TTeecchhnnoollooggiiccaall UUnniivveerrssiittyy DDuubblliinn AARRRROOWW@@TTUU DDuubblliinn Theses LTTC Programme Outputs 2005-01-01 CCrriittttiinngg tthhee CCrriitt iinn tthhee EEdduuccaattiioonn ooff AArrcchhiitteeccttss:: FFrroomm BBaauuhhaauuss ttoo BBoollttoonn SSttrreeeett Patrick Flynn Technological University Dublin, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://arrow.tudublin.ie/ltcdis Part of the Other Teacher Education and Professional Development Commons RReeccoommmmeennddeedd CCiittaattiioonn Flynn, Patrick: Critting the "crit" in the education of architects: from Bauhaus to Bolton Street. Dissertation. Dublin, Technologicl University Dublin, 2005. This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the LTTC Programme Outputs at ARROW@TU Dublin. It has been accepted for inclusion in Theses by an authorized administrator of ARROW@TU Dublin. For more information, please contact [email protected], [email protected]. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 4.0 License Critting the' crit' in the education of architects: from bauhaus to bolton street A thesis submitted to the Dublin Institute of Technology in part fulfilment of the requirement for the award of Masters (MA) in Third Level Learning and Teaching By Patrick Flynn August 2005 Supervisor: Anne Murphy DIT Learning and Teaching Centre, Directorate of Academic Affairs Declaration I hereby declare that the material which is submitted in this thesis towards the award of masters (MA) in Third Level Teaching and Learning is entirely my own work and has not been submitted for any academic assessment other than part fulfilment of the award named above. Signature of candidate Date Abstract This investigative study is concerned with examining the current methods of assessment of architecture students in the system known as the 'crit' and the associated methods of giving students feedback on their designs in a public forum. The aim of the research is to identify the main weaknesses of the crit system and to explore alternatives which perhaps would have more sustainable and transparent methods of assessment and feedback. Personal motivation for the research sprang from concerns regarding both the effectiveness of the crit from the pedagogical perspective of student learning and from concerns about it as a transparent and useful system of assessment for professional architects. Policy concerns in the research were informed by three immediate issues: an in-house concern regarding the relatively high number of examination appeals from architecture students compared to other design degrees which use a crit system, a national concern, based on the NQAI requirements that modules be expressed in terms of learning outcomes, and more global concerns for the five year undergraduate system of training architects in Europe generally arising from the preference for a three-year plus two-year degree systems manifest in the Bologna Accord. The research approach locates itself broadly within the postmodernist critical theory framework which acknowledges the complexity of the issues under study and the need for both the 'distant' and the 'close-up'. The research design is basically 'bricolage' which allows for nonlinear exploration of discrete but related aspects of the study and which facilitates a range of researcher stances including detached interpreter, insider-intervener and dialogic commentator. A literature review, pedagogic interventions in class-based teaching and in-depth interviews with architecture graduates from DIT and other colleges were used. The research findings show a remarkably similar experience of architecture education through the crit system with broadly negative opinions on the value of the crit as a learning experience. The fmdings from the class-based interventions indicate that the crit system which involves large numbers of students and staff is highly ineffective compared to small group crits and that the combination of oral and visual assessment feedback on designs is more effective than the traditional oral feedback system. The research offers a number of proposals regarding improvements to the crit system and suggest areas where further research is urgently required to make the system of assessment more effective and transparent and to ease the training system for architects towards the inevitable structural changes resulting from the Bologna Accord. Acknowledgements I would like to thank my supervisor Anne Murphy for all her helpful support and incisive comments throughout the process. I am grateful to my colleagues in the school of architecture and in particular the students of the academic year 2003/04. I am indebted to the interviewees who participated and who gave added impetus to the research at a vital stage. A sincere thanks and appreciation to Catherine Bates for her encouragement and patience. Table of Contents Chapter 1 Introduction Background-the researcher's positionality ................................................ 1 Broad Research Aim in Context ............................................................ 2 Summary of Chapters ........................................................................ 4 Chapter 2 Context, Rationale, Aims, Objectives and Ethics Introduction .....................................................................................7 Genesis and development of the term 'architect' ......................................... 9 The architecture course and the role of the professional bodies ........................ 10 Origins and ideology of teaching methods for architects ................................ 13 Description of the crit process ............................................................... 16 Aims and objectives of the study ............................................................ 20 Ethical issues ................................................................................... 21 Summary ....................................................................................... 22 Chapter 3 Research Design, Methodology and Methods Introduction .................................................................................... 24 Research paradigms ........................................................................... 25 Bricolage : a justification ..................................................................... 28 Outline of research design ................................................................... 31 Summary ....................................................................................... 