The Case Problem (Experimental) Model.pptx

1. MODELS OF TEACHING
ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN
• THE CASE PROBLEM(EXPERIMENTAL) MODEL
• THE ANALOGICAL MODEL
SUBMITTED TO-
AR. FAIZA HASHMI
SUBMITTED BY-
SHAHEEN PARVEEN
M.ARCH 1ST YEAR
2023-24
ARCHITECTURE PEDAGOGY II - MAP 213

2. The Case Problem (Experimental) Model
The Case Problem Experimental Method is a teaching method used in design education that emphasizes
real-world problem-solving and experiential learning. It was developed by Martin Symes and Alexi Marmot
in the 1980s at the Bartlett School of Architecture in London.
•Balanced Approach to Design:
• Design work is neither purely rationalist and deductive, nor purely empiricist and inductive.
• It involves a linking activity where designers review partially solved cases and associated problems.
•Case Problem Experimental Method:
• This approach involves presenting students with real-world design problems or challenges.
• Students are tasked with developing innovative solutions through hands-on experimentation.
•Combining Theory with Practice:
• The model aims to combine theoretical knowledge with design practice and education.
• It helps students develop a knowledge base while stimulating effective learning by preparing them
to design for real-life situations.
The method is based on the following principles:
•Real-world problems: Students are presented with real-world design problems, either from professional
practice or hypothetical scenarios.
•Active learning: Students are actively engaged in the learning process, through activities such as research,
analysis, design development, and presentation.
•Multiple solutions: Students are encouraged to explore and develop multiple solutions to the design
problem.
•Critique and feedback: Students receive regular feedback from instructors and peers on their work.

3. The method typically involves the following steps:
1.Introduction to the case problem: The instructor introduces the students to the design problem and provides
them with relevant background information.
2.Research and analysis: Students conduct research on the design problem, the site, and the users.
3.Design development: Students develop their design solutions, through sketching, modeling, and other design
tools.
4.Presentation and critique: Students present their design solutions to the class and receive feedback from
instructors and peers.
5.Reflection and iteration: Students reflect on the feedback they have received and iterate on their design
solutions.
The model originally has three stages:
i.) CONCEPTION STAGE:
•Real-life cases from architectural practice are brought into the design studio.
•These cases typically involve crisis situations where efficient decisions are required to overcome obstacles.
•The focus is on bringing in situations where work is stuck and requires a verdict or judgment to proceed.
•The design studio is the designated place for addressing these situations.
•Mature students capable of identifying problems and providing practical solutions are targeted for this stage.
•The aim is to link architectural course theory with practice and develop students' decision-making skills.

4. (ii) THE DESIGN PROCESS: the design development process is divided into the following stages:
 Stage 1:
• Students are introduced to the situation at the site through precedent studies and a package of useful
information.
• The package includes information about the architect, client, project requirements, site analysis, technical data,
construction resources, material selection, economic analysis, and precedent examples.
• Information about the architect's personality, design style, intentions for the project, and similar precedent
examples is provided.
• The goal is to provide students with a comprehensive understanding of the project context and relevant
factors.
 Stage 2: Evaluation of Design Solutions:
• Students evaluate design solutions within their peer groups, with instructors, and potentially with the client
and architect.
• Each group or individual presents their proposal in a professional manner, like in an office setting.
• Proposals are evaluated based on practical applicability, including spatial organization, natural lighting, passive
design techniques, noise control measures, construction resources, and economic analysis.
• Feedback is provided, and necessary corrections and changes are suggested to refine the proposals.

5. Stage 3:
•After receiving feedback, students return to the studio to review their design intentions and further refine their
proposals.
•They then submit their finalized design solutions for assessment.
GENERATING
SCHEMATIC
CONCEPTS
FORMULATING &
ESTABLISHING
MULTIPLE
CRITERIA
EVALUATION OF
CONCEPTS
REVIEWING
DESIGN
INTENTIONS
DEVELOPING
DESIGN
PROPOSALS
The process starts with generating design concepts. The concepts are evaluated by using multiple criteria. Students are asked to
review their design intentions according to this evaluation and develop design proposals. The evaluation phase represents
programming, since the criteria are developed within different types of knowledge.
The Case Problem (Experimental) Model

6. Benefits of Using the Case Problem
Experimental Method
ENHANCED CREATIVITY
• The experimental method
encourages students to think
outside the box and explore
unconventional design
solutions.
PRACTICAL EXPERIENCE
• Students gain hands-on
experience by actively engaging
in the design process and
testing their ideas in real-world
scenarios.
CRITICAL THINKING
• The experimental method
promotes critical thinking skills
as students analyze and
evaluate the outcomes of their
design experiments.
PROBLEM SOLVING
• Students learn to identify
design challenges and develop
innovative solutions through
trial and error.
COLLABORATION
• The experimental method
encourages collaboration and
teamwork as students work
together to design and
implement their experi
ADABTABILITY
• Students learn to adapt and
iterate their designs based on
the outcomes of their
experiments, fostering flexibility
and resilience.

