Teaching and Experimenting with Architectural Design

Kate Baker University of Portsmouth, School of Architecture, Portsmouth, UK 217

Conclusions

Collaboration

• Disability Awareness. The disabled artists demonstrated to the students that they
  were not ‘other people’ with problems that had to be dealt with along with other
  building regulation issues, and taking disability issues seriously can be a creative
  process in design. It also taught us that a disability to us is not necessarily a
  disability to the person concerned.


• Perception of space. It helped us understand the complexities of sensory aware-
  ness. Although we started off with an emphasis on one sense to investigate in
  each group, it became apparent just how much our sensory perceptions are linked
  and interdependent. Exploration through movement and direct physical involve-
  ment altered the students’ perceptions.


• Dance and music played a major part in the cohesion of the groups.


• Crossover of artistic disciplines during the project stimulated much conversation
  and debate. This was not always harmonious, and added considerable edge to the
  project. Having the performance as an end point provided us with a common aim
  and deadline which gave the work a focus and direction.


• The artists encouraged the students to think beyond conventional drawing to
  express their ideas, particularly by testing the potential for performative nature
  of drawing, and experimenting with movement and time.


• Pre-meetings. Over a period of 5 months, a core team met periodically. It was a
  challenge, as although we had heard of other similar projects such as “Between
  the Lines”^2 there were few precedents, particularly with involvement of disabled
  artists. The sessions were very productive. The main challenge was to work our
  way through the complexity of aims of all concerned.

Student Experience

• Group Work was successful for the following reasons:
  
  
  1. Year 2 is a good year for experiment. Students have acquired some basic skills
     and are not yet focussed on their degrees.
  
  
  2. Although we had large numbers, the architecture students were in the studio
     groups they had been in for the first semester, and were already familiar with
     each other. Interior students had to be allocated to each, and integrated
     well.
  
  
  3. Empowerment of students. Groups worked autonomously with tutors interven-
     ing as advisors only.
  
  
  4. Warm up/ice breaker sessions put everyone on a similar footing from the
     start.
  
  
  5. The diversity of the project allowed students with different strengths to flour-
     ish, and participate.
  
  
  
  


• Working with the artists. By engaging with artists from a range of disciplines,
  students were able to explore their own perceptions of space that took them
  beyond visual understanding which currently dominates in architectural and
  interior education.