built Environment
3 Russell	Parts1,2 & 3;UG-3 FT; PG -I year in practice + 1 FT	▯	▯	Some personal workspaces; year/unit studios; 24 hr access	Arts
4 Russell	Parts 1 & 2; UG — 3FT; PG — 2FT	▯	▯	Shared open studios; 24 hr access	Stand alone school
5 Post ′92	Parts1,2 & 3;UG-3 FT & 5PT;PG-2FT & 3PT	▯		Studios allocated by daily timetable; open 07:00–21:00	Engineering, Science & Built Environment
6 Russell	Parts1,2 & 3;UG-3 FT;PG-2FT	▯		Dedicated 1^st yr studio, others shared open access; 24 hr access	Architecture & Engineering
7 Russell	Parts1,2 & 3;UG-3 FT (or 4 Sandwich); PG-2 FT	▯		Open 07:00-midnight	Built Environment
8 Million +	Parts1,2 & 3;UG-3 FT & 4PT;PG-2FT & 3 PT	▯		Dedicated 1^styr studio, others shared open access; open 08:00–21:00	Architecture & Design
9 Russell/ UA	Parts1,2 & 3;UG-3 FT;PG-2FT	▯		Shared open studios; restricted opening hours	Architecture & Environment / Art & Design

Figure 1 Constituency of the three student focus groups at Institution 1

Figure 2 Constituency of the single focus group at Institution 2

Figure 3 Constituency of the two focus groups at Institution 3

Figure 4 Constituency of the single focus group at Institution 4

Table 3 What year of undergraduate study are you currently in? Please select the answer that most closely equates to your year of study

Year	Number	%
UG/Part I/Year 1	92	30.9%
UG/Part I/Year 2	119	39.9%
UG/Part I/Year 3	70	23.5%
UG/Part I/Year 4	11	3.7%
UG/Part I/Year 5	1	0.3%
UG/Part I/Year Out	5	1.7%

Table 4 What year of postgraduate study are you currently in? Please select the answer that most closely equates to your year of study

Year	Number	%
PG/Part II/Year 1	53	42.7%
PG/Part II/Year 2	52	41.9%
PG/Part II/Year 3	1	0.8%
PG/Part II/Year 4	4	3.2%
Post Part II/MA/MPhil/PhD/Part III	9	7.3%
Other (please describe below)	5	4%

Table 5 How much do you think you learn from other students? (Undergraduate respondents)

	A great deal	A fair amount	An average amount	Not much	Nothing	Response Count
Other UG students	38.0%(106)	41.6%(116)	14.0%(39)	5.7%(16)	0.7%(2)	279
PG students	21.4%(60)	30.4%(85)	16.8%(47)	17.5%(49)	13.9%(39)	280

Table 6 How much do you think you learn/learned from other students at Part I and at Part II? (Postgraduate respondents)

	A great deal	A fair amount	An average amount	Not much	Nothing	Response Count
Part I	37.7% (40)	38.7% (41)	13.2% (14)	8.5% (9)	1.9% (2)	106
Part II	40.6% (43)	41.5% (44)	10.4% (11)	4.7% (5)	2.8% (3)	106

Table 7 How do the following discussions with other students benefit you/your studies? Please rate each (undergraduate respondents)

	A great deal	A fair amount	Sometimes	Not much	Not at all	Response Count
Sharing ideas	51.4% (148)	36.8% (106)	9.4% (27)	2.1% (6)	0.3% (1)	288
Sharing references/ precedents	46.5% (134)	34.4% (99)	14.9% (43)	3.5% (10)	0.7% (2)	288
Gaining outside opinions	52.4% (151)	32.3% (93)	15.3% (44)	0.0% (0)	0.0% (0)	288
Gaining knowledge	45.8% (132)	36.1% (104)	13.9% (40)	2.8% (8)	1.4% (4)	288
Technical	36.1% (104)	36.1% (104)	19.4% (56)	6.9% (20)	1.4% (4)	288
Software advice	41.0% (118)	30.9% (89)	20.5% (59)	6.3% (18)	1.4% (4)	288
Presentation methods	28.8%(83)	33.7% (97)	26.4% (76)	9.0% (26)	2.1% (6)	288

Table 8 How did the following discussions with other students benefit you / your studies on your Undergraduate/Part I course? Please rate each (postgraduate respondents)

	A great deal	A fair amount	Sometimes	Not much	Not at all	Response Count
Sharing ideas	43.4% (46)	34.9% (37)	15.1% (16)	5.7% (6)	0.9% (1)	106
Sharing references/ precedents	44.3% (47)	33.0% (35)	15.1% (16)	6.6% (7)	0.9% (1)	106
Gaining outside opinions	47.2% (50)	29.2% (31)	15.1% (16)	7.5% (8)	0.9% (1)	106
Gaining knowledge	38.7% (41)	35.8% (38)	19.8% (21)	4.7% (5)	0.9% (1)	106
Technical	32.1% (34)	30.2% (32)	21.7% (23)	12.3% (13)	3.8% (4)	106
Software advice	41.5% (44)	30.2% (32)	16.0% (17)	9.4% (10)	2.8% (3)	106
Presentation methods	30.2% (32)	33.0% (35)	16.0% (17)	16.0% (17)	4.7% (5)	106

Jonas-Dwyer D. & Pospisil R. (2004). The millennial effect: Implications for academic development. In: Transforming Knowledge into Wisdom: Holistic approaches to teaching and learning. Proceedings of HERDSA (The Higher Education Research and Development Society of Australasia) Conference, 2004. Miri, Sarawak: Research and Development in Higher Education.

 Google Scholar