PROJECT TITLE
Collaborative Design Over the Internet
AUTHOR
John Weigand
Miami University
Oxford, OH
weiganj@muohio.edu
David Matthews
Ohio University
Akron, OH
matthej3@ohio.edu
PROJECT LEVEL
Third and Fourth Years
ABSTRACT
Recent advances in available computer technology
and in mediated communication devices are redefining the practice and
the teaching of interior design and suggest new and exciting potentials
for both. To this end, the authors collaborated in teaching a long distance,
joint design studio which required students to develop familiarity and
proficiency with alternative long distance communications media. Further,
this studio promoted both interdisciplinary and inter-university collaborative
learning.
OBJECTIVES
1. To gain an increased awareness of available
technologies for collaborative design efforts across the internet (i.e.
video-conferencing, synchronous 3D design software, e-mail, etc.).
2. To identify and debate potential uses of these technologies within
the design workplace.
3. To better understand the opportunities/limitations created by
internet communication within the broader spectrum of communication technologies.
4. To increase the understanding of opportunities/limitations created
by working in a distance team environment and to develop strategies for
improving communication and problem-solving efficiency.
5. To recognize unique (as well as common) types of knowledge brought
to the design process by both interior designers and architects.
6. To gain an increased familiarity with the various financial,
tectonic, and programmatic issues relevant to commercial office design.
7. To evaluate possible presentation techniques (and design processes)
made more available by computer and the internet in particular.
CRITERIA
Internet communication is having a profound impact
on the practice of interior design. For example, much of the furniture
manufacturing industry is now accessible over the internet, and this trend
promises to radically redefine the traditional ff&e resource library.
E-mail is becoming commonplace in practice, as well as within the university
and among our students, and it, too, is radically redefining modes of
communication and document transfer. Likewise, video-conferencing technology
is becoming more common in the workplace and offers much potential for
employee training, consultant collaboration, and client presentations.
Currently, over 90% of Fortune 500 companies are using some type of video
conferencing. Finally, computer-aided design software (e.g. FormZ), coupled
with synchronous) software such as Timbuktu and asynchronous design made
possible by document transfer, suggest a fundamental redefinition of the
design process itself, allowing for collaborative efforts (and collaborative
design) with consultants, manufacturers, and even clients.
It is essential, we believe, that these potentials for internet use (especially
collaborative design over the internet) be explored within higher education.
Our research indicates that little has been done in these areas within
interior design education, logically because the technology is new and
changing, and some fluency on the part of instructors is required.
Towards this effort, we structured an upper-level design studio project
intended to investigate long-distance communication, and co-design in
particular, over the internet. Because this had not been done previously
within either of our departments, we began planning for the studio almost
a year in advance. Grant money was applied for and obtained well in advance
of the Spring 1997 time slot for the course. This enabled us to take advantage
of our universities' large-group distance learning facilities and to purchase
the appropriate video-conferencing software and hardware.
This project paired students from two institutions in teams of four (two
from each institution). Students were required to communicate long distance
and to explore various avenues for communication. The team structure for
the project required that students develop strategies for improving problem-solving
efficiency within a team environment. Further, the project was interdisciplinary,
pairing Architecture majors from one studio with Interior Design majors
from the other studio.
PROCESS
The specific problem statement involved the renovation
of an historic train station into office space for a multi-disciplinary
design firm. The focus was largely on the interior of the building. All
building documentation was done by one of the studios. Program information
was developed and documented by the other studio, necessitating that the
two groups share information prior to beginning conceptual design.
[ image
1 ]
Students met each other during the first week of the semester via our
universities' large-group distance learning facilities. Once teams were
formed, the studio doing building documentation presented photographic
images and videos--as well as computer-generated "as-built" drawings —
of the train station. Students from the other studio presented program
requirements for the project. (Teams were allowed some latitude in their
interpretation of these requirements, which helped them to realize that,
as designers, they have a responsibility to critically challenge, and
(as necessary) redefine, program requirements generated by clients.)
