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

Pedagogy of the Cult:

teaching as one was taught and perhaps why one shouldnt

ERIC CONNELL
East Carolina University

Abstract
To approach the discipline of teaching without bilateral evaluative assessment can lead to
pedagogy of the cult. Teaching as one was taught without examining the existing context of the
learning relationship between the teacher and student may not yield the intended quality
educational experience for beginning students. How does one access the beginners mind?
The presentation of two teaching scenarios will demonstrate that even the best of intentions can
lead to a failure in reaching the desired effective teaching in beginning design students when
instruction becomes rote and continues without an occasional reflective evaluation. .

Introduction
The question is; what is it about a cult that attracts us?

Figure 1. Team think is efficient.

Teaching as one was taught is likely the approach that many of us use with beginning students.
We draw upon our past experiences. Many of us may have had an influential instructor or a
memorable educational experience and as a consequence attempt to provide the same for
others. Teaching as one was taught when it leads to an unexamined repetition of work or lacks
a component of reflection on the part of the student and the faculty can be the onset of
Pedagogy of the Cult.
No matter how long you have been teaching and no matter how well you have developed an
exercise for learning, even with apparently good results you may not be teaching appropriately.
Appropriate in this context is to achieve the most effective teaching possible. By effective I am
assuming you have in mind that the efforts and plans you initiate for any learning is based on
having some outcome in mind. To teach without a bilateral process of assessment and a selfcritical examination of teaching you may be involved in a situation you never intended.
When students are unable to articulate their ideas yet produced excellent work graphically, when
design projects are said to speak for themselves in lieu of students doing the speaking, where
final juries are only in front of the same faculty who taught the studio, then perhaps one should
become suspicious. When the rationale for design projects is we are a professional school ,

PROCEEDINGS: 21st National Conference on the Beginning Design Student

San Antonio 2005

73

when the theory of design is thats the way we were taught and most discussions revolve
around the good ole days, you may find yourself situated in Pedagogy of the Cult. These
statements may seem extreme to some of you, unfortunately I suspect that for others, they may
have a ring of familiarity.
Cult, from culture, in the abstract is not necessarily a problem. In fact one could argue that
design teaching attempts to create a culture in beginning students; it is often said among
teachers of studio. However when teaching become rote and learning is based on a
predetermined set of expectations regardless of any existing circumstances, when flexibility is a
derogatory word and diversity of approach is deemed counter productive this type of cult is a
hindrance and learning suffers.
If one teaches in the same manner as one has always taught, without an assessment of whether
teaching is consistent with intentions then one might be following a path of the cult. Teaching as
one was taught is problematic when an instructor unknowingly imposes his values over those
with whom he or she is teaching as the measure of success over the actual learning (my way or
the highway) and it is not much different if you do so knowingly, except perhaps that students
then may have a choice. Teaching without some type of self-critical assessment of the teaching
process can be a sign of pedagogy of the cult. These situations can occur when changing
disciplines or when moving within a different area of a curriculum.
This is not to say that we should not have boundaries related to the field of study. Alan PaulJohnson claims we cannot do without demarcation; however it does not require that we ignore,
silence or marginalize differences we find in the classroom. In fact, knowing what others value
can make you a more effective instructor, in that you can guide learning by understanding and
find a way to connect it to the student rather than by dominance or fear. When acknowledging
the diverse nature of the beginning student, a teacher can draw upon the uniqueness of those
individuals. When an instructor ignores differences it can have the effect of reducing the novel
student to the generic.
Recounting these cult-like conditions of teaching make them obvious but the problem is that they
have a way of being subtle. As with all things subtle, Pedagogy of the Cult is not overtly stated,
it may not be known to those who practice in this context, but that also does not excuse it either.
One usually has the sense that something is wrong.
Good teaching, authentic teaching, is a discourse. It involves a give and take of information from
both parties engaged in the educational setting. Particular to studio/lab education is the openended nature of problem solving being implemented for learning. Teaching in this manner is a
bilateral and inclusive process of knowledge/experiences which involves no less than two
persons who must interact in order to yield a productive learning environment.

