Content uploaded by Dhwani Yogesh Yagnik
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Dhwani Yogesh Yagnik on Apr 14, 2024
Content may be subject to copyright.
1
A Constructivist Instructional design approach for Architectural
Education, using Google Meet and Google Jamboard – a case study of
teaching-learning at ACOA, Pune.
Sub-Theme - Innovation in Teaching-Learning
Author:
Dhwani Yagnik
Designation:
Associate Professor (ACOA)
PhD Scholar (MIT School of Education and Research)
Institute:
Allana College of Architecture
Savitribhai Phule Pune University
Email:
dhwani2710@gmail.com
Contact:
9890248887
Postal Address:
Allana College of Architecture
2390/B – Azam Campus, Camp,
Pune – 411001
Co-Author:
Dr. Asawari Bhave-Gudipudi
Designation:
Professor
Institute:
MIT School of Education and Research
MIT Art, Design & Technology University
Email:
asawari.bhave@mituniversity.edu.in
2
Abstract
21st century education, post pandemic of 2019, and with the implementation of NEP 2020,
is undergoing drastic changes and Architectural Education is no exception. The
professional course of Architecture is based on the student-centered constructivist approach
and the challenge to innovate and implement new technologies in the architectural
pedagogies was enforced during the pandemic globally. The researcher attempts to
understand the point of view of the students and alumni of the Allana College of
Architecture, regarding the mode of teaching adopted and the tools utilized by the teachers.
While the survey indicates that there are apparent pros and cons to the online mode, it also
indicates that the hybrid mode is preferred by most students. The paper further
demonstrates the process of one such case viz. the first-year students of Allana college of
architecture, Pune, with respect to the conduction of the subject of Fundamentals in
Architecture through the constructivist approach using the medium of Google meet and
Google Jamboard.
Keywords
Architectural Education, Constructivist Instructional Design, Innovation, Digital tools
3
1.1. Introduction
The 5 years of the bachelor course of Architecture amalgamate art and science addressing
each student’s creativity individually. “The profession and further the education of
Architecture, is practice based, participatory, collaborative, and entails aspects of inquiry
and problem solving.” (Yagnik & Bhave-Gudipudi, 2022). The Architectural Education
Instructional design, therefore, is to a large extent a student-centered process which
encourages students to be “interactive, process oriented, open minded, intuitive, self-
controlling participant, and collaborative”(Kurt, 2011)
Architecture and further architectural education has not remained untouched by the global
digital explosion and the need and demand for relearning pedagogies with blended
instructional methods has been observed in the recent years. The researcher attempts to
understand the students’ and alumni’s’ point of view through survey with respect to the
mode of teaching adopted and the tools utilized by the teachers at the Allana College of
Architecture (ACOA), Pune, during the online mode owing to the pandemic of 2019. While
the survey indicates that there are apparent pros and cons to the online mode, it also
indicates that the hybrid mode is preferred by most students. The paper further
demonstrates the process of one such case viz. the first-year (Academic year 2020-21)
students of Allana College of Architecture, Pune with respect to the conduction of the
subject of Fundamentals of Architecture (FA) through the constructivist approach using
the medium of Google meet and Google Jamboard.
Fig. 2 Structure of the subject – Fundamental of Architecture
Source: SPPU 2019 Pattern First Year B.Arch. Syllabus, 2019
Fig. 1 Use of Constructivist approach in architectural education
Source: Kurt, 2011
4
Fig. 3 Constructivism
The subject of FA, is expected to introduce the students to the field of architecture, its scope
and the factors affecting design as indicated in Figure 2. The sub-topic under consideration
is the topic of ‘Site and Surrounding’, covered over 3 weeks (1 class per week). The strategy
adopted based on constructivism was inquiry based learning, problem based learning and
collaborative learning using the medium of Google meet and Google Jamboard.
1.2 Aims and Objectives
The paper aims to demonstrate the Constructivist instructional approach in Architectural
education conducted online using digital tools such as Google meet and Google Jamboard.
The objectives are as follows:
1. To conduct survey to understand the preferred mode of learning by the students.
2. To study the case of the conduction of the topic of site and surrounding using
Google meet and Google Jamboard, as part of the subject of FA for the students of
First year at ACOA, Pune.
1.3 Limitations
1. The study is limited to Architectural education.
2. The study covers one topic viz. site and surrounding as a case study to understand
the teaching methodology and the use of online digital tools.
3. The survey is limited to the students of ACOA, Pune, current and alumni, who have
undergone the online mode of education.
