{Assmt-intent} MY TRIP TO THE ARCHIVES

Research at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology Museum –Architecture and Design Collection

             My area of research concerns evaluation of university environments for learning in general, and college students and their assessment of their physical classroom space in particular. Inherent, although not often apparent in their evaluation, is the resultant effects of students perceptions of the personal and social relationships in their space as well as the perceived intent of the entity or person who created the environment for them. Although it is commonly understood in architectural education and  practice that designed spaces are the solidification of intention, there is no documentation as to how the nonprofessional perceives that intention in terms of how they feel valued, or even whether they perceive the classroom environment as utility to the teaching method. Historically spaces have been designed and assessed per the 19th century architectural maxim of “Form follows Function”.

            To those ends, my external experience involves conducting an initial research visit to the Massachusetts Institute of Technology Museum, Bldg. N51, in Cambridge Massachusetts (http://web.mit.edu/museum/collections/architecture.html). I will be working in the Architecture and Design collection and Institute Archives and Special Collections. Before the 19th century in America, design work was largely the province of artisans/builders and a few architects. In the 1840’s, there was less than a half dozen architects in New York and slightly more in Boston. However, because of the accumulated wealth of  the industrial revolution, architects began to be recognized as professional advisers and the first school of architecture in the United States was established at MIT. This archive collection documents the oldest architectural program in America and includes student thesis work and reviews from 1873 through the latter 20th century. The intent of the designer for classroom spaces are both illustrated and critiqued within the framework of architectural education, thus giving an historical foundation for the intent of the designer for teaching and learning environments.

            I will develop a list of artifact categories to submit to the curator 30 days before my visit. I will work with them and their collection list to develop an organized ordered sequence of artifacts for viewing and work out how to document the work for my use. I will make an appointment for the actual visit. All visits are supervised and prearranged and the cost is $30.00 per hour for each hour after the first. Therefore, this initial visit will set up my research initiative and build relationships with the curation staff.

            To document this external experience, I will write a paper detailing my process, present a summary of items viewed and commentary on the experience.  

Interdisciplinarity: Like a Full Earthen Bowl???

My Summary of "Interdisciplinarity: Like a Full Earthen Bowl" by Dick Westheimer

In this article, Dr. Westheimer gives support to his initiative to apply interdisciplinary methods to “ all of his work and play” by presenting a theoretical foundation, contrasting interdisciplinarians and the disciplines and then proposing implications.

            Setting his foundation for the place of interdisciplinary methods, Dr. Westheimer presents the angry admonitions of physicist Davie Bohm who blames contemporary culture for relying on a view of “ the totality as constructed of independent fragments”, in contrast to his views of an “undivided wholeness”. Westheimer summarizes by saying that interdisciplinarity views a phenomena as not discipline fragments independently existing, but rather, as Bohm posits “derivation of the parts by extracting from the whole”.

In regards to interdisciplinary actions and the disciplines, there is a dichotomy of sorts.   Although Dr. Westheimer, writes of a “coherent interdisciplinary method revealing a dynamic connectedness”, he admits that great truths can be and often are derived mechanically (isolated from the whole). Indeed, much good has come from close inspection within the constraints of disciplinary organization. But he concludes that disciplinary work, when taken to the extreme, often “lays waste to more than it builds up”. Within that position, he offers that the only way to truly have a greater understanding of the whole is to master the part, which is highly improbable when one accepts topics that span multiple disciplines.   Therefore, he concludes, that the problem is not in disciplinary work, but rather, when one crowds out the other and he clarifies the role of interdisciplinary work in nine areas.

Finally, Dr. Wertheimer illustrates the implication of his thinking by relaying  a personal experience in which an outsider’s view affected the status quo. He concludes by  imparting permission to  the reader to find value in undisciplined inclinations, to question authority and empower those left out - indeed, to question that those disciplines actually exist.

Commentary on George Hein's article, “The Challenge of Constructivist Teaching”

Overall, I found the article to be an unexpected delight. In his “prologue”, Dr. Hein illustrates that interdisciplinarity can bring benefits to the classroom and then proceeds with a largely reasoned introduction to constructivism and offers his personal journey before outlining his response to the challenge of developing a course that embodied the constructivist theory. Upon further reading, I realized that the aforementioned course was the predecessor to Interdisciplinary Seminar I and it laid a wonderful historical foundation for my understanding of our initiative. Amid this reading, I did connect with issues of power relationships in education, the Discoverists posit that knowledge can be right or wrong and, lastly, the reason why this is especially appropriate for interdisciplinarians in light of, as George Hein states, “the few semesters in which he found it painful to face another three hours”.

