This document presents a comparative analysis of two dissertations in architectural education, highlighting differences in methodology and focus between the first and fourth semesters. The first dissertation lacks clarity in its formulation and objectives, while the second dissertation is well-structured but still has some areas lacking, such as a clear hypothesis. Overall, the analysis emphasizes the importance of clarity and methodological rigor in architectural research.

1. COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
SUBMITTED TO-
DR. AHRAR
SUBMITTED BY-
APOORVA SINGH
M.ARCH 1ST SEM (ARCHITECTURE PEDAGOGY)

2. 1. To analyse the difference in the dissertations of the student in two semesters. To compare the two dissertations and find out the
changes in approach, re-thinking, methodology and ultimately the understanding of conclusion.
To understand the meaning of RSEARCH by studying the difference between finding, gathering and compiling of information
and by concluding with new thinking or ideas to it.
HEADS CREDENTIALS
Name of the student MOHD. HARIS BIN ARIF
Semester 1ST semester 4TH semester
Name of the Guide Ar. Mohd. Saquib (Assistant Professor) Ar. Mohd. Saquib (Assistant Professor)
Name of the Topic
Present Scenario of Architecture Education in context
with past and future.
Teacher, students practises and their impact on
learning spaces in architectural education
AIM AND OBJECTIVE

3. DISSERTATION 1
TOPIC- Present Scenario of Architecture Education in context with past and future.
SEMESTER- 1st Semester
GUIDE- Ar. Mohammad Saquib
The world has shown remarkable changes in the last few decades. Architectural education too, is no exception. New innovations have changed the course of
history, so also of style and structure of the architectural education programme. The very purpose of starting architecture education in India and the purpose
as it is viewed today, offer a totally diversified view. The programme over the years has become more matured and comprehensive but it could not keep up
the pace with the fast growth in the professional practice. The gap today, between education and profession is awesome. Many schools of architecture have
sprung up in the recent times and a shortage of able teachers is being experienced. The cumulative effect of all these is fast leading to falling standards and
architectural firm being more cautious choosy in checking the credentials of the incumbent fresh architectural hands. This dissertation sketches out the
history of architectural education in Indian context and concludes with some suggestions which would possibly lessen the downslide of architectural
education and consequently of the profession.
It could be argued that the history of Architecture of the last five centuries is the history of aspects of interdisciplinary, mainly in the way of thinking and
creating spatial manifestations of our social and cultural life. Starting from a multidisciplinary expertise possessed by one person in the Renaissance,
architecture has progressively passed through the classical periods to those aspects of interdisciplinary of modernist architecture, defined around the
sciences and then to those of Post Modernism, defined around the humanistic sciences and later on around the new construction technologies of the High-
Tech architecture of the 80s.
Nowadays, architectural education and practise are experiencing a shift of Interdisciplinary characterized by the coordinator, articulating and dominant role
of digital technologies. In this new situation the collaboration between architects, architecture education and architecture educators appear to be increasingly
necessary a condition. Any creative section takes place in a digital environment which affects all aspects of architectural form from the more abstract and
conceptual to its pure materiality. New architectural ideas and concepts related to the generation of forms that correspond to new conceptions of human and
social life, of space and time of nature and context, of speed and change, of communication and globalization, of complexity and order, of stability and
movement support and sustain this new condition.
In this context the education of architects and more specifically, architecture education, is progressively transforming in order to keep abreast with the
incredibly fast development of technological possibilities and infrastructures; and more informed about the amazingly wide variety of totally new
construction materials and techniques more aware of the rapid deterioration of the environment and of the imperative necessity for a built environment, less
energy-consuming and more sustainable, more attentive to an increasingly unstable labour market and increasingly specialised professional practice, more
conscious of the tremendously rapid transformations of the logic and the ideas which generate contemporary architecture, more sensitive to he unbelievably
fast-changing values and attitudes of our contemporary culture, more responsive to the rapid transformations of our everyday life, more responsive to the
demand for new forms of interdisciplinary collaboration for generating new forms of contemporary architecture.
PREFACE

