Methodological approaches for NTNU Live projects in culturally diverse
teams, context and professional environment
Handling diversity by evaluating
course curriculum + structuring approach to teaching
1.
What issue or issues within the scope of the Diversity project will you
be addressing?
Explain why this topic or area is significant, for you personally or for
your project team and/or for NTNU as a whole.
Have recent trends, changes or developments made this topic or chosen
area more significant?
Course Methodological
approaches for Live projects it is one of the key components in just recently designed
Live Studio HUBs at NTNU (Figure below).
“Live Studios are conducted to challenge the students; to
bring them out of the „academy‟ and into real-world situations that enable them
to gain insights, skills and understandings that cannot be academically
„taught‟. By „being in the situation‟ where solutions are sought both
physically and socially, they not only learn much more efficiently by having to
engage all their senses, but they acquire a much wider understanding of what
architecture is and what it does. Being outside the academy the problems
students confront are embedded in real-world constraints, social and material,
that trigger ingenuity, innovation and creativity all according to the
principles of problem-based-learning.” (not
sure we need this description)
Live studio HUB is service based platform designed to
accommodate the challenges that national and international students, teaching
staff and architecture curriculum is facing today at our faculty while trying
to accommodate Live project initiatives inside and outside curriculum in Norway
and abroad. This platform will accommodate and promote the use of Live projects
as more structural approach to teaching. One of the key components in this
platform is method that we teach our students in the course of Methodological
approach for Live projects.
Methodological approaches for
Live projects course was already piloted in 2013 based on the
experience and challenges students face in Live projects affiliated with NTNU
from 2008-2012. The course provides methodological
knowledge that can be used in field-based project work on an urban ecological
basis. The course is design also to lay a methodological foundation for
cooperation in a local society and development practice.
The course prepares students for
handling situations in the field and preparing the basis for managing the Live
Projects. The course facilitates an exchange of experience with other previous
initiatives and thereby enables a continuity of such projects at the Faculty.
The students are exposed to reflection on theoretical concepts in the
contextual realities of the field that they will experience. They are also made
familiar and experiment with the tools for handling multicultural,
international, interdisciplinary team based projects for design and
construction in local and foreign complex situations.
Methodological approaches for Live Projects course in Diversity
project is aiming to evaluate course curriculum and restructure approach to
teaching by accommodating internationalization challenges that faculty,
students and professional are facing today. An increasing number of
international students (enrolled in the Master’s program and exchange
students), Norwegian students of architecture and civil engineering have shown
an interest in participating in Live Projects at the Faculty, as a part of
their regular curriculum. The faculty and in a larger context NTNU is
challenged to accommodate Live projects as a pedagogical approach in education.
It requires accommodating and improving methodological approach courses as part of the curriculum.
The goal for this
course within the Diversity Project, is to review and take the experience from
the pilot course in 2013, develop it and clarify the learning outcomes and
methodology. Pilot course feedback form students and teaching staff already
indicates the challenges and need for better structured teaching approach while
addressing:
§
Intercultural, interdisciplinary diverse in working teams and context
§
Clarifying professional and the values
§
Work in the international/ interdisciplinary teams and
communities
§
Professional and
ethical responsibilities
§
Cross-cultural
skills, incorporate cultural diversity as a methodology
§
How to mediate
between multi stakeholders, communities and professionals
§
Prepare and equip
students with skill to communicate, write, read and publish in English
§
How to equip students
with reflections and evaluation skills
§
How to increase
international students number in Live projects base in Norway
2.
What outcomes or evidence will you generate which shows that you have
made a difference for the issue you are addressing?
This is a practical project and aims to make changes in how NTNU
currently deals with diversity. Your
outcomes need to be tangible: you should
be able to state what you will create, demonstrate or generate. Outcomes could be products, revised
programmes, data, evaluation information or other documents.
The outcomes that we aim for in the project period 2013/2014:
§
Revised course
curriculum, new learning outcomes, new assessment (December 2013)
§
Implementing result
in the course (2014 spring)
§
Reflective account of
the process, lessons, recommendations (May 2014)
§
Feedback to Live
Studio service platform (May 2014)
§
Feedback to education
at the Faculty (May 2014)
§
Broadening up
potentials for publication in the faculty from the students activities
3.
What method or methods will you use?
How will you achieve the outcome(s)?
This section is
likely to be the longest section in your proposal.
You need to be
specific. Your plan should state, month
by month, what you and/or the project team will do to achieve the project
outcomes. The plan can extend up to
September 2014 or whenever the final conference occurs.
Time line:
§
2013 August/December: Review, evaluate, redesign
§
2014 January/April: Implementation and
conduction the spring semester course
§
2014 April/June: Feedback,
evaluation, recommendation
§
2014 June/August: Documentation,
publications and presentations
§
2014 September: Final evaluation
and presentation
2013 August-December: Review, evaluate, redesign
Review and evaluate the course
curriculum its Methodology and content with the help of expertise from NTNU,
Oxford Brooks, TU-Berlin, Queens
University Belfast, ETH Munich education
institutions and laboratories: Baupiloten, Urban Think tank, which contains similar approaches in architectural-planning pedagogy
and practice.