            I am a university professor, and in that light, I experience the balance of power between undergraduates and their instructor. My students, largely, expect to be fed what is ‘right’ and then offered the opportunity to regurgitate the truth in examination. Their subservience to the knowledge and faith in this process ensure that I am in control in the classroom. I strive for a different pedagogy and I notice their fear of personal empowerment and the accompanying responsibility. As Dr. Hein acknowledges, shifting power, even in a constructivist methodology can be palatable.

The concept of knowledge as being right or wrong was highlighted for me when I took my first course here at Lesley University this summer and experienced a constructivist pedagogy. In collaborative work, as part of a process, not knowing if it is “right’ and not knowing if your cohort is “right” can be daunting. I can understand how the ‘unenlightened’ student can be wary of group work constructed from each team member’s interpretation of the text and I strive for more enlightenment.

Lastly, I can understand a benefit for interdiscipinarians in the constructivist methodology as Dr. Hein proffers, and I do see theories of knowledge and theories of learning working in continua with best practice often residing apart from the extremities. 

Evaluation of Educational Facilities for Instruction/ Design

(COPYRIGHT © 2010 MIKAEL POWELL. All Rights Reserved)
The purpose of this course is to analyze the efforts by Lesley University and its agents to evaluate the architectural design of the existing Art Institute of Boston facility and outline the dynamics of the programming and schematic design phase of the new Art Institute of Boston. Topics addressed are curriculum and instructional theory, and contemporary evaluation.

A. Underlying premises
1. “School architecture profoundly influences the outcomes of learning” (Upitis, 2010, p. ix).
This assertion drives my research because it substantiates the relationship between adequate accommodations and effective teaching and learning.

2. There are distinct discourses to understand within the professions of architecture and education for effective collaboration (Upitis, 2010)
My architectural experience supports this idea that there are differences in the ways of speaking and values between architects and educators.

3. “If complexity science can be used to characterize the emergent and romantic nature of teaching and learning, then the next issue to consider is the kinds of architectural patterns that would allow for complexity to emerge.”(Upitis, 2010, p.79).
Within the various approaches to teaching and learning theory (constructivism – behavioralism, etc...) there are educational goals that are best supported by the built environment after consideration whether architectural accommodations address simple, complicated or complex issues.

4. Assessment of spaces must include lifecycle considerations (Upitis, 2010).
This premise reinforces that long-term use analysis is essential to effectively compare costs to benefits.

B. Course objectives:
Existing facility:
• To discover the basis for the design of the existing facility
• To review the relationship between curriculum/instruction and layout/spatial accommodations
• To gain an understanding of administrative procedures involved in the design of the facility
• To gain an understanding of the intentions and values of major stakeholders at the time the existing facility was developed.
New facility:
• To gain an understanding of the design of the new facility in regard to deficits of the existing building
• To analyze the initial stages of design for the new facility exploring how the proposed built environment supports teaching and learning (with particular attention to non-linear solutions that incorporate complexity science theories).
• To review the relationship between instruction and spatial accommodations
• To gain an understanding of administrative procedures involved in the design of the new facility
• To gain an understanding of the discourse, intentions and values of major stakeholders
• To gain an understanding of the new facility as a venture driven by owner initiatives, as a community venture, and as an architectural statement

C. Level of access requested from Lesley University
• Interviews with stakeholders
• Minutes of meetings (and attachments) of Lesley University with the architect
• Minutes of internal meetings (and attachments) and correspondence of Lesley University
• Minutes of internal meetings (and attachments) and correspondence from the architect
• Access to architectural sketches and presentations
• Assessments of the existing facility (formal and commentary)

D. Course grade is assessed from satisfactory completion of the following components:
1. The Process:
• Set up the process and repository to receive preliminary design documents and correspondence
• Set up procedures and materials for interviews
• Review, maintain, format and analyze data repository
• Perform interviews with key stakeholders
• Collect and analyze pertinent research

2. The Deliverables:
• Prepare interview protocol document for review.
• Prepare an analysis of the efforts by Lesley University and its agents to evaluate the architectural design of the existing Art Institute of Boston facility and outline the dynamics of the programming and schematic design of the new Art Institute of Boston pursuant to course objectives.
• Present evidence of archival categorization and formatting of artifacts.

3. Timetable
Issue Preliminary draft to Dr. Rena Upitis for comments no later than Sunday, November 14, 2010.
Transmit final paper to Dr. Rena Upitis for grade and final comments no later than 30 days after receipt of preliminary comments.
4. Final Evaluation
Outside activity faculty/ individual will send a letter of evaluation to the Senior Advisor in time for grades to be posted.

-end

Reference

Upitis, R. (2010). Raising a school: Foundations for school architecture. Township of South Frontenac, Ontario, Canada: Wintergreen Studios Press.
(COPYRIGHT © 2010 MIKAEL POWELL. All Rights Reserved)