A Beginners Mind

PROCEEDINGS
21st National Conference
on the Beginning Design Student

Stephen Temple, editor

Conference held at the

College of Architecture
The University of Texas at San Antonio
24-26 February 2005

A Beginners Mind
PROCEEDINGS
21st National Conference
on the Beginning Design Student
Stephen Temple, editor
College of Architecture
The University of Texas at San Antonio
24-26 February 2005

Situating Beginnings
Questioning Representation
Alternative Educations
Abstractions and Conceptions
Developing Beginnings
Pedagogical Constructions
Primary Contexts
Informing Beginnings
Educational Pedagogies
Analog / Digital Beginnings
Curriculum and Continuity
Interdisciplinary Curricula
Beginnings
Design / Build
Cultural Pluralities
Contentions
Revisions
Projections

Offered through the Research Office for Novice Design

Education, LSU, College of Art and Design, School of
Architecture.
Copyright 2006 University of Texas San Antonio
/ individual articles produced and edited by the authors

Printed proceedings produced by Stephen Temple, Associate Professor, University of Texas San Antonio.

All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced in any form or by any means without
written permission of the publisher.
Published by:
University of Texas San Antonio
College of Architecture
501 West Durango Blvd.
San Antonio TX 78207
210 458-3010
fax 210 458-3016

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Temple, Stephen, editor
A Beginners Mind: Proceedings of the 21st National Conference on the Beginning Design Student /
edited and compiled by Stephen Temple
1. Architecture - Teaching 2. Architecture - Design 3. Design - Teaching

ISBN 0-615-13123-9

Parallel Processing: Teaching Assistants in the Beginning Design Studio

BETH TAUKE (WITH KORYDON SMITH, SCOTT NUNEMAKER,
KERRON MILLER, JESSICA JAMROZ, AND TED LUTZ)
Department of Architecture School of Architecture and Planning
University at Buffalo, State University of New York
Introduction
Schools of architecture are relying more on
graduate student instruction these days, especially in
beginning design studios. Statistics suggest that this trend
will continue to grow as universities rely less on tenure and
tenure-track professors to deliver undergraduate curricula.
If this is a given, it is important for faculty and
administrators to focus on effective coordination and
development of teaching assistants to ensure the highest
quality design education for both graduate students themselves and the beginning students for
whom they are responsible.
The teaching assistant as a studio instructor is somewhat unique in that few of these
graduate students receive formal training in the skills of teaching prior to taking on that role in the
studio. It is often assumed that graduate students will be capable of design instruction simply
because they have achieved a certain level of expertise in their own work. However, the
possession of knowledge and competence in the discipline of architecture does not guarantee the
ability to transmit these ideas and skills to others. Beginning studio graduate assistants can
become discouraged with teaching because of their inability to communicate information, critical
thinking strategies, design skills, and enthusiasm for the discipline itself to their students. One of
the tasks of the new teaching assistant, then, is to learn to translate the language of design to
beginning students in ways that make it both accessible and meaningful.
This paper describes one curricular model involving teaching assistants, and examines
ways to help them find their own teaching approach while simultaneously delivering a quality
design education to beginning students. This model (consisting of a faculty coordinator, an
instructor, ten teaching assistants, and approximately 160 students divided into groups of 16)
places varying degrees of responsibility for teaching/learning on each individual and group within
the structure. The curricular core of this model begins with rigid prescription and, through a series
of assimilated and connected projects, gradually opens into a flexible set of explorations. All
participants in the model begin with more grounded conditions, and move toward conditions that
are less defined, requiring them to make multiply linked decisions with imprecise and partial
information. With this increase in processingtranslation/transformationtime, comes the
increase in critical thinking and making, a primary aspect of beginning design. All participants in
the various levels of the model work in parallel to one another, and, at times, they formally change
roles.
The teaching assistants in the first year studio at the University at Buffalo participated in
the writing of this paper by providing written descriptions of the curriculum and its structure, their
concerns about assuming the role of instructors, opinions about what worked and what didnt in
their own studio section and the larger studio, ways that they evaluated their effectiveness,
recommendations for curricular changes, and reflections on their own approaches to teaching and
learning.

