You're using an outdated browser. Please upgrade to a modern browser for the best experience.
Submitted Successfully!
Thank you for your contribution! You can also upload a video entry or images related to this topic. For video creation, please contact our Academic Video Service.
Version Summary Created by Modification Content Size Created at Operation
1 Ashraf M. Salama -- 1663 2025-09-08 04:38:54 |
2 formatted Vicky Zhou Meta information modification 1663 2025-09-08 04:45:19 |

Video Upload Options

We provide professional Academic Video Service to translate complex research into visually appealing presentations. Would you like to try it?
No, upload directly Yes
Cite
If you have any further questions, please contact Encyclopedia Editorial Office.
Salama, A.M.; Holgate, P. Where Critical Inquiry, Empirical Making, and Experiential Learning Shape Architectural Pedagogy. Encyclopedia. Available online: https://encyclopedia.pub/entry/58934 (accessed on 22 December 2025).
Salama AM, Holgate P. Where Critical Inquiry, Empirical Making, and Experiential Learning Shape Architectural Pedagogy. Encyclopedia. Available at: https://encyclopedia.pub/entry/58934. Accessed December 22, 2025.
Salama, Ashraf M., Peter Holgate. "Where Critical Inquiry, Empirical Making, and Experiential Learning Shape Architectural Pedagogy" Encyclopedia, https://encyclopedia.pub/entry/58934 (accessed December 22, 2025).
Salama, A.M., & Holgate, P. (2025, September 08). Where Critical Inquiry, Empirical Making, and Experiential Learning Shape Architectural Pedagogy. In Encyclopedia. https://encyclopedia.pub/entry/58934
Salama, Ashraf M. and Peter Holgate. "Where Critical Inquiry, Empirical Making, and Experiential Learning Shape Architectural Pedagogy." Encyclopedia. Web. 08 September, 2025.
Peer Reviewed
Where Critical Inquiry, Empirical Making, and Experiential Learning Shape Architectural Pedagogy
This is a peer-reviewed entry published in Encyclopedia Journal, full entry can be found at 10.3390/encyclopedia5030129

This entry is based on the premise that pressing issues of climate change, social injustice, and post-COVID practices appear to have superseded some essential values of architectural and design pedagogy, leading to improvements in content that may be offset by a loss of focus on the core curriculum. The entry reimagines architectural pedagogy by arguing for a transformative shift from traditional product-based education to a process-oriented, inquiry-driven approach that cultivates critical thinking and empirical making, predicated upon experiential learning. It aims to integrate rigorous critical inquiry into both studio-based and lecture-based settings, thus critiquing assumed limitations of conventional approaches that prioritise final outcomes over iterative design processes, dialogue, and active engagement. Employing a comprehensive qualitative approach that incorporates diverse case studies and critical reviews, the analysis is divided into two main threads: one that places emphasis on the studio environment and another that focuses on lecture-based courses. Within these threads, the analysis is structured around a series of key themes central to experiential learning, each of which concludes with a key message that synthesises the core insights derived from case studies. The two threads instigate the identification of aligned areas of emphasis which articulate the need for active engagements and reflection, for bridging theory and practice, and for adopting interdisciplinary and experiential approaches. Conclusions are drawn to establish guidance for a future direction of a strengthened and pedagogically enriched architectural education.

studio-based teaching experiential learning active learning architectural theory design education dialogical learning learning from reality
Architectural education has long been situated at the intersection of artistic enterprise and technical rigour. Over the past decades, concerns about the effectiveness of traditional pedagogical models have given rise to a renewed interest in alternative, process-based and inquiry-oriented approaches to design learning. This entry echoes the French philosopher and sociologist, Edgar Morin, known for his work on interdisciplinary thought and complexity, who argued that “by sacrificing the essential for the urgent, one ends up forgetting the urgency of the essential” [1]. Morin’s observation is a perceptive cue that the architectural education community may seek to address pressing demands such as climate science, wellbeing and pandemics, and social inclusivity within architectural pedagogy and design studio teaching practices, at the expense of deeper, long-term skills, knowledge and behaviours that underpin architectural education and practice.
Reacting immediately and constantly to emergent issues risks ignoring fundamental disciplinary premises. Progressive architectural pedagogy requires a judicious balance of immediacy with significance, ensuring that foundational principles that underpin the core aims of educators and students are critically reinforced.
Weaving two threads of pedagogical discourse in architecture, this entry places emphasis on ways in which knowledge content is delivered effectively within the learning process, rather than focusing on the type of content itself. While the two threads place emphasis on experiential learning, the first concerns critical inquiry and process-oriented studio pedagogy. The second thread highlights impactful learning approaches in lecture-based courses and modules. Collectively, these approaches offer working examples of evolving methods of architectural pedagogy.
These educational initiatives are not necessarily new in many other disciplines and contexts beyond architecture and design; all such alternatives require continuous and progressive institutional commitment. Curriculum restructuring should explicitly promote constructive alignment between theoretical and practical courses, ensuring that students experience a cohesive learning trajectory. Academic development programmes can support educators in experimenting with active learning methods, digital platforms, and interdisciplinary collaborations. Educators themselves need space and time to develop, reflect upon, and refine their teaching practices, echoing the iterative design processes they advocate for their students. Partnerships with local communities, professional organisations, and industry leaders can offer students real-world contexts and opportunities that amplify the relevance of both studio and classroom learning. Such collaborations also serve as channels for future employment, networking, and continued professional growth, forming a bridge between academia and practice.