1.4 Structure of paper
1. Review of literature
2. Survey to establish the preference of students with respect to mode of teaching and
preferred tools.
3. Case study of the instructional design for the conduction of the subject of FA
conducted by the researcher.
4. Analysis and conclusion.
2.1 Theoretical Background
2.1.1 Constructivist approach
Elliott, S.N., Kratochwill, T.R., Littlefield Cook,
J. & Travers,(2000), explain that constructivism
is “an approach to learning that holds that
people actively construct or make their own
knowledge and that reality is determined by
the experiences of the learner”.
In relation to this, one may conclude that the
pedagogues of Architectural Design
Education derive their teaching learning
techniques subconsciously from
Constructivism.
Source: (Druvenga, 2021)
5
The process is entirely intuitive (based on
experiences), self-exploratory i.e. cognitive
(Piaget, 1968) in addition to being
collaborative (Vygotsky, 1978).
Online pedagogy presents a new set of
threats and opportunities with respect to the
model of learning and teaching via the web.
(Morrison, 2013b), suggests that the most
critical opportunities are the evolution of
instructional design principles and models,
which allow the instructors to focus on the
students rather than digital tools. The
constructivist online learning further
involves self-guided inquiry-based problem
solving under the scaffolding provided by
the instructor using various digital tools and
methods.
Fig. 4 Constructivism based on online learning.
Source: (Morrison, 2013a)
2.1.2 Blended learning
Fig. 5. Blended Learning
Source: (KUBO Education, 2022)
Blended learning (BL) emerged in the 1960’s, and was the approach that combined
instructor led brick-and-mortar classroom training and online learning activities.
The NEP 2020, emphasises the importance of face-to-face mode of learning, however, with
the emergence of technology for learning-teaching, promotes digital learning and
education. The UGC, in the concept note on blended learning, elaborates as, “BL is not a
mere mix of online and face-to-face mode, but it refers to a well-planned combination of
meaningful activities in both the modes. The blend demands consideration of several
factors, mainly focussing on learning outcomes and the learner centred instructional
environment.”(eGov, 2021)
6
3.1 Survey Results and Analysis
Architectural education is a professional education and the hands-on practical knowledge
approach is accepted for the pedagogy. Owing to the pandemic of 2019, the educationists
and students were forced to adopt the online mode of education using digital tools like
Google Meet, Google Jamboard, WhatsApp, email, YouTube etc. for the conduction of the
course. To better understand the students perspective of this shift of teaching and learning
the subject of architectural design considering the online offline mode, a survey was
designed. The target group were the students and alumni of the Allana College of
Architecture, Pune, who had specifically undergone the online mode of education.
A random sample group was formed of 95 students belonging to the current Second year
B.Arch., Third year B.Arch., Fourth year B.Arch., Fifth year B.Arch. as well as the alumni
of the past 3 years, viz. 2019-2022, pursuing masters, having their own practice or working
in architectural firms. 65 responses to the online survey was recorded and analysed.
3.1.1 In which year/s have you undergone online architectural education?
As the online mode of education had extended over a period of time, it was essential to
gather data with respect to the academic years in which the students underwent the online
mode. As observed, the first, second and third year students formed the larger portion of
the group. These being the foundation years of Architectural education, formed an
important aspect of the further study and analysis.
Fig. 6. Response Data of Survey
Source: Survey by Researcher
Fig. 7. Respondents’ Current Academic year distribution
Source: Survey by Researcher
Fig. 8. Year wise distribution of online mode of architectural education
Source: Survey by Researcher
7
3.1.2 What teaching tools have been used by the Design teachers to conduct the
subject?
The survey further focused on the subject of Architectural Design and the various online
tools used by the teachers and the students. The survey indicated that the majority of the
conduction of the online education was done using Google classroom and Google meet,
with some instances of the use of Google Jamboard. It was also found that WhatsApp was
an important tool of choice utilized by the teachers.
3.1.3 Please rate the teaching tools in the following scale.
The students were expected to rate the various tools adopted on the scale ranging from
poor, average, good and excellent. The observations are as under.
Fig. 9. Online teaching tools adopted by the teachers.
Source: Survey by Researcher
Fig. 10. Rating of online teaching tools adopted by teachers.
Source: Survey by Researcher
8
3.1.4 What according to you are the advantages of the online mode of architectural
design education?