7. Application of the Case Problem
Experimental Method in Teaching Design
Example: Designing a Sustainable Packaging Solution
In one case study, students were presented with the challenge of designing a sustainable packaging solution for a
consumer product. They conducted research, analyzed existing packaging designs, and experimented with different
materials and manufacturing processes. Through iterative prototyping and testing, they developed a packaging
solution that minimized waste and environmental impact while still meeting the functional and aesthetic
requirements of the product.
Case Study: Redesigning a Public Space
Another case study involved the redesign of a public space to improve its functionality and aesthetic appeal. Students
conducted site visits, analyzed user needs and behaviors, and researched best practices in urban design. They then
developed and tested design concepts through physical and digital modeling. The final design solution transformed
the space into a vibrant and inclusive community gathering place.

8. The Teaching Style
In this model, students work in small groups.
•Group Work: Students collaborate in small groups, with each group working on a project from stage to stage.
•Individual Contributions: Despite working in groups, individuals are responsible for specific sections of each
stage to ensure that everyone makes a positive contribution to the design development.
•Teaching/Learning Style: Based on March's ideas (1976) emphasizing productive thinking in design, which calls
for explicit treatment in both practice and education.
•Focus on Productive Thinking: Encourages design professionals to find new formal ideas to reorganize
established problems, as argued by Symes (1985).
•Linking Theory with Practice: Examines how generic ideas and philosophies impact architectural design, aiming
to bridge theory and practice.
•Consideration of Multiple Criteria: Takes into account various criteria involved in a design problem.
•Use of Specific Information: Criteria are handled with specific information to investigate problems and find
solutions effectively.
•Iterative Design Process: Students develop an initial idea based on precedent, test it thoroughly, and then refine
or generate alternative ideas for better solutions.
•Deepening Knowledge: Testing ideas leads to a deeper understanding of the problem, enabling students to
produce alternative solutions.
•Iterative Improvement: Students continually refine their designs based on feedback and testing, aiming for
continual improvement throughout the design process.

9. THE ANALOGICAL MODEL
THE CONCEPTION OF ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN
 This model has been developed by Gordon Simmons (1978).
• Teaching/Learning Format: The model is based on the design studio format.
• Design Process: Design is seen as a process of selection rather than invention.
• Combination and Development of Ideas: Ideas for architectural solutions are not invented from nothing but are
combinations and developments of other ideas.
• Influence of Collins (1971): The model's concept is influenced by Collins (1971), who argues that the eclectic
process of selecting and rejecting possible solutions is how design actually occurs.
• Role of Novelty and Originality: Overemphasis on novelty and originality is considered misdirected and futile, as
it ignores the need for continuity in communication.
• Design Ideas as Intuitive Hypotheses: Design ideas are viewed as intuitive hypotheses that are rationalized
afterward.
• Factors in Architectural Design: Economic, political, structural, functional, technological, and other factors are
considered theoretically equal in their potential to affect building form.

10. • Relative Impact of Factors: The relative impact of each factor varies depending on the specific situation.
• Use of Analogy: Analogy is emphasized as a rich source for creative ideas. Architects often draw inspiration
from disciplines such as nature, literature, and science.
This model is based on analogy as a rich source for creative ideas, since architects have always imported
inspirations from outside disciplines; such as nature, literature, and science.
The predominant analogical sources of building form have been other buildings.
THE DESIGN PROCESS
The model is based on the epistemological distinction of theoretical and imperical descriptions of how knowledge
is obtained whether through deduction of particulars from general principles or through building up general
solutions inductively through observation and accumulation of sense data.
The model tries to explore the relationship between the gathering of information and the occurrence of formal
ideas.
The model is divided into two sub models,
i. the building technology model and
ii. the formal vocabulary model.
THE ANALOGICAL MODEL

11. THE BUILDING TECHNOLOGY MODEL
•Technology-Oriented: The model is focused on technology and aims to provide a set of technical
parts that can be manipulated and integrated into design along with other factors.
•Objective: The objective is to address students' relative lack of awareness of technical aspects of
building by emphasizing the importance of technology in influencing building form.
•Process Division: The process is divided into a group of procedures.
•Detailed Analysis: The project begins with a detailed analysis of technical and structural
elements.
•Functional and Social Program: Design tasks follow a functional and social program of an
existing building.
•Graphic Presentation: Following the analysis of technical and structural elements and
identification of the program, the next step involves a graphic presentation of the technical
system and its elements, along with an analysis of their formal implications.
•Design Solution: The final step consists of producing a design solution based on the analysis
and presentation of technical systems and elements.