37 Chapter 4 Literature Review Introduction .................................................................................... 38 Organisation of the crit ....................................................................... 39 Dominance of the crit ........................................................................ .44 Value of language and learning ............................................................ 46 The crit expert panel .......................................................................... 47 Type of knowledge ........................................................................... 49 Teaching of design ............................................................................ 52 Summary ....................................................................................... 54 Chapter 5 Findings: Interviews Presentation of interviews .................................................................... 56 Class atmosphere and peer learning ......................................................... 57 Students perception of the role of the staff. ............................................... 60 Openness to learning: emotional impact ................................................... 64 Openness to learning at the crit .............................................................. 68 Perception of the crit as assessment ......................................................... 70 Perceived centrality of the crit ............................................................... 72 Learning in the crit. ........................................................................... 75 Atmosphere of the crit ........................................................................ 78 Methods of teaching design .................................................................. 81 Defining and protecting knowledge and the cult status of architecture ................ 89 Chapter 6 Presentation of Findings: Micro Action Interventions Introduction .................................................................................... 92 Layout of space ................................................................................ 94 Verbal concepts .v. visual comments ....................................................... 103 Who participates at crits ...................................................................... 106 What is remembered at a crit ................................................................ 107 Propositions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... 109 Chapter 7 Discnssion of Findings Introduction .................................................................................... 113 The ethnographical/ sociometry situation of the students/staff. ........................ 114 The openness of the student to the learning experience ................................. 118 The centrality of the crit in the learning and assessment of students ................... 120 The origins and methodology of teaching design ......................................... 122 The definition and protection of the knowledge and status of architecture ............ 124 Summary ....................................................................................... 127 Chapter 8 Conclusions & Recommendations Introduction .................................................................................... 128 Shortcomings of the research ................................................................ 129 Main findings .................................................................................. 130 Benefits of study .............................................................................. 132 Conclusion ..................................................................................... 134 Bibliography .................................................................................. 136 List of figures Figure 1 Crit as observed in hour 0 to 1 ............................................. 95 Figure 2 Crit as observed in hour 1 to 2 ............................................. 96 Figure 3 Crit as observed in hour 2 to 3 ............................................. 97 Figure 4 Crit as observed in hour 3 + ................................................ 98 Figure 5 New layout hour 0 to 1 and 1 to 2 ......................................... 100 Figure 6 New layout hour 2 to 3 and 3 + ........................................... 101 Figure 7 Photograph of crit in progress ............................................. 102 Barlett School of Architecture, 2005 Available from: www.architect.com/schoolblog [accessed 18.08.05] Figure 8 Concept diagram of building .............................................. 103 Figure 9 Same building as finished drawing ....................................... 103 Figure 10 Growth in availability of material.. ....................................... 134 from Architectural Review, August 2004:39 CHAPTERl INTRODUCTION The researcher's positionality I teach in the architecture course in DIT and most of my contact hours are in the design studio. I graduated as an architect in 1986 from UCD and after qualifying I worked in the U.S. for a number of years. My experience abroad made me realise that the same system of education for architects was widely used in most countries. In the practice office in the U.S. there were graduates from Germany, France, Switzerland, Holland, Argentina and Chile as well as American graduates from the universities of Harvard, Yale and Cornell. It was interesting that all the architects from many different cultures had proceeded through, or been processed through, a very similar method of education. The primary method used for both learning and assessment in all of these contexts was the 'crit'. One only has to say the word 'crit' to an architect and straight away, like a universal language, the architect, from whatever nationality you are talking to, knows what you mean. What is interesting is that this method of education has been dominant and unchallenged for so long! The role of the architect and the available technology, both in terms of teaching and practice, has altered dramatically over this period of time, yet the teaching method has remained relatively untouched. The time gap between my education to my current teaching role stretches to more than fifteen years, and despite fairly radical changes to the profession and the needs of industry, the same method of exploring architecture still applies to the teaching of