Figure 2. Interactive Learning Performance

74

PROCEEDINGS: 21st National Conference on the Beginning Design Student

San Antonio 2005

Garden. UCSB, Media Arts + Technology.

Teaching is a dynamic and interrelated activity. It helps to know who you are teaching, why you
are teaching the topic, what the limits of learning might be and how you intend to influence the
student, all the while knowing you will have to determine by some means, if you in fact DID
achieve what you had intended. It is not uncommon to teach as you were taught, however one
must remain vigilant to prevent the educational experience from becoming rote and then lose
much of the original relevant quality.
Two beginning classes; a design studio in architecture and a lab in construction management
are the teaching scenarios that are compared. In each scenario I found differing levels of the
Pedagogy of the Cult. My initial speculation is that it stems primarily from the basic inclination
to teach as one was taught. In both cases I hope to draw attention to issues that you may
identify with to some degree, and then to suggest ways to improve teaching effectiveness by
avoiding Pedagogy of the Cult. At this stage in the education process, the beginning levels, it is
especially important and difficult because we find the greatest diversity and most impressionable
students. To ignore this situation is to teach inappropriately and warrants reconsideration.

Context
ARCHITECTURE
Beginning design studio typically entails six sections of freshman students. Each section of the
studio is assigned a design instructor. Each instructor works with his/her section of the studio for
ONE of the six major sequential steps of the design project. Upon completing each part of the
design exercise, the instructor moves to the next section of students for about 2 to 3 weeks at a
time. The process of changing sections does not allow any one instructor to overly influence the
students and is rationalized as being objective and a necessary requirement of the team
teaching approach. Each of the nearly 100 freshman students work on the identical design
project, with the identical schedule and have identical requirements for presentation, displayed
on identical predetermined template boards.
The design project was developed in sequential steps from beginning to end with each interim
step leading to the next exercise. Basic 2-D graphic compositions evolve over the semester into
3-D abstract space models. The same beginning design curriculum has been in place for over
20 years and is considered by the majority of faculty as a direct result of the schools design
success. To question the beginning design pedagogy is interpreted as an inability to understand
(if it has to be explained then you are not going to ever get it) design teaching. However, 7 of
the 8 instructors all had their education under the very same curriculum they were currently
teaching.
The manner in which they were teaching was based on tacit knowledge of the
project. Even though faculty provided typed written handouts that at times were 15 pages in
length there were often uneasy about any questions relating to the project goals, purpose or
intentions. Teaching as one was taught was clearly failing in this context.
In order to assure consistency, each student is graded not only by his/her instructor but by no
less than two other instructors, even if those instructors had not interacted with the student
during the design exercise. The students are not permitted to present their design intentions
verbally but only visually, where the work would speak for itself. The process assured that a
faculty member was not unduly influenced by the interactions with students. Team grading was
done in an effort to be more objective. The grade issued by the instructor responsible for a
particular section, was averaged with two other instructors grades, all which were teaching the