4. ANALYSIS ON THE BASIS OF 8 STEP MODAL-
1. FORMULATION OF RESEARCH-
I. Proper formulation is not done, while reading through the dissertation it seems the student got deviated from the topic.
II. The student could not mention the AIM/OBJECTIVES of the dissertation and it got catered. For example. For aim, to write
TO ANALYSE instead of TO STUDY, the aim is the name of the topic of dissertation itself which is misguiding, objectives
are very elaborative, instead of being to the point he wrote whole para.
2. CONCEPTUALIZING-
I. NEED/ SCOPE of the topic is not mentioned.
II. HYPOTHESIS of the project is not drawn.
III. RATIONALE is also not mentioned, student has directly jumped onto the methodology.
IV. DELIMITATIONS are also mentioned.
V. Study design is also not prepared, whether what type of research it is going to be.
3. CONSTRUCTING AN INSTRUMENT FOR DATA COLLECTION-
I. He did mention the data collection as a step in the methodology but, did not mention any tool/ instrument for collecting
data, as according to the topic it requires more of interviews from exerts, architects, professors and even students, but
nothing as such is mentioned nor done in the report.
II. None of the primary sources are mentioned, but references are mentioned at the end of the report.
III. Only case studies are performed and literature studies done, but we can say that conclusion drawn by the student is the
perspective of his own thoughts as he did not ask the point of view of others.
4. SELECTING A SAMPLE-
I. As proper is not collected so no step of sampling is performed, and the report is not reliable/validate/.
5. WRITING A RESERCH PROPOSAL-
I. Content is descriptive and it got scattered, intro of the topic we can is okay, but, the actual problem or aim is not clear.
II. Objectives are even translucent, as when the aim is not clear, the objectives designed can be misleading too.
III. Hypothesis is not mentioned.
IV. Measurement procedure can not be drawn as there are no figures or percentage to be calculated.
V. Appendix is not mentioned
6. COLLECTING DATA-
I. Data collected, one can say is not reliable as it has no significance with what was actually required.
7. PROCESSING DATA-
I. It is not applicable only, as when collected is non reliable, so how can the coding/ decoding, or editing of the data can be
done.
II. Neither the representation of data is applicable.
8. WRITING A RESEARCH-
I. References are drawn.
II. No bibliography/appendices
III. No variable/no evaluation/ no questionnaires.

5. DISSERTATION 2
TOPIC- TEACHERS STUDENTS PRACTISES AND THEIR IMPACT ON LEARNING SPACES IN ARCHITECTURAL EDUCATION
SEMESTER- 4th semester
GUIDE- AR. MOHAMMAD SAQUIB
The form and function of the constructed on- campus environment, particularly classrooms(e.g. lecture theatres, tutorial rooms) and other formal places of
learning within it(e.g. libraries, laboratories) have remained largely unchanged for seven centuries, apart from obvious technical advances. This institutional
architecture has provided an optimum environment for prevailing teacher-centred practises—lectures supplemented by tutorials—concerned primarily with the
one-way delivery of information to students.
Architecture institutes require more versatile spaces, as well as clusters of facilities offering a variety of options for students to work in different ways, and
which also increases the ability for teachers to adopt different instructional approaches. These spaces would afford students greater responsibility for, and
ownership and control of, their physical learning environments. But such changes need to be accompanied by broad efforts to overcome the separation of
“formal” learning environments such as classrooms, libraries and labs, on the one hand and, on the other, “informal” social spaces such as café and student
lounges which has characterised traditional student campus design.
An abstract from the movie, “Harry Potter and The Philosophers Stone”
“he emerged into the strangest- looking classroom he had ever seen. In fact, it didn’t look like a classroom at all, more like a cross between someone’s attic
and an old fashioned tea shop. At least twenty small, circular tables were crammed inside it, all surrounded by chintz arm chairs and fat little poufs.
Everything was lit with a dim, crimson light; the curtains at the windows were all closed, and the many lamps were draped with red scarves. It was stiflingly
warm, and the fire was burning under crowded mantelpiece was giving off a heavy sickly sort of perfume as it heated a large copper kettle. The shelves
running around the circular walls were crammed with dusty- looking feathers, stubs of candles, many packs of tattered playing cards, countless silvery
crystal balls, and a huge array of tea cups.”
This enchanting description of a classroom, at the fictitious Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and Wizardry captures three fundamental ideas, about learning
spaces.
First, all learning takes place in a physical environment with quantifiable and perceptible physical characteristics. Whether sitting in a large hall, underneath a
tree, or in front of a computer screen, students are engulfed by surroundings. Specific targets within the environment draw the students attention, such as arm
chairs, scarves and tea cups, and they continuously monitor the ambient properties such as light of the lamps, the smell of the kettle, and the warmth of the fire.
PREFACE