328

PROCEEDINGS: 21st National Conference on the Beginning Design Student

San Antonio 2005

The first of these statements is written by Korydon Smith, who taught during the 19992000 and 2000-2001 terms, and currently is an Assistant Professor in the Department of
Architecture at the University of Arkansas. These remarks set the stage for the comments of the
other teaching assistants and frame the primary issues addressed in the first semester studio.
Parallel Perforations
Korydon Smith: The evolution of the graduate teaching assistant, through the fall
semester of first year studio, occurs in conjunction with the evolutionary perforation of
the sequence of first year projects, an increased flexibility and independence within a
clearly delineated domain. This development begins with a markedly prescriptive project
that initiates the semester. A list of clearly outlined objectives initiate this project,
alleviating some of the stress and confusion that comes with entering a new position,
allowing teaching assistants to focus on: 1) establishing a positive rapport with students,
2) discovering his/her role as an instructor, and 3) gaining confidence as a mentor and
section leader. Here, the faculty coordinators role is to establish an articulate,
recognizable pedagogy for the teaching assistants and a rigorous, inspired, and firmly
grounded educational setting for the students.
As well as communication with the coordinator, the assistants comprehension of the
curriculum occurs in two other distinct ways. First, the graduate assistants are in an
academic extension of the curriculum, and many of these TAs went through the
undergraduate curriculum themselves. This familiarity with the program permits[an
answer to the question: What is covered (or not covered) in the first semester design
studio at SUNY at Buffalo?] Second, TAs who are teaching in this studio for the second
time facilitate the pedagogic dialogue between the coordinator and the first-time TAs. As
the veteran assistants previously had questions and struggles experienced by first-time
assistants, a peer-dialogue of these issues can occur.
The projects in the final two-thirds of the semester contain an increasing flexibility.
However, this is not a complete open-endedness, but rather a single calculated
perforation within project statements and objectives. First this flexibility came in the form
of material processes; each teaching assistant engages a different material process
casting, machining, cutting/folding, assembly, etc. In the final project, the differentiation
between each studio section comes in the form of site, artifact selection, and analytical
processes. Teaching assistants choose the various sites and subject matter in this
project. These selections often correspond to the research interests of the graduate
student/teaching assistant, which allows for an analogous learning process between the
graduate assistant and the first year student. The built-in flexibility of the projects allows
the graduate assistants to explore thematic secondary and tertiary issues of the project,
while exposing first year studentsduring daily inter-section discussions and formal
whole-class critiquesto the multiplicities of architectural philosophy, design, method,
and construction.
This evolutionary environment prepares teaching assistants to further pursue careers
in education, developing the assistants confidence and familiarity as an instructor and
exposing him/her to the multiple roles of teachingi.e. discussing and generating
pedagogy, establishing the rhythm for daily/weekly assignments, facilitating group
discussion, and experiencing the environments of one-on-one desk critiques, small
group critiques, and formal multi-group reviews. It is the faculty coordinators
responsibility to ensure a well-grounded common experience among a large group of first
semester design students, while exposing each student and TA (actively and passively)
to a multitude of architectural topics and methods.

PROCEEDINGS: 21st National Conference on the Beginning Design Student

San Antonio 2005

329

Assuming the Role of Instructor

Despite the fact that only the best graduate students are
selected to teach in the first year studio, the anxiety level among
them about teaching is typically quite high. Most are concerned
about their qualifications and the responsibility of introducing the
fundamentals of the discipline to new students. Prior to teaching,
many graduate assistants question their own knowledge of
fundamentals, often admitting that they arent confident in their
abilities to communicate various basic principles and ideas.

