Richard Presentation - Altc Symposium No 1

Enhancing and Assessing Group and Team Learning in Architecture and Related Design Contexts
Associate Professor Richard Tucker Deakin University
This is a two-year project, commencing in November 2011, which is investigating best practice in Australian higher education for the teaching of teamwork in the design disciplines, with a focus on Architecture. The project aims to: highlight and develop innovative approaches to collaborative studio-based learning; structure team learning within curricula; develop graduate attributes for teamwork; and inform assessment of team design that supports team-working skills and increased learner confidence.
Introduction
The project addresses five principal research questions:
1. how do we teach teamwork skills in the context of design? 2. Should we assess teamwork skills? 3. how do we assess teamwork skills ?
4. how do we fairly assess individual contribution to team designs? 5. can we develop curriculum level approaches to teaching teamwork
Introduction
The project addresses four principal research questions: 1. how do we teach teamwork skills in the context of design? 2. how do we assess teamwork skills? 2 levels of teamwork skills: 1. Context related - the particular skills needed to design collaboratively e.g. idea selection and development, shared understanding through graphic communication and reflective practice (complex negotiation); 2. Non context related - those skills commonly needed for group-and-team-work, irrelevant of field e.g. leadership, management, delegation, consensus seeking and the capacity to effectively handle conflict.
Introduction
Whats different about the learning context of design?
1. Consistent with all creative fields, but in contrast with other teaching areas, design students must collaborate in a highly emotive and subjective activity (no one correct solution). 2. The emotive nature of designing in teams is further charged by the difficulty of assigning authorship to a creative work (such as a building design), which means that freeloading is difficult to detect (consistency of presentation practice authentic). 3. In the workplace, design is nearly always a collaborative activity (especially in architecture). 4. But we dont tend to teach how to design in teams (learning by emersion for an required g.a).
Participants
Four partners: Deakin University (Associate Professor Richard Tucker); University of Newcastle (Professor Michael Ostwald, Associate Professor Tony Williams); University of Tasmania (Louise Wallis); Victoria University (Professor Graham Thorpe);
Participants
International Benchmarking through six Canadian partners: University of British Columbia School of Architecture and Landscape Architecture; Faculty of Design at Kwantlen Polytechnic University;* University of Toronto, John H. Daniels Faculty of Architecture, Landscape, and Design; University of Waterloo, School of Architecture; Universit de Montral cole darchitecture; McGill University School of Architecture, Montral.
Introduction
The project has nine stages that can be divided into two broad phases :
Phase 1 (Evaluation): Review current teaching and assessment at four Australian partners and six Canadian collaborators (2 surveys + focus groups); Discuss the conceptualisation and role of teamwork with practitioners and teachers specialising in this area (5 questions National Teaching Symposium); Identify case studies of good practice (context specific models). *
Collaboration Down Under: Investigating Team Learning in Australia in Architecture and Related Design Contexts
Timeline & Data Collection

Phase 1 (Evaluation): Discuss the conceptualisation and role of teamwork with practitioners and teachers (5 questions); 1. Is there still, or was there ever, a place for the individual in contemporary design practice? 2. Should a team member stand out from the rest of the team and be acknowledged for their contribution? 3. What are the boundaries that differentiate between the memberships of teams and groups? 4. Are students today more able to communicate and work in parallel than collaborate? 5. Is teamwork only learned through experiential learning, or can it be taught?
Introduction
The project has nine stages that can be divided into two broad phases :
Phase 2 (Implementation ): Refine units at the four Australian partner universities to promote effective teamwork in design learning; Evaluate the effect of these changes; National Survey of current teaching and assessment at all Australian design schools (2 surveys); Publish case studies of good practice (context specific models).
Dissemination
2 Volume Book
Vol.1 Conceptualizing Teamwork in Architecture and Related Design Disciplines (stage 1 of lit review + position statements from 40 teachers and practitioners in Australia and Canada)
Dissemination
2 Volume Book
Vol. 2 Teaching and Assessing Teamwork in Architecture and Related Design Disciplines (stage 2 of lit review, recommendations and case studies) Community of practice based around project website
8 key areas (with guidelines for students, teachers and practitioners): 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. Collaborative design practices and processes; Group formation / team composition / team cohesion (diversity is best); Communication; Conflict resolution / conflict management (a growing problem); Ongoing assessment and self-and-peer-evaluation (to fairly assess individual contribution); Teaching practices (to teach team-working skills); Information and communication technologies; Integration into curricula.
Early Findings
1. 2.
The teaching of teamwork is largely ad hoc in Australia and Canada, rather than structured in curricula. Teaching and assessment approaches are developed by maverick teachers within the context of the specific units they teach (with little uptake beyond); Teaching and assessment approaches are at the unit level rather than the degree program level; Student learning is often delayed by acclimatisation to inconsistent pedagogies; Curriculum level approaches are possible (at least for smaller cohorts) where progression and reinforcement is planned (Kwantlen Polytechnic University).
3. 4. 5.
Early Findings
Students' Experiences of Team-and-Groupwork Survey
160 140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 147
1.2. Are you?
37
20
Female 39% Male 61%
What is your age ranger?