PROCEEDINGS: 21st National Conference on the Beginning Design Student

San Antonio 2005

75

identical project but may not have worked with the students during the exercise. The grades
where then accumulated and the average grade was issued to the student publicly, assuring
fairness. It was explicitly stated that; the process of team grading, where one instructor who
essentially knew nothing about students design intentions yet evaluated their work, made the
grading process more fair and balanced, and ultimately more objective. If grades were too
disparate during the grading process faculty deliberated until the difference was minimized and
then posted publicly for all students to view. The public posting of grades, that is, posting the
name of the student next to a grade, for all to see, was considered a teaching tactic that helped
students learn to discriminate between good and bad design. It was thought of as seeing for
themselves and did not require faculty to waste time talking about design when you can
produce yet another project. The final semester grade was the average of all six stages of the
design process.
The biggest challenge in this school was raising issues related to design teaching with
individuals who themselves were a product of the educational process without them personally
taking offense. There is little hope of teaching students to be interactive with their education
when the faculty who teach them are reluctant to being interactive. Clearly I did not understand.
CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT
Students in Construction Management take the Architectural Documents course after having one
previous semesters of lab where they learn to draw. The lab is a similar setting to a studio in
that there are only 16-20 students and the teaching involves much one-to-one interaction
between the instructor and the student. Many aspects of the instruction are demonstrated by
example and critiqued at their desk side. The differences are worth noting as they have
implications for the type of teaching that can follow. The lab meets twice a week for two-hours
each meeting (compared to design studio 3 times and 3-4 hours per meeting) over the course of
15 weeks. The total contact hours are 60 compared to design studios 135 on average. Further
differences are that the labs in my construction school have hot desks, whereas design studios
have cold desks. Students in design work on drawings beyond the contact hours as do
construction students but it is not nearly the same length. This is significant as to how much
time can be spent on an exercise and the corresponding learning that goes with the effort. Here
is a clear difference of values, where actions speak volumes, the time spent on a acquiring the
skill of drawing/understanding drawings is nearly four times greater among design students than
it is construction management students.
The primary source for drawing understanding is taken from a printed set of architectural
documents, modest in complexity. The content of the architectural documents is introduced to
the student in the same order as that of the building construction process. The course starts
with site construction, foundations, structural frame and concludes with architectural finishes and
details. Supplemental information is provided in the form of slides presentations and site visits
to buildings.
The type of exercises given to students is intended to help students learn to visualize a building
from the perspective of the construction of components of a building. In the beginning of
teaching this course, students were given exercises that required them to (1) show their ability to
translate the verbal information into verbal responses; a question is answered about some facts
pertaining to the project and (2) translate graphic two-dimensional information into verbal
responses; a question is answered about the nature of a drawing from the set.

76

PROCEEDINGS: 21st National Conference on the Beginning Design Student

San Antonio 2005

After my expectations were less than satisfactory in terms of students abilities as demonstrated
by the exam results, additional exercises were implemented to further develop their abilities.
The supplemental exercises required that students; (1) translate two-dimensional graphic
information into two-dimensional abstract diagramming - a schematic drawing is made from an
existing drawing in the set, (2) synthesize two-dimensional graphic information, i.e. take
separate details and put them into a correctly assembled two-dimensional drawing - a building
section is from many related but partial details. A semester long exercise was introduced into
the course curriculum with the requirement to identify and photo-document physical components
of a building currently under construction associated with drawing details from the course
reference drawing set. This exercise had the intention of facilitating abstract to concrete
understanding. An assessment was made of students performance and it was determined that
construction students are experienced at making things and that it would be more effective to
draw upon this ability and a variation on the abstract to concrete exercise was made. The
students were required to make a concrete three-dimensional model of an abstract twodimensional detail found in the course drawing set, i.e., a physical model was constructed.

Figure 3. 3-D model created from

a 2-D abstract representation.

The challenge for construction management students is to translate abstract and symbolic 2-D
graphic data into a visual image, visualizing the object/building in 3D. The pace in which I was
able to see students gain ability with these exercises was slow. The presumption was that the
students coming to the course already had ability since they had a previous course in drawing
and CAD. It was not until the exercises were given did I began to question my approach.
Without knowing, I was teaching as I was taught. I had taught drawings directly for three years
and indirectly for over ten years and I was using the teaching strategies that had worked from
my previous experience. However, having moved into another discipline, from Architecture to
Construction Management, I rationalized that the problem of learning was a result of students
lacking ability. It was mistaken to believe that I only needed to teach as I was taught and this
attitude yielded frustration on the part of students and me. I was able to teach more effectively
only after I examined the values and experiences of construction students and questioned my
presumptions about their abilities in light of the course objectives. The steps needed to improve
my results in the classroom required that I was interactive with students abilities and values. It
also required that I examine my teaching in a reiterative process to isolate strengths and
weaknesses of approach. If I relied only upon teaching as I was taught as pedagogy the result
of the educational experience would have been far less than it was.