Scott Nunemaker: When I was first approached about the possibility of teaching as a
graduate student, I had feelings of both excitement and anxiety. I had never taught
before. I certainly did not feel like I had the authority or the ability that I saw in my own
instructors.
The weekly meetings with all the other teaching assistants and the faculty coordinator
on the development of assignments really helped me to understand the importance of
getting into the mind of the student. I soon realized that [to a certain extent] I would have
to think like they did. I believe that being a beginning design student four years before
teaching a studio was an asset to the process. The years I lacked in experience, I made
up for in my ability to relate to students as they made the transition from high school to
the intensity of the undergraduate architecture program. I, too, made that transition and
remembered it like yesterday. As a beginning design student, I struggled to understand
how to create meaningful architecture. Encouragement and sensitivity from my studio
instructor turned my discouraged attitude into confidence. Consequently, as a teaching
assistant, I learned to pay attention to those who seemed somewhat frustrated or
discouraged as well; often, I encouraged the quieter and more sensitive students who
might otherwise have gone without notice.
I assumed from the start that most students would have reservations about a fellow
student acting as their instructor. I feared a lack of respect would make the process
weak, but I was wrong. I think that most students respected me and felt like they were
actually accomplishing something.
Unexpected Difficulties
Teaching assistants encounter many unexpected difficulties during their teaching
experience. Some do not realize how new this studio mode of learning is to incoming students.
Others are surprised by the types of personal problems their students experienceroommate
difficulties, financial difficulties, illness, disabilities, etc.and the ways that these problems affect
students performance in studio. Still others are simply caught off guard when parents enter the
picture, at times, even attending studio with their child. Often teaching assistants find that
beginners notions of architecture are quite rigid, and their expectations about what will happen in
studio are equally rigid.

330

PROCEEDINGS: 21st National Conference on the Beginning Design Student

San Antonio 2005

Scott Nunemaker: The biggest obstacle to overcome in my mind was the

preconceived notion of architecture that the students brought with them to the studio.
Most had a specific idea of what architecture should look like. They were not concerned
with how to manipulate space in a way that was not only meaningful, but also unique and
personal. Having a first project that somewhat catered to these notions was helpful. This
project allowed the students to use their t-squares, triangles, and all the other items on
their shopping list that they were expecting from the start. Drawing objects within the
confines of geometry was not too far from what they were anticipating. It also allowed
them to accomplish something in a fairly straightforward way with a very presentable
product in the end.
Kerron Miller: The difficulty that arose in my studio was ensuring that each student
understood the goals of the project even if they didnt understand every part of it. I
addressed this by breaking down the components of the project and focusing on specific
relationships that could be developed as the project evolved.
Jessica Jamroz: In most cases, the students were fresh to university experience and
came to the studio with a wide range of skills, talents, and backgrounds. Initially it was
difficult to instill the appreciation of working long after-formal-studio-time-hours together
towards the creation of a studio vibe.
Eventually, this difficulty was overcome by checking in on students outside of
allocated class time.
Evaluating Effectiveness
It is difficult for teaching assistants to evaluate themselves and their success or failure
in the studio. Many expect immediate results (forgetting that much learning takes place afterthe-factsometimes years after), and are frustrated when their students dont get it or are not
as motivated/inspired as they assume them to be. Often, during the first weeks of teaching, the
assistants are troubled when students do not follow their lead. They are equally upset when the
coordinator discourages them from telling the students exactly what to do and instead, asks
them to put the responsibility of thinking through the project onto the student. To compound
matters, there is a natural competitiveness among the various teaching assistants. Consciously
or unconsciously, they are rewarded for high quality work in their studio. However, high quality
work does not always verify high quality teaching. Sometimes, teaching assistants will opt for
approaches that generate great looking work in lieu of approaches which concentrate on and
challenge the student's ideas, abilities, and critical development, but which do not necessarily
produce exhibition pieces. Eventually, most come to value within themselves the art of helping
students to refine their own logic, and to take intelligent design risks.
Kerron Miller: I evaluated my effectiveness in the freshman studio by judging how
much the overall group of students in my section developed their design and critical
thinking skills from the beginning of the semester to the end.
Jessica Jamroz: At first I felt that each failure or success reflected on my abilities as a
teacher. I took it very personally. I wanted to give as much knowledge as I could to the
students so that they could take it and translate it through their own personalities. At first
I became frustrated with myself when they either did exactly what I suggested or when
they completely missed the point. Once the channels of communication with my students
were strengthened, I determined my effectiveness to be verified by the considerable
improvements in the students abilities to translate their ideas into their own design work.

