Abstract
Teaching students to practice biophilic design (BD) in an environmentally sustainable design (ESD) studio may enhance human–nature connectedness in their future design outcomes. However, integrating BD within ESD requires the development of a framework that is compatible with both approaches. Hence, a systematic teaching approach is critical to guide students in develo** such a design framework. Reflective Action Conjecture Map (RACOM), an educational design approach for the ESD studio is developed that can guide educational designs to teach different sustainable design approaches. An educational innovation based on RACOM that facilitates students to develop BD frameworks is presented demonstrating the development process. This educational innovation aims to support students in overcoming three challenges: (1) shifting the sustainability view to derive common categorisations for criteria, (2) a systematic method to bridge ESD and BD, and (3) integrating the BD framework into the design thinking process. Three embodied educational design elements, namely, sustainability manifesto, success matrix and reflective portfolio are identified could support students to develop and use BD frameworks in sustainable designs.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Altomonte, S., Rutherford, P., & Wilson, R. (2014). Map** the way forward: Education for sustainability in architecture and urban design. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 21(3), 143–154.
Bereiter, C., & Scardamalia, M. (2014). Knowledge building and knowledge creation: One concept, two hills to climb. In Knowledge creation in education (pp. 35–52). Springer.
Berg, A., Stoltenberg, E., & Reitan, J. B. (2014). Sustainable design technology: A case study of a master student's lamp project. The Design Society.
Bertelsen, O. W. (2000). Design artefacts: Towards a design-oriented epistemology. Scandinavian Journal of Information Systems, 12(1), 2.
Boud, D. (2010). Assessment for develo** practice. In J. Higgs, D. Fish I. Goulter, S. Loftus, J-A. Reid, & F. Trede (Eds.), Education for future practice (pp. 251–262). Sense.
Boud, D., & Soler, R. (2016). Sustainable assessment revisited. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 41(3), 400–413.
Braha, D., & Reich, Y. (2003). Topological structures for modeling engineering design processes. Research in Engineering Design, 14(4), 185–199.
BRE. Building Research Establishment. (2013). BREEAM international new construction technical manual 2013. https://www.breeam.com/discover/technical-standards/newconstruction/.
Browning, W. D., Ryan, C. O., & Clancy, J. O. (2014). Patterns of biophilic design. Terrapin Bright Green, LLC.
Dabaieh, M., Lashin, M., & Elbably, A. (2017). Going green in architectural education: An urban living lab experiment for a graduation green design studio in Saint Catherine Egypt. Solar Energy, 144, 356–366.
Dib, H., & Adamo-Villani, N. (2014). Serious sustainability challenge game to promote teaching and learning of building sustainability. Journal of Computing in Civil Engineering, 28(5), A4014007.
Donovan, E. (2018). Sustainable architecture theory in education: how architecture students engage and process knowledge of sustainable architecture. In Implementing sustainability in the curriculum of universities (pp. 31–47). Springer.
Fry, T. (2009). Design futuring: Sustainability, ethics and new practice. Berg.
Goodyear, P., & Markauskaite, L. (2019). The impact on practice of wicked problems and unpredictable futures. In Challenging future practice possibilities (pp. 41–52). Brill Sense.
Hengrasmee, S., & Chansomsak, S. (2016). A novel approach to architectural education for sustainability: a quest for reformation and transformation. Global Journal of Engineering Education, 18(3).
International Living Future Institute (ILFI). (2018). Living building challenge V3.1. Vol. 3.1. https://www2.living-future.org/LBC4.0?RD_Scheduler=LBC4
Karol, E., & Mackintosh, L. (2011). Analysing the lack of student engagement in the sustainability agenda: A case study in teaching architecture. International Journal of Learning, 17(10).
Kellert, S. R. (2008). Dimensions, elements, and attributes of biophilic design. In Biophilic design: the theory, science, and practice of bringing buildings to life (pp. 3–19).
Kellert, S., & Calabrese, E. (2015). The practice of biophilic design. Terrapin Bright LLC.
Lawson, B. (2005). How designers think: The design process demystified. Architectural Press, Elsevier.
Lüley, M. (2020). Non-linear design thinking in architectural education. World Transactions on Engineering and Technology Education, 18(3), 2020.
Markauskaite, L., & Goodyear, P. (2017). Epistemic fluency and professional education. Springer.
Markauskaite, L., & Patton, N. (2019). Learning for employability in the workplace: Develo** graduate work capabilities. In Education for employability (Vol. 2, pp. 227–236). Brill Sense.
Munro, K., & Grierson, D. (2018). Nature, people and place: informing the design of urban environments in harmony with nature through the Space/Nature Syntax. In Lifelong learning and education in healthy and sustainable cities (pp. 105–125). Springer.
Razzouk, R., & Shute, V. (2012). What is design thinking and why is it important? Review of Educational Research, 82(3), 330–348.
Sadler, D. R. (1989). Formative assessment and the design of instructional systems. Instructional Science, 18(2), 119–144.
Schön, D. A. (1987). Educating the reflective practitioner: Toward a new design for teaching and learning in the professions. Jossey-Bass.
Schön, D. A. (1983). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. Basic Books.
Tai, J., Ajjawi, R., Boud, D., Dawson, P., & Panadero, E. (2018). Develo** evaluative judgement: Enabling students to make decisions about the quality of work. Higher Education, 76(3), 467–481.
USGBC. (2013). LEED V4 reference guide for building design and construction. U.S. Green Building Council, Washington, DC.
Wijesooriya, N., Brambilla, A., & Markauskaite, L. (2020). Develo** a pedagogical model for biophilic design: An integrative conjecture map** and action research approach. WIT Transactions on the Built Environment, 195, 57–70.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2022 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Wijesooriya, N., Brambilla, A., Markauskaite, L. (2022). Develo** an Educational Innovation for Biophilic Design. In: A Biophilic Design Guide to Environmentally Sustainable Design Studios. SpringerBriefs in Education. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-19-4428-4_2
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-19-4428-4_2
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore
Print ISBN: 978-981-19-4427-7
Online ISBN: 978-981-19-4428-4
eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)