PROCEEDINGS: 21st National Conference on the Beginning Design Student

San Antonio 2005

77

Both scenarios, the one from Architecture and the other from Construction Management, show
how teaching as one was taught fall short of providing quality learning experiences for the
beginners mind even with the best of intentions. One is bias by history; a 20-year school
tradition of teaching beginning design, the other has the bias of personal experience, 12-years in
a related but different discipline. The less maligned problem, yet problematic all the same,
occurs when teaching from one perspective so long that it is difficult to recognize personal
internalized bias; the ideology has become tacit. Most of these situations are subtle and can
only be avoided if a self-critical process of teaching is in place. Pedagogy of the Cult can only
exist if nothing is questioned and is sustained when a unilateral approach to teaching is the only
choice. Prejudice is never apparent to the perpetuator as it is to those it is being afflicted upon.

Findings/Suggestion
How do you avoid teaching as one was taught? What can an instructor do to avoid the
negative influence of experience or tradition? How can a teacher become cognizant of his or her
effect on students? How do you determine a students value system in terms of specific
discipline learning? To begin with it is important to understand that simply being motivated does
not necessary mean you are prepared to learn, you have to have the proper abilities before
working on certain projects. Likewise and less spoken about is, you can have the proper
preparation but if you are not motivated you have an ideal educational experience.
To understand the difference in values between architectural and construction students multiple
forms of information and assessment were undertaken. A biographical sketch, inferred multiple
intelligences based on Gardners Frames of Mind, an assessment of thinking style from
Harrison research on inquiry modes and unique characteristics of the respective disciplines
provided the basis for determining differences between the two disciplines. When examining the
initial findings of the thinking style of architecture and construction students some notable
differences emerged.
TYPE
Synthesist
Idealist
Pragmatist
Analyst
Realist

ARCHITECTURE
19%
19%
21%
52%
19%

CONSTRUCTION
7%
7%
11%
61%
32%

GENERAL POPULATION
11%
37%
18%
35%
24%

Figure 4. Comparing Inquiry Mode results between students in the two disciplines against the general
population.

The preferential decision making approach, i.e. the valued way of looking at problems, ones
world view, differs between the two groups most significantly in terms of two thinking styles,
Synthesist and Realist. Construction students (32%) value the Realist mode of thinking more
than the general population and the Architecture students (19%) value it less than the general
population. Contrastingly the Construction students (7%) valued the Synthesist mode of
thinking less than the general population while Architecture students (19%) valued it more than
the general population. When we are working with beginning students common sense would
have you believe their values should be closer to the general population, but in this anecdotal
survey it suggest a difference worth further examination. This information alone suggests that it

78

PROCEEDINGS: 21st National Conference on the Beginning Design Student

San Antonio 2005

is our interest to understand whom we are teaching and beginning students are not perhaps
what we think they are.
This information helps an instructor realize the complexity of teaching design thinking to
beginning students. According to Rowe, there is no singular step by step idealized design
process, therefore we have to consider many factors, not just visible abilities, or stated
philosophies but something that even students themselves may not be aware of, including the
interests of others. Understanding the values we as instructors prefer is also significant to
prevent favoritism for those inquiry modes similar to our own. This evaluative process of both
self and student is a bilateral approach to teaching that will improve the need to multiple
approaches of problem solving, a necessary skill that professional designers must develop. We
must teach students the value and necessity of multiple perspectives, not just from an
attitudinal perspective but from behavior conduct. Daniel Meinigs article the Beholding Eye:
10 Views of the Same Landscape makes the point with everyday examples. Personal
interests or values will influence what you see in the landscape and or how you construct
meaning from things you have an interest in. What you see is a product of what you are
interested in seeing, and that is clearly influenced by the values you hold, resulting from the
experiences you have had.
Gardners proposes seven different intelligence clusters, and Harrison states it as inquiry
modes that affect our world views. The preliminary comparison of architectural students and
construction students noted earlier reveals some noteworthy information. Kathryn Anthony
points out . All you have to do is to give the professor what he/she wants and you will do well
in that class . This is an indictment against teaching as one was taught and valuing only one
approach to teaching, its my way or the highway!
A conscientious teacher will implement many informal assessment techniques that effectively
do the same as the structured approach referred to here. That is not the problem; those
learning contexts have developed a quality learning environment. It is those that teach with an
attitude of presumed understanding and use authority to impose a limited approach that is of
concern, believing in one way only is an issue. What I am suggesting is how you can break
the cycle of repetition or tradition if there are signals that something is amiss.
Deliberate with students at the beginning, throughout and in the end about the learning that
took place. Allow students to speak without showing disapproval or any other sign of
disagreement. This will allow you to see if from there perspective. Create a means to evaluate
the effectiveness of the stated goal of an exercise and determine how that might be improved.
E.g. if space is the object of learning then examples of work should be about containment,
boundaries, orientation, etc. not form, composition and color. If you are looking to understand
how objects are put together then there might be a level of complexity, the parts and pieces
should be apparent and not obscured etc. Ask students to speak about or highlight the goals of
the exercise and listen for those pertinent items to determine if you they are consistent with
intensions for the exercise. This is really nothing more than open and equal communications
between student and faculty in a shared learning environment. I provide the strategy to help
look beyond the surface of teaching and offer the argument for consideration of ideas that are
more than just a personal approach but one that can be used my others with what I believe are
going to be useful results.