Subsequent to the initial meeting, the studio doing building documentation
developed a web site containing building plans and several scanned photo
images. Teams quickly began to develop schematic designs, using video-conferencing,
the web-site, and e-mail, as well as the telephone, the fax, and conventional
mail. At midpoint during the project, several students even traveled to
visit their counterparts for a weekend work session.
Interim critiques were scheduled periodically, sometimes using video-conferencing
and involving all members of the team, and sometimes using conventional
pin-up and/or computer presentations and involving only local members
of the team. Final presentations were again scheduled for the universities'
distance learning facilities, allowing for a wide variety of presentation
media (see below).
[ image
2 and image
3 ]
The project was critiqued constantly, at many levels, throughout its duration
and upon its completion. We discussed the design process and the various
technologies and methods of communication selected by each group to solve
the problem. Strengths and weaknesses of each of these methods were evaluated,
as was the potential for use of each of these methods in the workplace.
Team dynamics was a constant topic of discussion. Cooperative design is
difficult enough when partners are face-to-face; adding two more team
members at a remote location compounds the problem further. All groups
completed the project with clear ideas of how group interaction could
be improved if the project were to be undertaken a second time.
Finally, much discussion centered around expectations and understandings
of the two majors (Architecture and Interior Design) and the two programs.
Stereotypes were necessarily dealt with, and the responsibilities of each
discipline (within the project and within the workplace) were better clarified.
Further, this project made apparent the differences in philosophy, background,
skills, etc. that necessarily exist between two programs. The more successful
groups learned to recognize and take advantage of these diverse skills
and ideas.
In summation, we found this to be an especially successful project as
evidenced by our own observations and by feedback from students. As a
primary objective, students gained a much increased familiarity with communication
and co-design over the internet. Additionally, they were able to evaluate
opportunities and limitations inherent in group projects, and they were
able to work specifically within an interdisciplinary and inter-university
setting.
PRESENTATION
Specific presentation requirements for each group
included the following:
Site plan
Rendered floorplan/furniture plan
Conceptual lighting plan
Exterior elevations/3D drawings
Interior elevations, sections, details
Interior 3D drawings
Architectural colors and materials
Furniture, furnishings, and finishes
Final presentations occurred via both universities' distance learning
classrooms. Students decided how best to present the project concurrently
to two locations over 500 miles apart. Some chose a conventional pin-up
presentation. Others presented via the computer. Several used a combination
of media to present ideas. A follow-up discussion of presentation techniques
concluded that some of the above requirements are presented quite effectively
over the internet while others are less effective over the internet. For
example, "colors and materials" and "finishes" may be more effectively
communicated via conventional color and materials boards.
[ image
4 and image
5 ]
EVALUATION
At the completion of the project, students participated
in the grading process by both helping to prioritize evaluation criteria
and by providing written and verbal feedback on peer projects. Selected
criteria for project grading included the following:
cohesiveness of team presentation
contribution as a team member
conceptual design strength
design development
functional resolution
technical resolution
contextual appropriateness
strengthof graphic presentation
strength/clarity of oral presentation
completeness of presentation
process development
attendance/effort/attitude
improvement
participation in peer critique
participation in seminar work
PROJECT LENGTH
Project length was approximately seven weeks. Several
related seminar activities were scheduled concurrently with the studio
problem.
RESOURCES
Wojtowics, Jerzy (1995). Learning and Teaching
the Virtual Design Studio (Panel Session 95 ACADIA). ACADIA Quarterly,
Volume 15, #1.
Hasell, Mary Joyce, and Scott, Suzanne C. (1996). Interior Design Visionaries'
Explorations of Emerging Trends. Journal of Interior Design, Volume 22
#2.
Jones, Kay Bea, and Piotrowski, Andrzej (1995). Beyond the Interfacade:
Critical Pedagogy for Collaboration in Architecture. Proceedings from
the Association of Collegiate Schools of Architecture Annual Meeting.
CREDITS
Assistance on this project was provided by technical
personnel at both universities. This occurred both within our respective
computer labs and while utilizing our universities' distance learning
facilities.
_back to contents
// _download
pdf