6. Second, students do not touch, see, or hear passively; they feel, look and listen actively. Students can not attend all the environmental information bombarding
them at any given time; their ability to gather and understand incoming information is limited. Through automatic and controlled processes, students select
information for consideration. They try to understand what they are sensing by piecing bits of information
together from the bottom up and by applying existing thoughts and preconceptions from the top down. A classroom with circular tables and comfortable arm
chairs may look strange but students may direct their attention to particular targets in the learning environment that they find more interesting or important. For
some it may be instructors engaging chemistry demonstrations. For others, it may be silvery crystal ball on the shelf. In any learning environment, student
manage their limited cognitive resources by actively selecting environmental information for further consideration.
Third, the physical characteristics of learning environments can affect learners emotionally, with important cognitive and behavioural consequences. Although,
emotional reactions to environmental stimuli have been shown to vary widely across individuals and activities, most students would probably find learning
difficult in a classroom that is stiflingly warm. Conversely, environments that elicit positive emotional responses may lead not only to enhanced learning but
also to a powerful, attachment to that space.
The importance of “Place” in the Teaching and Learning Process
The discourse on the built environment of the campus now needs to address explicitly the relationship between the “places” provided on-campus and the quality
of the student learning experience. By the virtue of the university campus, and the s[paces within it, as an active agent in the learning process, the campus
environment is part of the learning experience and spaces need to be silent teachers.
At the site of individual lesson or instructional episode, the “place”, of teaching and learning plays a vital role in how the process is experienced by the
participants? A practising architect has commented:
Space is neither innocent nor natural: it is a instrument of the political; it has a performative aspect for whoever inhabits it; it works on its occupants, space
prohibits, decides what may occur, lays down the law, implies a certain order, commands and locates bodies.
The lecture theatres and instructional spaces of the traditional campus have functioned in exactly this way, being the manifestation of particular power relations
between teacher and student, and reinforcing traditional, narrowly defined roles. In contrast to the uniformity and restrictions imposed by traditional classroom
settings, this study argues that it should be the intention of universities to create places of learning which contains the possibility for multiple and contrasting
experiences.
The tools developed for this study achieved 71% response rate. Respondents selected trends that they expected to increase; the top five all involved the
application of IT. In some cases, this had a direct relationship to physical space, such as technology enhanced social spaces and use of networking across the
institution.

7. ANALYSIS ON THE BASIS OF 8 STEP MODAL-
1. FORMULATION OF RESEARCH-
I. Formulation is proper. And author is clear with his understanding of the topic and how he needs to proceed?
II. Findings are contextualised as in starting itself he mentioned the percentage of response he received from the interviews.
III. Although, a major drawback or a blunder is author did not formulated the aim of the dissertation and objectives designed are
misleading.
IV. Reviewing of literature is not mentioned but the immense work is done for case studies of JAMIA itself, and MNIT, MIT,
AMU.
V. Conceptual and theoretical framework has been developed which is drawn in introduction itself.
2. CONCEPTUALIZING-
I. NEED/ SCOPE of the topic is mentioned and explained thoroughly.
II. HYPOTHESIS of the project is not drawn.
III. RATIONALE is also not mentioned.
IV. DELIMITATIONS are mentioned.
V. Study design is also not prepared, whether what type of research it is going to be.
3. CONSTRUCTING AN INSTRUMENT FOR DATA COLLECTION-
I. He did mention the data collection as a step in the methodology and even prepared 4 tools for collecting the data.
II. Tools used- questionnaire for teachers/ students, observing students of JMI, international case studies.
4. SELECTING A SAMPLE-
I. Random selection of the samples, conducted for period of 4 weeks.
II. 4 institutions were monitored for sampling.
III. 100 samples were taken(20 teachers and 80 students).
IV. Handouts of questionnaires were provided to students/teachers, some of them were mailed.
V. Sampling was quantitative
5. WRITING A RESERCH PROPOSAL-
I. Content written is good, descriptive but at times caters from the exact path, but aim is not clear.
II. Objectives are even translucent, as when the aim is not clear, the objectives designed can be misleading too.
III. Hypothesis is not mentioned.
IV. Can not judged as, findings drawn are on the basis of observations and not calculative.
V. Appendices are mentioned, depicting the “analysis of findings from questionnaires”/ methodology used,