Rationale and Brief Argument

The growing complexity of social, environmental, and economic challenges and the role of architecture in addressing these issues necessitates a pedagogical shift towards more dynamic, integrative, and process-oriented approaches to learning [2]. Traditional design studios and lecture-based courses often fail to fully engage students in skills of critical inquiry and experiential learning [3]. Architectural education has historically relied on a dual structure of theoretical coursework and design studios. However, the rapid evolution of digital tools, changing socio-environmental challenges, and the need for interdisciplinary collaboration call for approaches that transcend this assumed dichotomy [4][5]. While several voices call for reconciling knowledge types by integrating the two, attempts at this synthesis often fail to recognise the spread and depth of knowledge required in lecture content and the ways in which such knowledge is incorporated into design studio projects. In response, process-oriented pedagogy has emerged as a convincing approach that fosters creativity, solution generation skills, and engagement in empirical making [6][7]. It emphasises the process of design rather than solely focusing on final outcomes, encouraging students to engage in reiterative experimentation and critical reflection. Research suggests that process-driven learning enhances adaptability and the ability to creatively synthesise diverse knowledge sources and types which are essential attributes for contemporary architects [8][9].
Various national and international reports, such as the UIA-UNESCO Charter of Architectural Education (1996—updated 2023) [10], the Carnegie Foundation’s report ‘A New Future for Architectural Education and Practice’ (1996) [11], and the AIAS report ‘The Re-design of Studio Culture’ (2002) [12], highlight the limitations of traditional architectural education. More recently, AACA of Australia, RIBA and ARB in the United Kingdom, and NAAB of the United States [13][14][15][16][17][18] have introduced new criteria for validating schools of architecture including calls for new knowledge contents. This is coupled with significant inquiries that emphasise benefits of integrating research processes into architectural education while advancing deeper connections between academia and professional practice [4][5][9][19][20][21][22][23][24][25][26]. Such commentaries often advocate for a radical knowledge-based reform in architectural pedagogy to prepare students for rapid changes in professional practice. Although these organisations appear to focus on the architecture student’s acquisition of more professional knowledge, their aims can be translated as calls for a paradigm shift in teaching approaches, curriculum structures, and assessment metrics to better serve the lifelong learning needs of students, the profession, and society.
Central to the discussion in this entry, it is argued that architectural pedagogy should transition from a traditional output-based model to one that accentuates process, inquiry and experiential engagement. As architectural practice becomes increasingly complex and interdisciplinary, the traditional studio approach, characterised by linear sequencing, prescriptive instruction, and limited student agency, will prove inadequate [8][9]. An educational transformation that employs active learning, autonomous inquiry and self-reflection, as well as integrating innovative methods and technologies, may more effectively echo the dynamic nature of contemporary professional practice. In studio settings, this argument is supported by evidence that creative thinking and problem-solving skills are developed effectively through iterative cycles of experience and reflection [6]. Engaging in hands-on activities, dialogue and empirical making, students develop the capacity to translate abstract ideas into realistic responses to simulated client requirements, values and aspirations. Concomitantly, lecture-based courses can be reimagined as interactive learning settings where the built environment itself can be utilised as a learning opportunity and an applied source of knowledge. These corresponding approaches form two threads of an integrated pedagogical vision that aims to equip students with technical competencies through nurturing the adaptive, reflective mindset necessary for lifelong learning and professional success. While many of the practices discussed in this entry are evident across global schools of architecture, this paper analyses how these practices are being consciously restructured and reframed within evolving pedagogical perspectives.