12. ANALYSIS OF
TECHNICAL
SYSTEM
TECHNICAL
VOCABULARY &
FORMAL
IMPLICATIONS
GRAPHICAL
PRESENTATIONS
USING A
PROGRAM OF AN
EXISTING
BUILDING
DEVELOPING
DESIGN
PROPOSALS
The process starts with a detailed analysis of any comprehensive coherent technical system. The design
starts with following a functional/social of an existing building. Student develop a graphic presentation for
the system and analyse its formal implications. The design solution is then produced.
THE PROCESS OF THE ANALOGICAL MODEL
(BUILDING TECHNOLOGY)

13. THE FORMAL VOCABULARY MODEL
• Objective: The objective of this model is to examine formal vocabulary examples using the
vocabulary of famous architects.
• Architect Selection: Architects are chosen based on the availability of information about
them and the significance of their formal system.
• Process Division:
• Literature Analysis: The process begins with an analysis of literature related to three or
four famous architects.
• Slide Presentation Development: The second step involves developing a slide
presentation about the theories and buildings of the selected architects.
• Individual Design Work: After the literature analysis and slide presentation
development, students work individually on their design solutions.
• Designing in the Manner of Chosen Architects: Students are tasked with designing in
the manner of the architects they choose. They are guided to consider how their selected
architect would approach the problem, what personal ideals they bring to the situation,
and how to work with site, technology, structure, and other factors.
• Evaluation: The final step involves evaluating student performance based on their design
solutions and how well they were able to emulate the style and approach of their chosen
architects.

14. SELECTING
FAMOUS
ARCHITECTS
LITERATURE
REVIEW/ANALYSI
NG THE FORMAL
VOCABULARY
SLIDE PRESENTAT
USING A
PROGRAM OF AN
EXISTING
BUILDING
DEVELOPING
DESIGN
PROPOSALS
The process starts with selecting three or four famous architects and then analyzing the literature related
to them. The task of design starts by following functional/social a program of an existing building, and
then developing design proposals.
THE PROCESS OF THE ANALOGICAL MODEL
(FORMAL VOCABULARY)

15. THE TEACHING STYLE
According to this model,
• Exposure to Broad View:
• Students should be exposed to the broadest possible view of architecture.
• This exposure provides a frame of reference for subsequent specific learning.
• Opposition to Incremental Learning:
• The model opposes the view that a student's comprehension of architecture should be widened block by
block, like an inverted pyramid.
• Emphasis on Specific Aspects:
• Gordon Simmons (1978) argues that students lack the knowledge and experience to handle complete
architectural problems.
• Design exercises should emphasize a particular, clearly defined aspect within a larger context.
 By following this approach, students can develop a deeper understanding of architecture by focusing on
specific aspects within a broader context, rather than attempting to tackle complete architectural problems
without the necessary knowledge and experience.

16. The model has three pedagogical objectives, which they are:
 Providing an understanding of different types of knowledge in architecture, theories and building techniques.
 Developing the students' abilities to manipulate a comprehensive design within these types of knowledge.
 Using abstractions of generic ideas from the work of others.
In summary, the teaching style of this model is based upon developing students capabilities to use analytical data
in design, thus, enabling them to perceive limitations as well as positive values of the system at hand (formal
vocabulary or technical system), develop the individual cognition of essential ideas, and then realize the usefulness
and worth of an explicit body of knowledge.
THE TEACHING STYLE

17. The Case Problem (Experimental) Model: Application in
the Design Studio
INTENT- The paper aims to bridge the gap between architectural theory and practice, encouraging students to
become efficient decision-makers and generate multiple solutions to design problems. The paper examines the Case
Problem Model developed by Martin Symes and Alexi Marmot in 1985, which introduces real-life architectural cases
into the design studio for educational purposes.
PROCESS- An architectural studio exercise is described, where students engage with a hypothetical problem to
design a Guggenheim Museum in Nagpur, India, applying the phases of the model to foster creativity and practicality
in design. Various creative exercises were introduced to stimulate the design process, leading to a variety of design
concepts for the hypothetical Guggenheim Museum.

18. OUTCOME-
This model gives us a new approach towards the design studio which can be made a lively and interesting affair.
Even complex design problems and real live situations from the site can be moulded in stages to help generate
multiple solutions.
The model proved to be an engaging way to approach design education, with the potential for refinement in future
studios, particularly regarding material selection and form-oriented design.

19. Role of Analogy in Architecture Design Education
INTENT- The paper discusses the role of analogy in enhancing design skills among architecture students, focusing
on analogical learning, reasoning, and thinking within the design studio context.
PROCESS- The study employs various research methods, including data collection tools, questionnaires, and
comparative analysis, to evaluate the effectiveness of the proposed framework. The experiment involves students
using analogy to improve concept design. Phases include knowledge identification, mapping, problem-solving, and
construction.
OUTCOME- Students’ perceptions show that analogy enhances design knowledge, analytical skills, and
presentation abilities. Analogical learning positively impacts design solutions. Findings suggest that analogical
learning significantly improves students’ design skills, enabling them to approach design problems holistically and
incorporate multiple design aspects into their solutions. The document emphasizes the importance of analogy as a
cognitive tool in architectural design education, proposing practical methods to integrate it into the curriculum. This
study confirms the feasibility of using analogical thinking in the teaching of architecture design to enhance analytical
skills, improve presentation skills and graphic skills.

20. THANK YOU