The students’ point of view with respect to the advantages of the online mode for the
conduction of the subject of Architectural Design were recorded. It was found that the
primary advantages were the saving of time and money in travel and resources as well as
ease of remote access and the availability of documented work anytime and anywhere.
Some notable respondent statements are listed under Figure 11.
Respondent 1: “The online mode allows all the students to have a view of what the teacher
is teaching. It also allows multiple participation without chaos. Many times
in classrooms we cannot see what the teacher is teaching or sometimes
hear them clearly. This method makes the class more personal and I feel I
can absorb more.”
Respondent 2: “Well I am more inclined towards the offline mode of education but it
seems like market is pivoting towards the online mode and IT industry is
booming these days to suffice the needs. There are many applications,
portals with latest features introduced considering all the crucial things
needed. May be at some point it may easy the process like for instance
Artificial intelligence is used to create architectural visualisations this
came to my radar few days back it was shocking for me to see how
beautifully it works which actually reduces the human efforts.”
Respondent 3: “Flexibility and Self-Paced Learning, Better Time Management, Improve
Virtual communication and new technical skill learning.”
Respondent 4: “One can impart his or her teaching to 1000 of students at particular time .
The classes can be conducted as per convenience and can be adjusted by
both the parties. Travelling time is saved.”
Respondent 5: “1-Reduces travelling time and the energy consumed for the same, 2-
Students/Teachers having social anxiety or fear of public speaking can
converse comfortably, 3-Unnecessary interactions can be avoided which
cannot happen when in person.”
Fig. 11. Advantages of online mode of Architectural Design education
Source: Survey by Researcher
9
3.1.5 What according to you are the disadvantages of the online mode of
architectural design education?
The students’ point of view with respect to the dis-advantages of the online mode for the
conduction of the subject of Architectural Design were recorded. It was found that the
students primarily found it difficult to understand the matter on the online mode and found
that there was poor student teacher interaction as compared to the traditional face-to-face
mode of learning. Being a professional course, the lack of practical knowledge, interaction
and hands-on training was also found to be one of the disadvantages of the online mode of
architectural education. Some notable respondent statements are listed under Figure 12.
Respondent 1: “Lack of interaction and understanding one another during a discussion.
Lack of sharing knowledge and inspiration. Pace of understanding and
varies across the class. Extra learning after class hours is compromised.
Lack of personal bonding between peers and teachers that highly effects
grades and approaches to one another.”
Respondent 2: “Requires self-discipline and time management skills Diminished social
interaction, Lack of trust between teacher and students.”
Respondent 3: “Students take online classes for granted and mostly sleep or leave once
they are done with their discussion.”
Respondent 4: “The real disadvantage to an Internet-based course is that you might not
own up to it. You might not take responsibility for your studies and your
goals. You might get way behind and never catch up.”
Respondent 5: “1-There remains a very thin line between your college life and your own
life, 2-People with anxiety later on have a very tough time dealing with in
person interactions since they get accustomed to conversing in their
comfort zone, 3-Far too much screen exposure which also happens in usual
cases since it's just a TV/ Mobile getting replaced by a Laptop, 4-Student
to Student, Student to Teacher interaction decreases which bridges the gap
between mutual empathy.”
Fig. 12. Disadvantages of online mode of Architectural Design education
Source: Survey by Researcher
10
3.1.6 Which teaching learning method for design would you ideally prefer?
The students’ preferred mode of teaching learning was found to be The Hybrid mode with
65.6%. This proved that despite the apparent disadvantages, the education trends are
moving towards a cohesive amalgamation of the practical and the online medium.
3.1.7 Your recommendations if any for improved online teaching learning for the
subject of Architectural Design.
The survey allowed the students to provide recommendations for the improvement of the
online teaching learning for the subject of Architectural Design. Out of the total students,
62% students provided recommendations while 38% chose to not answer. The collated
recommendations are indicated in Figure 14.
3.2 Conclusions of the survey
The survey analysis indicates that the new generation of learners are expecting a paradigm
shift in the learning – teaching practices. The preference for the blended mode of learning
for a professional course like Architecture, proves that there is an urgent need to adopt the
modern innovations in learning and teaching, driving the teachers and students to acquire
21st century skills in addition to effective learning and skill development. It is further
interesting to note that of the tools adopted by the teachers, while Google classroom,
Google meet and Jamboard had obvious advantages, the students also preferred WhatsApp.
While the paper does not study the use of WhatsApp as a tool for education, it can be
assumed that the preference is due to the ease and speed of access provided by this tool,
with respect to communication and interaction between students and teachers. This allows
further scope for research of such instant multi-platform mass communication tools and
their role in the field of education.