Objectives

Considering these existing challenges, the increasing body of literature that calls for reforming architectural education, and our focus on the essential rather than the urgent, this entry aims to achieve the following:
  • Examine the role of critical inquiry, empirical making, and process-oriented approaches in architectural pedagogy.
  • Demonstrate how experiential learning and digital technologies can enhance studio teaching.
  • Explore approaches to encourage active engagement in lecture-based courses or taught modules.
  • Develop recommendations for cultivating a culture of inquiry and collaboration within the student body, and between students and staff.
On a broader level, this entry seeks to contribute to the ongoing discourse on architectural pedagogy and offers strategies for educators seeking to encourage more effective teaching approaches. The study also aims to provide insights into how knowledge delivery can be reconceptualised to prepare students better for the demands placed on the profession and its education by society.

Approach to Analysis

An extensive qualitative and multi-perspective approach is employed to integrate case studies and critical reviews of pedagogical experiments and address the premise and objectives of this entry. This approach is predicated on an existing body of knowledge, which has developed over several decades, including pedagogical theories and situated experiments conducted by educators in architecture. The selection of examples is identified to cover the range of themes this entry aims to capture and convey, including creative thinking, critical inquiry, experiential (active-inquiry-based) learning, empirical making, and process-oriented pedagogy. The selection of cases draws from a range of schools of architecture in Asia, Europe, North America, and Europe to demonstrate and validate the identified themes, as well as to identify fundamental drivers of architectural pedagogy in a cross-cultural milieu.
The analysis is divided into two threads: one that focuses upon the studio environment and another that concentrates upon lecture-based courses and modules. Within these threads, the analysis is structured around key themes such as creative thinking, experiential learning, critical inquiry, process-based teaching, digital pedagogy, the built environment as an open textbook, and the continuing relevance of history. Each subsection concludes with a synopsis that synthesises key insights for educators and practitioners teaching architecture (Figure 1). The entry draws on seminal works by educational theorists as well as empirical studies, generating a robust, evidence-based framework for reimagining design pedagogy. The two threads instigate identification of shared emphases and links, challenges and opportunities, and limitations and possibilities associated with these theories and approaches, postulating guidance for strengthening future pedagogical practices in architecture and design.
Encyclopedia 05 00129 g001
Figure 1. Approach to analysis involving two main threads: one that places emphasis on the studio environment and another that focuses on lecture-based courses.