2013 August/September/October
The methodology part of the course curriculum will be reviewed and
evaluated in collaboration with expertise in Live Project pedagogy from Oxfords
brooks (Jane Anderson) and Queens University Belfast (Ruth Morrow).
This will be achieved by visits and online consultation
with identified experts from the field.
2013 October
The content of the course
curriculum will be supplemented and based on course student feedback in 2013
and evaluation report of methodology. Course content will be supplemented with
methods and approaches from other institutions and practitioners working with
Live Projects in diverse teams and environment.
It will be done, by visiting,
contacting and documenting Live Project practices at TU-Berlin, Queens
University Belfast, ETH Munich universities.
2013 November
Systematic – structured approach
to teaching a diverse and international group, environment and challenges will
be supplemented with a new goal in this course: Improve students’ capability to
write, read, communicate and mediate in English/ Norwegian in their
professional field.
It will be achieved by
supplementing the course with 3 days’ workshop on communication, writing and
reading skills in their professional field. We will use resources from NTNU
Dragvoll and supplement it with expertise from the editor of an academic
journal in architecture: Arkitektur-N.
2013 December: Redesign of course
curriculum
The overall course
curriculum will be redesign on the bases
of reviewed, evaluated of pilot course
in 2013 spring report, student feedback and evaluation report on methodology
and content . Redesign of the course curriculum will be done with help of
expertise from NTNU (Leif
Martin) and Oxford Brookes (Jude Carroll).
The main goal is to improve and
supplement the course with new learning methods and activities by addressing three main challenges that were
highlighted from pilot project feedback- - multicultural, interdisciplinary,
new professional content.
2014 January- April: implementation of
the result in spring semester course
§
Conducting reviewed
and supplemented course in 2014 spring semester for national and international
interdisciplinary students from NTNU and abroad.
§
Documenting the
process and learning outcomes
2014 May: Reflective account of
the process, lessons, recommendations
§
Writing report
§
Feedback report for
the faculty
§
Feedback to the
course structure 2014 fall
2014 June/ August: dissemination,
documentation, publications and presentations
2014 September: final evaluation
and presentation
§
Presentation of the
publication and project results in faculty Miniseminar
§
Presentation in
national and international Live Projects network
§
Presentation in
Diversity Project conference
4.
What resources do you need?
Think about necessary
resources in the widest sense. You might
need to plan in time, access to experts and to experiences within and outside
of NTNU, space for thinking and meetings, limited travel, editing help, publication
costs …..
Make a case for any
stated expenditure. You need to explain
why you have settled on a particular cost or expense. You need to justify general budget items (for
example, for ‘time’ or ‘travel’) and explain why they are additional to what
you would be doing as a normal part of your role at NTNU.
Time support for the academic
staff involved in the project:
§
Time allocated for
the coordinator of the course for
organising evaluation of the curriculum
and redesigning it for 2014
spring
§
Time for a student assistant
to collate results and help with documentation
§
Time for
documentation and dissemination, publication
Resources persons support:
NTNU:
§
Leif Martin- review
of overall curriculum/ intercultural communication
§
Nancy Lea Eik-Nes -
Writing/ reading skills
§
Jonathan
Reams -Integral education/Teamwork
Oxford Brookes:
§
Nabeel
Hamdi-Reflection and evaluation methodology
§
Jude Carroll
-Literature on international curriculum design
Other institutions:
§
Ingerid Almaas,
Arkitektur-N -Writing skills in Architecture
§
Ruth Morrow, Queens University Belfast,
Ireland -Review of methodology in Live project
§
Dr. Rosie
Parnell, Sheffield
School of Architecture- Public relations/
presentations skills
§
Susanne Hofmann, Baupiloten- methods on
community engagement, mediation skills
Financial resources:
§
Support for 2-3 day
writing, reading, April, 2014 Support for 2 day reflection/evaluation
workshop in Spring, 2014
§
Support for exposure
visits to other similar courses Queens
University Belfast, Ireland
§
Support for guest visits/lectures Baupiloten-Berlin, Urban Think Tank
–Zurich
§
Support for dissemination of the results through a seminar
and project report
§
Support for editing,
publication costs for Live Project documentation book.
5.
How will you disseminate your achievements?
You need to tell
others about what you have done. Who
will benefit from hearing of your outcomes?
How will you disseminate the findings, both within NTNU and externally
as appropriate? Think about
publications, conference presentations, reports to NTNU strategic managers,
and/or communication with your colleagues.
Be sure to include dissemination costs in your overall budget.
§
Feeding back to Live
Studio service platform
§
Feedback,
presentation in miniseminar form to the faculty staff programs and courses
§
Report and
presentation to the Diversity University team and conference
§
Publication and
conference presentation in Live project pedagogy network
§
Part funding for publication on Live projects at NTNU
that includes students’ professional critics form the methodology course in
2014. ( not sure if they could fund it but I think we
could give a shot)