Fig. 13. Preferred mode of teaching-learning by students
Source: Survey by Researcher
Fig. 14. Recommendations for improved online teaching learning
Source: Survey by Researcher
11
4.1 The case study
Fundamentals of Architecture (FA), is a subject conducted for the First year B.Arch.
students and as per the syllabus stipulated by the Savitribai Phule Pune University, the
subject encompasses an introduction to the field of Architecture, its scope and the factors
affecting design (Figure 2). The case study examines the conduct of one of the sub-topics
of FA, viz ‘site and surrounding’, covered over 3 weeks (1 class per week) for the first year
students of ACOA in 2021 using Google meet and Google Jamboard. The instructional
approach explores the constructivist approach of inquiry based learning, problem based
learning and collaborative learning. The stages of the sessions are enlisted below:
4.1.1 Theoretical introduction to the topic
The theoretical introduction to the topic of site and surrounding, began with an
understanding of the basics of the various aspects of the topic ie. Site on which the architect
builds and its surrounding.
A dialog using Google meet, was conducted with the student, about their understanding of
what information would be needed by them as an architect regarding the site they would
be working on. The presentation was done on Google meet using Microsoft PowerPoint.
The points mentioned by the students were noted down on screen. Each point prior to being
accepted was discussed in terms of its relevance to the study. The teacher was a guide
acquainting the students with the accurate architectural terminology for certain aspects.
Various examples from their own experiences e.g. The map of 100 Acre wood in Winnie
the Pooh cartoon series was shown and discussed, and the student’s point of view and
understanding from the point of view of topic under discussion was noted. Further, students
were asked to express what they would consider while mapping their own surrounding i.e.
create a mind map of their own home and its surroundings. The discussion points were
noted.
Fig. 15. Introduction to site and surrounding via
google meet
Source: Researcher, FA online class for students
of FYBArch., 2021, ACOA.
Fig. 17. Points of discussion on aspects of mapping one’s own surrounding
Source: Researcher, FA online class for students of FYBArch., 2021, ACOA.
Fig. 16. Map of the Hundred-Acre Wood
Source: Shepard & Milne, 1926
12
4.1.2 Self-study, introspection, and inquiry
The students were provided with reading and video material on the various aspects of the
topic for individual introspection and study. Based on the discussions and reference
materials, the students were asked to create a map of their surroundings and meet back in
a few days to present it to the rest of the class. Different typologies of buildings and their
impact on the surroundings, the residents, and the city as a whole, were analysed and
discussed in the presentations.
4.1.3 Collaborative learning
The students were expected to break out into groups and study 4 different building
typologies of their choice and analyse them. The site and surrounding parameters for the
analysis were from the discussions and suggestions given by students in the earlier sessions.
These were formulated into a table (template given to the students). Each group presented
their findings to the rest of the class.
4.1.4 Learning issues and resolution
In the class discussions, an important pre-design aspect of Architectural Design of ‘site
analysis’, which entails the analysis of the elements in and around the site, and which
impacts design and development was found to be the ‘learning issue’ of the class. An
attempt to resolve this was through the method of collaborative inquiry and problem-
solving using Google meet and Google Jam board.
Fig. 18. Presentation of maps of their own surrounding created by students
Source: Researcher, FA online class for students of FYBArch., 2021, ACOA.
Fig. 19. Group work presentation on the analysis of various building typologies
Source: Researcher, FA online class for students of FYBArch., 2021, ACOA
13
A hypothetical site opposite the Taj Mahal (a structure known to everyone and with 3D
view available on Google Earth) was given to the students. A simple design brief for which
the inquiry was to be performed and a solution was to be given. Students using the pen tool
on the Jam board analysed the context of the site and collaborated in real-time via the online
mode, to find an optimum solution for the ideal location of the built project keeping the
various parameters discussed in the earlier sessions.
The hypothetical project brief was understood, and the interrelationship of spaces discussed
in the same session. The students created the zoning and interrelationship diagrams together
on Google Jamboard. Various trial and errors were conducted to find the optimum solution
for the design problem.