References

  1. Morin, E. Seven Complex Lessons in Education for the Future; UNESCO Publishing: Paris, France, 1999.
  2. Jenkins, A.; Healey, M. Institutional Strategies to Link Teaching and Research; Higher Education Academy: York, UK, 2005; Available online: http://www.heacademy.ac.uk/assets/York/documents/ourwork/research/Institutional_strategies.pdf (accessed on 19 March 2025).
  3. Bose, M.; Pennypacker, E.; Yahner, T. Enhancing Critical Thinking through ‘Independent Decision-Making’ in the Studio. Open House Int. 2006, 31, 33–42.
  4. Burton, L.O.; Salama, A.M. Sustainable Development Goals and the Future of Architectural Education—Cultivating SDGs-Centred Architectural Pedagogies. Archnet-IJAR Int. J. Archit. Res. 2023, 17, 421–442.
  5. Salama, A.M.; Burton, L.O. Pedagogical Traditions in Architecture: The Canonical, the Resistant, and the Decolonized. Tradit. Dwell. Settl. Rev. 2023, 35, 47–71.
  6. Kolb, D.A. Experiential Learning: Experience as the Source of Learning and Development; Prentice Hall: Englewood Cliffs, NJ, USA, 1984.
  7. Schön, D.A. The Reflective Practitioner; Jossey-Bass: San Francisco, CA, USA, 1983.
  8. Salama, A.M. A Process Oriented Design Pedagogy: KFUPM Sophomore Studio. CEBE Trans. 2005, 2, 16–31.
  9. McAllister, K. The Design Process: Making It Relevant for Students. Archnet-IJAR Int. J. Archit. Res. 2010, 4, 76–89.
  10. UIA-EDUCOM. UNESCO-UIA Architectural Study Programme Validation. International Union of Architects. 2023. Available online: https://www.uia-architectes.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/08/FINAL_UNESCO-UIA_Validation_Manual_2023.pdf (accessed on 23 February 2025).
  11. Boyer, E.L.; Mitgang, L.D. Building Community: A New Guide for Architectural Education and Practice; Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching: Princeton, NJ, USA, 1996. Available online: https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED399717.pdf (accessed on 1 March 2025).
  12. Koch, A.; Schwennsen, K.; Dutton, T.; Smith, D. The Redesign of Studio Culture. In Studio Culture Task Force; The American Institute of Architecture Students-AIAS: Washington, DC, USA, 2002; Available online: https://www.aias.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/The_Redesign_of_Studio_Culture_2002.pdf (accessed on 15 February 2025).
  13. AACA. National Standard of Competency for Architects; Architects Accreditation Council of Australia: Canberra, ACT, Australia, 2021; Available online: https://aaca.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2021-NSCA.pdf (accessed on 22 February 2025).
  14. AACA. Architectural Practice Examination Overview; Architects Accreditation Council of Australia: Canberra, ACT, Australia, 2023; Available online: https://aaca.org.au/architectural-practice-examination/ (accessed on 2 March 2025).
  15. RIBA. 2030 Climate Challenge; Royal Institute of British Architects: London, UK, 2021; Available online: https://www.architecture.com/about/policy/climate-action/2030-climate-challenge (accessed on 2 March 2025).
  16. RIBA. The Way Ahead—An Introduction to the New RIBA Education and Professional Development Framework and an Overview of Its Key Components; Royal Institute of British Architects: London, UK, 2021; Available online: https://www.architecture.com/knowledge-and-resources/resources-landing-page/the-way-ahead (accessed on 2 March 2025).
  17. ACSA. Equity in Architectural Education; Association of Collegiate Schools of Architecture: Washington, DC, USA, 2023; Available online: https://www.acsa-arch.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/08/Equity_in_Architectural_Education_Supplement.pdf (accessed on 26 February 2025).
  18. NAAB. Conditions for Accreditation and Procedures for Accreditation; National Architectural Accrediting Board: Washington, DC, USA, 2020; Available online: https://www.naab.org/accreditation/conditions-and-procedures/ (accessed on 26 February 2025).
  19. Salama, A.M. Spatial Design Education: New Directions for Pedagogy in Architecture and Beyond, 1st ed.; Taylor & Francis: Abingdon, UK, 2016.
  20. Salama, A.M. Transformative Pedagogy in Architecture and Urbanism, 1st ed.; Routledge Revivals; Taylor & Francis: Abingdon, UK, 2021.
  21. Hadjiyanni, T. Integrating Social Science Research into Studio Teaching. Open House Int. 2006, 31, 60–66.
  22. Silva, K.D.; Fernando, N.A. (Eds.) Theorizing Built Form and Culture: The Legacy of Amos Rapoport, 1st ed.; Routledge Research in Architecture; Routledge: Abingdon, UK, 2023; pp. 235–246.
  23. Salama, A.M.; Osborne Burton, L. Defying a Legacy or an Evolving Process? A Post-Pandemic Architectural Design Pedagogy. Proc. ICE—Urban Des. Plan. 2022, 175, 5–21.
  24. Samuel, F.; Dye, A. Demystifying Architectural Research: Adding Value to Your Practice, 1st ed.; RIBA Publishing: London, UK, 2019.
  25. Groat, L.N.; Wang, D. Architectural Research Methods, 2nd ed.; John Wiley & Sons: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2013.
  26. Lucas, R. Research Methods for Architecture; Laurence King Publishing: London, UK, 2016.
More
© Text is available under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy.
Upload a video for this entry
Information
Subjects: Education & Educational Research
Contributors MDPI registered users' name will be linked to their SciProfiles pages. To register with us, please refer to https://encyclopedia.pub/register : Ashraf M. Salama , Peter Holgate
View Times: 797
Online Date: 08 Sep 2025
Table of Contents
    Notice
    You are not a member of the advisory board for this topic. If you want to update advisory board member profile, please contact office@encyclopedia.pub.
    OK
    Confirm
    Only members of the Encyclopedia advisory board for this topic are allowed to note entries. Would you like to become an advisory board member of the Encyclopedia?
    Yes
    No
    ${ textCharacter }/${ maxCharacter }
    Submit
    Cancel
    There is no comment~
    ${ textCharacter }/${ maxCharacter }
    Submit
    Cancel
    ${ selectedItem.replyTextCharacter }/${ selectedItem.replyMaxCharacter }
    Submit
    Cancel
    Confirm
    Are you sure to Delete?
    Yes No
    Academic Video Service
    Feedback