Under 20 20 to 30 30 to 40 Above 40
Undergraduate Postgraduate (Coursework) Postgraduate (Research) Other 166
42 1 4
1.3. What is the program in which you are enrolled?
Early Findings
3.5. Do you prefer to design in groups/teams or individually?
36%
Groups/Teams Individually
64%
3.6. Do you think that the group design projects you were previously involved in were good preparaHon for professional pracHce?
Yes No Not Applicable 26%
13%
61%
Early Findings
3.8. How important 0% do you think it is to learn about how to WORK in teams?
Very important Somewhat important Neither important not unimportant
24%
72%
Somewhat unimportant Very unimportant
Early Findings
Teachers' Experiences of Team-and-Groupwork Survey
40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 38
Yes 7 No
Do you teach a unit that requires or encourages students to work in groups or teams?
Do you teach students teamworking skills i.e. 'how to work in teams'?
48% 52%
Yes No
Early Findings
4.2. What level of teaching did you receive to assist you with team/groupwork?
14% 30%
The teacher/tutor taught us a great deal about teamworking. The teacher/tutor provided us with some guidance on teamworking. 56% The teacher/tutor provided us with liSle or no guidance on teamworking.
Early Findings
3.9. How important do you think it is to learn about how to DESIGN in teams?
6%
Very important Somewhat important 34% 57% Neither important not unimportant Somewhat unimportant Very unimportant
Early Findings
Do you teach students how to design in teams?
26% 74%
Yes No
Early Findings
6.2. How do you think group work can be fairly assessed?

15% 39% 19%
By awarding the same mark to the whole team By students assessing each others' contribuVons via face-to-face round-the-table discussions By students assessing each others' contribuVons via an on-line system By tutors assessing team members contribuVons
27%
Early Findings
How do you assess the group/ team component?

Individually A team mark is awarded. A team mark is individualised. A combinaVon of an individual and team mark is awarded.
38.46%
42.31%
15.38% 3.85%
Individually A team mark is A team mark is A combinaVon awarded. individualised. of an individual and team mark is awarded.
Early Findings
Do you assess the quality of ?

0%
The teamwork PROCESS The teamwork PRODUCT (i.e. the submiSed work) A combinaVon of the teamwork PROCESS and the teamwork PRODUCT
50%
50%
Early Findings
25 20 15 10 5 0 4
23
How are the groups/teams assembled?

Teachers/tutors allocate students to groups Every student chooses his/her team mates
Early Findings
Are curricula in your school designed around a structured framework for teaching teamwork skills?
Yes No
30%
70%
Questions?

Richard Presentation - Altc Symposium No 1

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Richard Presentation - Altc Symposium No 1

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Enhancing and Assessing Group and Team Learning in Architecture and Related Design Contexts

Associate Professor Richard Tucker Deakin University

Timeline & Data Collection

1.2. Are you?

Female 39% Male 61%

What is your age ranger?

Undergraduate Postgraduate (Coursework) Postgraduate (Research) Other 166

1.3. What is the program in which you are enrolled?

3.5. Do you prefer to design in groups/teams or individually?

Somewhat unimportant Very unimportant

Do you teach students teamworking skills i.e. 'how to work in teams'?

Do you teach students how to design in teams?

6.2. How do you think group work can be fairly assessed?

How do you assess the group/ team component?

Do you assess the quality of ?

How are the groups/teams assembled?

You might also like