Low attendance at design reviews
In my Stage 1 design studio, a key challenge emerged during the Design Unit 2 summative review, where only four students attended. This reflected ongoing low attendance and engagement across the course. When invited to reflect upon this, students expressed fear of judgement and anxiety about showing unfinished work while engaging with unfamiliar tutors.
Imperfection and the fear of judgment
Discussing with my colleagues, we have observed declining confidence, heightened anxiety, and a tick‑box mindset among recent Stage 1 cohorts. Students often avoid critique situations, worry their work is “not enough,” and struggle to present work that is ‘not perfect’. I believe this is an urgent issue that we, as tutors, need to address. This is impacting learning of design fundamentals, affecting trust and connection with the wider cohort and the teaching space. Architectural pedagogy requires iterative making and experimentation, where embodied spatial testing are essential processes that cannot be replaced by digital production (Collevecchio, 2024), in turn strengthening confidence in the process and relationships in the classroom.
Pedagogical experiments
To address these issues I intend to introduce three pedagogical experiments focusing on bringing embodied knowledge to the classroom. Although difficult to manage within the tight schedule of the course, I believe these can help normalise exposure to critical feedback while brining joyful moments to help celebrate the work produced in the studio, offering a more process-based and experimental student-centered learning experience.
Learning and thinking through the hand
Focused, hands‑on sessions, centred on making and analogue drawing, will help keep students’ outputs specific, achievable, and grounded in process. These will emphasise design fundamentals and will be planned to support students struggling with process and communication. By working iteratively on a single task across the day, students engage with tactile, experiential and relational methods that foster embodied and situated learning (Petrescu, 2023). This approach aligns with Collevecchio’s (2024) argument that learning by making is essential in first‑year architectural education, beginning with bodily experience, iteration, and material engagement, where inspiration is gained through the process.
The celebration of imperfection
To help normalise exposure to public presentation and sharing, I will incorporate end of the day studio pin-ups: short, frequent and celebratory review moments focussed on process, rather than finished outcomes. These would nurture an informal studio environment by exposing students to each other’s work, offering inspiration and new ways of thinking, reducing anxiety and gradually building confidence in showcasing unfinished, imperfect work. This format could be tested further, in coordination with the Stage Leader, into a wider whole-course pin-up. A silent review where all classrooms become galleries dressed in student’s work creating collective moments of celebration, with the option of awarding prizes.
Building feedback literacy
I will incorporate regular feedback exercises during studio days, including De Bono’s PMI method (de Bono, no date), to cultivate reflective thinking, care and constructive critique. I am hoping peer-feedback will help establish a culture where students share responsibility in supporting one another throughout the unit. This also aligns with Petrescu’s teaching approach which centres embodied, collective learning, “quilt‑like” relations and process‑based making to build communities of care in architectural education (2023). With these strategies I aim to create shared spaces of curiosity, cross-pollination and visibility to restore confidence, presence and joy in early design learning.
References:
Collevecchio, C. (2024). Conversation with Carla Collevecchio (Umeå School of Architecture, Sweden). Corporeal Architecture. [online] YouTube. Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ocGhJdlOXQM [Accessed 13 Feb. 2026].
deBono. (no date). 1. PMI lesson plan. [online] Available at: https://www.debono.com/de-bono-thinking-lessons-1/1.-PMI-lesson-plan.
Petrescu, D. (2023). Learning and teaching with the ‘body’: pedagogical hatches from Jennifer Bloomer. The Journal of Architecture, 28(6), pp.902–924. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1080/13602365.2023.2281625 [Accessed 13 Feb. 2026].
Lucas’s models and drawings at final U2 Design Review