Design Studio Management Case Study

850 Words4 Pages
what the negative implications of each error in various stages of design, in order to lessen students’ design errors. 3.3. Design studio management aspects. The design studio administration needs some sort of project management skills and enforcement on entire design project phases, similarly, design studio requires elasticity to adapt the project schedule depending upon project circumstances and students’ responses to faculty teaching and learning practices and project milestones. Hereafter the design studio management aspects: The appraisal of the project on nominated criteria. it leads to the conviction of students with their grades, since the assessment based on an objective standard and students competencies as well, not rely on the…show more content…
This leads to an agreement between the faculty of design and students concerning the project milestones and what is the weekly deliverables. Depending on the schedule, students organize their time so that submit the best performance possible. at the time schedule is to determine the design process for various phases and the sequence of the architectural deliverables, as well as required compulsory and elective architectural…show more content…
This is one of the remarkably valuable facets of architectural pedagogy, individually, ongoing follow-up for each student should conduct to keep tracking their levels, after remarking that the lack of ongoing individual monitoring of a faculty member to the students lead to weakness in the project architectural level, in this sense the students were divided into groups based on (GPA score) with gradually ascending scale, so as to make competition among the students that boost the overall level of the diverse students levels. and each group has a supervisor, as well as this method make a competition among teaching assistants through creating diverse teaching techniques to attempt raising their students’ levels to outperform the rest of the groups. There have been heterogeneity and differences of opinion between some students and the supervisor of the groups, the author suggested students’ self-determination of review and evaluate their work with those they deem appropriate to them from faculty members. The author resolves the disputes through the convergence of views and the emphasis on everybody to work as one team. The author configures a focus group in the second project. Depending on the proposal to assemble the students with the same prevalent weaknesses in one working group, they need to develop some architectural skills, besides, the faculty developing a training program
Open Document