PROCEEDINGS: 21st National Conference on the Beginning Design Student

San Antonio 2005

331

Reflections on Approaches to Teaching Studio

By the end of the first semester, each teaching
assistant has had the opportunity to experiment with
their own ways of delivering the studio content, and
inspiring their group. Some tend to emphasize how
history and theory affect design processes and products.
Others are very materially oriented, and focus intently on
the work as everything. Many emphasize concept and
imagination as the basis of risk taking. All are
attempting to encourage their students particular
potentials to research, imagine, represent and critique
various design processes and explorations.
Ted Lutz: I saw my role as being an interpreter, educator, and motivator. When a
project was first given to the students they often were overwhelmed. As interpreters, we
offered them a specific set of tasks to accomplish. We broke the project down into pieces
and explained not only why they were doing this work, but how to get it done. I would
spend time discussing their time line and I would often require certain work by the end of
studio. As educators, we taught beginning students the skills necessary to complete the
tasks they had been given. I often tried to teach one lesson per day. At the beginning of
a semester these lessons were rather simple; perhaps a drawing technique or a simple
structural principle. As the semester progressed, these lessons built upon one another
and involved more complex conceptual issues.
Finally, we were charged with motivating the students to create great work. This was
the most difficult aspect of teaching. Students need to be treated as individuals. While
each responds to different types of motivation, all students need to be applauded when
they try hard and, therefore, produce a quality project.
Role of the Faculty Coordinator
While many educators are suspect of the increasing participation of the teaching
assistant in design studio, others view it as an opportunity to couple the freshness and new ideas
of beginning instructors with the experience and knowledge of more practiced educators. Within
this reciprocal framework, faculty coordinators play a key role in the effort to ensure provocative,
and meaningful studio experiences for beginning students and valuable teaching experiences for
graduate students. These coordinators are required to be highly energetic, organized, informed,
and flexible instructors who are aware of the value of their mission; who can frame design
curricula to respond to changing conditions; and who can communicate the curriculum and its
value to others. Faculty coordinators can facilitate the success of apprentice teachers and their
students by defining responsibilities, providing clear (but multiple) strategies within a flexible
framework, setting up studio content/process, questioning the intentions and operations of the
curriculum, working as a cooperative team, and pursuing responsible engagement of the studio.
Likewise, teaching assistants can facilitate the success of the faculty coordinator and the
beginning studio as a whole by deliberately assuming the position of simultaneous teacherstudent, assisting in the development of curriculum, mediating between students and faculty,
questioning the preconceptions of both groups, and pursuing responsible engagement of the
studio. And students themselves can contribute to the success of the studio endeavor by actively
participating in critical thinking and making, suspending their disbelief, taking risks, questioning
the teaching assistants and faculty, and pursuing responsible engagement of the studio. This
parallel pursuit of responsible engagement of the studio requires three interconnected entities,

332

PROCEEDINGS: 21st National Conference on the Beginning Design Student

San Antonio 2005

each of which executes a portion of the tasks, each contributing to a shared memory, and each
dependent upon the development of reciprocal teaching/learning sensibilities that optimize the
education of the designer.

PROCEEDINGS: 21st National Conference on the Beginning Design Student

San Antonio 2005

333