8. 6. COLLECTING DATA-
I. Data collected, was analysed with help of literature reviews(web/printed/journals/books), interviews(telephonic,
personal), 4 international case studies and observing students.
II. Questionnaires were framed(teachers/ students)
III. Response rate was calculated- teachers(64%) 21 responses to 33 invitations, students(51%) 82 responses to 159
invitations.
IV. Majorly senior faculties and 1st and 2nd year students responded.
V. Conducted in a period of 4 months.
7. PROCESSING DATA-
I. Author processed the data he collected, and the drawn some pictographic descriptions, depicting the teacher student
relation.
II. Findings drawn were depicted graphically.
III. Findings were not calculative or mathematical to be coded or decoded, they were the behavioural responses to the
interviews and questions asked about the spaces and impact of spaces on teacher/ students.
IV. Results were analysed to explore the overall rate of change predicted.
8. WRITING A RESEARCH-
I. References are drawn.
II. bibliography/appendices were mentioned.
III. Conclusions were drawn keeping in mind all the aspects and the requirements of the dissertation.

9. COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF BOTH TOPICS ON THE BASIS OF 8 STEP MODAL-
S.NO. STEPS TOPIC 1 TOPIC 2
1. Formulation of research
No proper formulation, no defined
aims/objectives, no clarity, nor focused
Focused, properly formulated, contextualised, proper
procedure for review was followed,
2.
Conceptualizing a
research proposal
Not conceptualised, nor any study design was
mentioned
To a certain extent as capered to the previous research,
it was conceptualised, but no study design
3.
Constructing an
instrument for data
collection
No instrumentation was used, conclusions
were self drawn.
Various tools were used for collecting data,
observations of students as also processed, as a whole
in this research methodology actually evolved from
compilation.
4. Selecting a sample No selection of samples/
Random sampling was done, handouts were prepared,
followed by personal and telephonic interviews.
5.
Writing a research
proposal
Improper way of writing research, steps were
missing
Improved way of writing proposal, author was more
clear about the understanding of research, but still did
not mention hypothesis, aims and even the rationale.
6. Collecting data No data collection
On the basis of interviews, from primary sources,
confidentiality is mentioned, just the no. of people
interviewed are mentioned not their names. Percentage
of responses is also calculated.
7. Processing data
Not applicable as author did not undergo the
step of data collection.
Through pictographic/graphical representation some
data is processed, rest of the findings are based upon
the behavioural impacts and aspects, so it is non
calculative, hence, no depiction or statistical calculation
needed.
8. Writing a research report
References were written, no outline was
developed, no bibliography
Outline was developed, but some way got catered,
references and bibliography were drawn, appendices
were mentioned

10. CONCLUSIONS DRAWN FROM BOTH THE STUDIES-
1ST SEMESTER 2ND SEMESTER
Author is not clear to what he intend to study with the
dissertation.
Author had a clear intentions to study the impact of
spaces, but he got deviated with the impact of teacher
on student and vice versa.
He ended up with the self drawn conclusions and even
the accepted study format for architectural education,
as he did not go through thorough study.
He did a good collection of data, but findings are not
based on figures and facts, findings are more impact on
teacher and student.
First dissertation cannot be called as a Research as
nothing new was generated nor evolved out of the
research.
Conclusions drawn are new as the author formulated
those results and outcomes after going through various
reviews and literatures, including international case
studies and even holding various interviews.
MY CONCLUSIONS -
1. For the above mentioned report, I would conclude
by saying that it was merely a documentation of the
topic, as neither the reviews were studied nor the
literatures were read.
2. All the conclusions drawn were hypothetical, with
references mentioned but no validity or reliability
of the same.
1. I would conclude, that, the above mentioned
dissertation to an extent can be called a Research,
as at the end with all permutations and
combinations something new was evolved.
2. But it also left with blunders like no aim, no
hypothesis, no rationale, so in a way or so it is not
a research, as it missed a one or two steps from the
modal.
…end…