I submitted my third study for approval - Understanding studio culture in design education

Background and Purpose

Formal design education typically includes a studio, which encompasses a physical space and social context in which education occurs, a style of master/apprentice teaching and learning, and projects that require making artifacts (physical or otherwise.) Studio-based teaching and learning is unique, and existing research indicates that efficacy of learning may depend on peer-to-peer culture and community as much as teaching ability. While certain aspects of studio education—particularly critique (Blair 2006; Dannels 2005; Orr & Shreeve 2017) and creative pedagogy (Schön 1983; Cross 2006; Cennamo & Brandt 2012)—have received scholarly attention, the affective and cultural dimensions of studio learning remain comparatively underexamined.

Research in art and design education has primarily explored the history of the studio (and typically in the context of Bauhaus education of the 1920s and 1930s), and skill and knowledge acquisition (generally focused on architecture, and frequently in the context of Schon’s perspectives on reflective practice.) Investigation of studio culture has been limited primarily to how it relates to learning how to design, not towards growing into a designer. Understanding the studio culture that surrounds this learning of design is a critical aspect of design theory, and can provide insight into how students gain creative confidence.

Additionally, design studio culture in education still relies on many of those older constructs of Bauhaus education, yet students now experience the world in very different ways than they did 100 years ago. Education has become much more student-focused and attuned to the emotional wants and needs of students, and students who are entering higher education directly from high-school have experienced a radically different world than previous generations. Design studio culture can only be productive if it recognizes and, as appropriate, adapts to the way students experience the world.

A surface-level observation of the physical space shows that students often claim areas of the studio as their personal workspace for a long duration. They work on their own projects or in small groups, and are surrounded by artifacts that have been made. They develop shared rituals and ways of being, and as is the case with any shared space, situations occur and are experienced and resolved. The space appears collaborative, but the development of craft skills is also highly personal, and likely emotionally charged. And while this studio culture is influenced by formal educational methods (such as lecture, demonstrations, in-class critique, and meeting with a professor), students spend long periods of time in the space without the presence of an instructor. It is a dynamic space that is, in part, “controlled” by the students, and it likely plays a large role in a student’s ability to gain creative confidence and build a sense of self in the context of their experiences with making things.

Understanding this space (both physical and conceptual) will help highlight opportunities for improved learning experiences, both as discrete interactions and as more fundamental pedagogical changes; this is the focus of this study–to understand the qualities of design studio culture, and how they show up in an educational context.

Research Goals

The purpose of this study is to answer this primary research question:

In the context of higher education, what do design students feel constitutes a positive or negative design studio culture, and how do they describe that culture manifested in a studio learning environment?

Design educators primarily leverage older models of studio, and qualities of traditional design studio may not "fit" in the lived experiences of today's design students. Understanding what students perceive to be an effective studio culture will provide visibility into how educators can evolve the studio learning practice to be more effective for teaching and learning.

Approach

Research data will be gathered through cultural probes (Gaver, Dunne, & Pacenti, 1999), which are exploratory, participant-driven tools designed to elicit reflective and creative responses about lived experience. Probes “enable researchers to get closer to understanding in-situ,” and are considered legitimate research tools that can be used to “understand lived experience and promote participant voice, gather requirements, seek formative feedback, and inspire creative ideation.” Probes take a variety of forms, which include journalling, sketching, video recording, and photograph capture (Ibrahim, et al., 2024).

These cultural probes will be disseminated in a manner proposed by the Experience-Sampling Method (Larson & Csikszentmihalyi, 1992). Throughout the duration of the study, a student will periodically receive a text message asking them to take a photo or video and upload it to a private shared drive. For example, a student may receive a text asking them to film something in their studio that is bothering them, or to provide a tour of a part of the studio that they find most inspiring. This approach is appropriate in this research because:

• Some existing research indicates that physical space, territory, and privacy are intertwined and salient in a studio context, and images and video will illustrate these contextual elements clearly
• It’s hypothesized that studio culture involves the relationship between designers and the things in the space (and the space itself), and this will capture the richness of that environment
• Student-driven selection criteria provides a view into priority–what they choose to respond with is a clear indication of issues students feel are shaping their educational experiences
• Using photos and videos has been normalized by social media, and participants are likely to understand how to capture digital media, upload them, and describe them with little or no training