Source: Author, FA online class for students of FYBArch.,2021,
Allana College of Architecture
Fig. 20. Context (surrounding) analysis on Google Jamboard
Source: Researcher, FA online class for students of FYBArch., 2021, ACOA
Fig. 21. Site analysis on Google Jamboard
Source: Researcher, FA online class for students of FYBArch., 2021, ACOA
Fig. 22. Project Brief interpretation and Bubble diagram development
Source: Researcher, FA online class for students of FYBArch., 2021, ACOA
14
5.1 Case Study Analysis
The instructional design adopted by the teachers for the conduction of the sub-topic of site
and surrounding, allows the students to construct the parameters of analysing their
immediate surroundings, which they are extremely familiar with, and develop onto those
parameters. In the process, the students understanding of the various factors that affect any
site becomes clear, making learning an active and inquiry-based process. The students
through their discussions arrive at conclusions on their own and the teacher takes the role
of a facilitator, steering them in the right direction and providing necessary scaffolding
when needed.
The process adopted allows students, time for self-reflection and to gain knowledge on
their own with the help of the reference materials (reading material and videos). It is
observed that the students don’t blindly follow the material and are able to disagree, discuss
and arrive at conclusions developing on the existing ideas. This in turn encourages research.
The site analysis and the design development exercise, allows the students to devise a
solution to the given problem. The exercise mimics the real-world problems that would be
faced by them in their own architectural practice, a crucial aspect of the constructivist
problem-based learning. The process is not without errors, which is considered an
important part of the learning process. The students are able to review and clarify these and
ultimately see that they are not building upon knowledge that is errored. This is done by
actively participating in groups, communicating, and learning from the mistakes i.e.,
through the reflection process.
However, it should be noted that the process in the case study, though relies heavily on, but
does not entirely follow the principles of constructivist teaching-learning. The
disadvantages of the online constructivist method like lack of structure, possibility of
missing out on struggling students, lack of adherence to a time bound program etc. are not
ignored. These aspects are borrowed from the traditional method of learning, allowing the
program to emerge in a structured, timely manner while allowing the students to become
actively involved in the learning process as they use their prior knowledge and real-world
experiences, learn to make hypothesis, test their theories, and finally draw conclusions from
their results.
5.2 Conclusion
Students and educators of today, are at the epicentre of the global digital explosion and the
forced use of digital tools and AI, during the pandemic, have made it evident that the
blended mode of instructional design is the need and way ahead. The research into the
integration of the offline and online mode of teaching, using various instructional design
theories, will not only provide the students with effective learning but also furnish an
opportunity for educators to further research into innovative pedagogies and dedicated
softwares and technology.
15
References
Druvenga, K. (2021). Constructivism. Instructional Coaches Corner Ideas & Strategies
for K-12 Coaches and Teachers.
https://www.instructionalcoaches.com/portfolio/constructivism/
eGov. (2021). Blended Mode of Teaching and Learning: Concept Note. University Grants
Commission New Delhi. https://www.ugc.gov.in/pdfnews/6100340_Concept-Note-
Blended-Mode-of-Teaching-and-Learning.pdf
Elliott, S.N., Kratochwill, T.R., Littlefield Cook, J. & Travers, J. (2000). Educational
psychology: Effective teaching, effective learning (3rd ed.). McGraw Hill, Boston,
2000.
KUBO Education. (2022). Heading into blended learning.
https://kubo.education/heading-into-blended-learning/
Kurt, S. (2011). Use of constructivist approach in architectural education. Procedia -
Social and Behavioral Sciences, 15, 3980–3988.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2011.04.402
Morrison, D. (2013a). How Course Design Puts the Focus on Learning Not Teaching.
Online Learning Insights.
https://onlinelearninginsights.wordpress.com/tag/constructivism/
Morrison, D. (2013b). Why Online Courses [Really] Need an Instructional Design
Strategy. Online Learning Insights.
https://onlinelearninginsights.wordpress.com/2013/05/07/why-online-courses-really-
need-an-instructional-design-strategy/
Piaget, J., & Tenzer, A. (Trans.). (1968). Six Psychological Studies. New York: Vintage
Books.
Shepard, E. H., & Milne, A. A. (1926). A map of the Hundred-Acre Wood.
https://collections.vam.ac.uk/item/O133284/a-map-of-the-hundred-drawing-shepard-
e-h/
SPPU 2019 pattern First year B.Arch. Syllabus. (2019).
http://collegecirculars.unipune.ac.in/sites/documents/Syllabus 2019/First
Year B.Arch. 2019 Patt.Syllabus.pdf
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological
processes. Cambridge, Mass.:Harvard University Press, 1978.
Yagnik, D., & Bhave-Gudipudi, A. (2022). Implications of the Cognitive Apprenticeship
model for Architecture Teaching Practices.