Speculations/Conclusions

PROCEEDINGS: 21st National Conference on the Beginning Design Student

San Antonio 2005

79

There are certainly other forms of Pedagogy of the Cult that you may have experienced. When
having to make the choice, I would place the emphasis on quality over greater numbers of
projects. Slow down to give the needed time for interaction. Good teaching is involved and
takes time. Knowing your values and those of your students does not mean you can teach all
things to all individuals but it means you can be apparent about what you do and that allows
students to have empathy with you and what you bring to the classroom. In an ideal
educational environment learning is continuous, validation and respect for multiple perspectives
is valued and encouraged. The learning environment is a place where a trust and respect are
built and everyone grows from the exchange.

What is it about a cult that attracts us?

IGNORANCE.
That is the first suspicion, we do not realize what we are doing, its just the way things have
been done and we followed, however it relinquishes us of culpability and is perhaps acceptable
for children and adolescents, but not so for adults.
TIME.
There is so much to do and so little time. We are competing in a continuously changing and
more complex world, we have to produce more and if we all just work together in a team
approach we can get more done in less time. Time has never changed only our use of it.
FEAR.
We join a cult to sustain a mythic view of the world. Exposing a myth can instill fear in the
believers who realize its lack of relevance. Myths provide comfort where ignorance exists. The
design myth of the ultimate solution, universal design, the absolute answer or the
definitive theory, is undermined when we learn of other worlds, diverse worlds, different from
our own.

Figure 5. Fear of changing our mind. (Image from University of London, Birkbeck)

How do we avoid the cult?

educational experiences.

80

Resist fear and remain relevant, take time and offer authentic

PROCEEDINGS: 21st National Conference on the Beginning Design Student

San Antonio 2005

References
Anthony, K. (1991) Design Juries on Trial: the Renaissance of the Design Studio,
New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold.
Gardner, H. (1993) Frames of Mind: The Theory of Multiple Intelligences,
New York: Basic Books.
Harrison, A. & Bramson, R. (2002) The Art of Thinking,
New York: Berkley Book.
Johnson, P. (1994) The Theory of Architecture: Concept, Themes and Practices,
New York: Wiley.
L, V.M. (1992) In Praise of Slowness, Milan, IT: Domus.
Leamnson, R. (1999) Thinking About Teaching and Learning, Sterling, Virginia: Stylus.
Lincoln, Y. & Guba, E. (1985) Naturalistic Inquiry, Newbury Park, California: Sage.
Meinig, D. (1979) The Beholding Eye in The Interpretation of Ordinary Landscapes,
New York: Oxford University Press.
Palmer, P. (1988) The Courage to Teach, San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
Postman, N. (1988) Conscientious Objections, New York: Random House.
Postman, N. (1995) The End of Education: Redefining the Value of School,
New York: Random House.
Rowe, P. (1990) Design Thinking, Cambridge, MS: MIT Press.

PROCEEDINGS: 21st National Conference on the Beginning Design Student

San Antonio 2005

81