Table 6 Future implications for... | Emerald Publishing

Table 6

Future implications for architectural education and profession

Themes	Intended mandates (L1 and L2)	Operational reality (L5)	Translational gap in studio teaching (L1-L5)	Future implications for
T1: Working with others	Interdisciplinary team Diverse teams	Diverse people	Dilution	Studio pedagogy: Incorporate studios that require students to work in genuine interdisciplinary teams
	Indigenous engagement	X	Absence	Studio pedagogy: Must ensure that studios integrate Indigenous engagement in the curriculum
				Institutions: Must investigate the reasons behind the lack of integration of Indigenous engagement in courses and studios
				Profession: Accreditation bodies can seek explicit evidence from institutions of how specific mandates like Indigenous engagement are taught and assessed within the operational curriculum
T2: Interpersonal skills	Communication with external stakeholders Teamwork, communication, negotiation and leadership skills	Teamwork and communication skills	Dilution	Studio pedagogy: Integrating external stakeholders at the course and studio levels, and explicit studios focussing on teamwork
				Institutions: Must explicitly embed and teach studios and courses focussing on “soft skills.”
				Program and course design: Program directors must revise course outlines to embed missing competencies explicitly. Interpersonal skills, stakeholder communication, and end-user integration must be written into the formal learning outcomes and grading rubrics at L3 and L4
				Studio courses must shift to formally assess teamwork and other skills, moving away from grading mechanisms that only reward individual design output
T3: Environment	Investment in physical collaborative ecosystems, digital tools and infrastructure	X	Absence	Institutions: Must investigate why investment in collaborative environments or precincts fails to translate into learning environments
				Must train educators to use physical and digital collaborative tools as active instructional mechanisms and provide formal pedagogical training for studio tutors in operationalising collaborative mandates
				Studio pedagogy: The use of physical and digital collaboration tools should be promoted
T4: Pedagogical integration	X(L1) Industry, end-user, and interdisciplinary integrated teaching	Explicit activities Simulating professional practice	Dilution Absence	Studio pedagogy: Must move beyond simulations to authentic industry, end-user and interdisciplinary integration
				Must align assessment rubrics to reward collective outputs
				Profession: The AACA could develop supplementary guidance notes (Practice Notes) to help tutors translate professional mandates. They can also suggest minimum standards for the required depth of industry input in the curriculum

Themes	Intended mandates (L1 and L2)	Operational reality (L5)	Translational gap in studio teaching (L1-L5)	Future implications for
T1: Working with others	Interdisciplinary teamDiverse teams	Diverse people	Dilution	Studio pedagogy: Incorporate studios that require students to work in genuine interdisciplinary teams
	Indigenous engagement	X	Absence	Studio pedagogy: Must ensure that studios integrate Indigenous engagement in the curriculum
				Institutions: Must investigate the reasons behind the lack of integration of Indigenous engagement in courses and studios
				Profession: Accreditation bodies can seek explicit evidence from institutions of how specific mandates like Indigenous engagement are taught and assessed within the operational curriculum
T2: Interpersonal skills	Communication with external stakeholdersTeamwork, communication, negotiation and leadership skills	Teamwork and communication skills	Dilution	Studio pedagogy: Integrating external stakeholders at the course and studio levels, and explicit studios focussing on teamwork
				Institutions: Must explicitly embed and teach studios and courses focussing on “soft skills.”
				Program and course design: Program directors must revise course outlines to embed missing competencies explicitly. Interpersonal skills, stakeholder communication, and end-user integration must be written into the formal learning outcomes and grading rubrics at L3 and L4
				Studio courses must shift to formally assess teamwork and other skills, moving away from grading mechanisms that only reward individual design output
T3: Environment	Investment in physical collaborative ecosystems, digital tools and infrastructure	X	Absence	Institutions: Must investigate why investment in collaborative environments or precincts fails to translate into learning environments
				Must train educators to use physical and digital collaborative tools as active instructional mechanisms and provide formal pedagogical training for studio tutors in operationalising collaborative mandates
				Studio pedagogy: The use of physical and digital collaboration tools should be promoted
T4: Pedagogical integration	X(L1)Industry, end-user, and interdisciplinary integrated teaching	Explicit activitiesSimulating professional practice	DilutionAbsence	Studio pedagogy: Must move beyond simulations to authentic industry, end-user and interdisciplinary integration
				Must align assessment rubrics to reward collective outputs
				Profession: The AACA could develop supplementary guidance notes (Practice Notes) to help tutors translate professional mandates. They can also suggest minimum standards for the required depth of industry input in the curriculum

Source(s): Created by authors