Modelos de respuesta extrapenal en ordenamientos del Civil Law

The social environment of design studio course is essential and crucial for design learning and teaching (Schön, 1988; 1987; 1985; Kvan, 2001; Ashton and Durling, 2000; Craig and Zimring, 2000). Kwan (2010) suggests that “design cannot be learned in isolation”. On the grounds of uncertainty and ambiguity of the given design assignment, students find their way through the design process and learn how to design by interacting within their social surrounding. The complex network of

reflections in studio, as described above, creates the foundation for design studio process. This networked environment creates the setting for “background learning”, where students learn from the sum of all the influences that they are exposed to (Schön, 1988; 1985). Therefore, the more connected a student within this network, the more chances s/he has in enriching her/his personal design process. The learning environment of studio is described as “many-to-many” by Kvan (2001), where students learn from their own experience of “doing”, learn from their teachers’

doing, and from each other’s – their peers’ – doing (Andia, 2002; Zimring, et al.

2001; Schön, 1988).

Design studio class accommodates a complex social environment, which induces multi-directional, diverse interactions and communications (Demirbaş and Demirkan, 2000). The multi-directionality is created by the distributed emphasis on the studio people, i.e. students and teachers (Kvan, 2001). The many-to-many nature of the social environment in studio can be observed from different aspects. Typically, there is more than one teacher giving a studio class, which distributes the emphasis among the studio teachers. Similar to the physical setting of generic design process, the spatial composition of the studio is an important factor, too (Blevis et al., 2008;

Brown, 2006). Each student has her/his desk and her/his personal environment on and around the desk. Desks represent the students’ working and also private areas, dividing the open plan studio space into personal spaces. In these personal spaces, students mostly work; but they also have a coffee, visit each other’s desks; teachers visit their desks to give critiques or sometimes to have casual talks with a gathered group of students. When a submission date is approaching, some students may choose to live in the studio for a few days and use their desks as everything, including a bed. Thus, desks are important spatial elements that divide up the emphasis in the social environment in the studio, making the studio space a relatively more homogenous educational habitat; the students the inhabitants; and the teachers the visitirs. This spatial organisation helps the networked social structure in the studio. An important aspect of a student’s desk is its being the personal working space of the student, where s/he keeps her/his ideas-in-progress. In such a social environment of students and their original design ideas, isues of public vs. private spaces also rise (Blevis et al., 2008; Craig and Zimring, 2000; Demirbaş and Demirkan, 2000). Therefore, the studio space accomodates a dynamic social setting.

Such a unique spatial organisation in an educational setting directly effects the social context, and that is why the design studio rooms are an essentail part of design education.

In design studio, the social roles of students and teachers, and the interactions and communications among these social characters, are essential for design learning and design teaching (Kwan, 2010). When teachers present the design briefs to students and evaluate the projects in critique sessions, they take the role of a client, a customer commissioning a project and monitoring the progress; while the students become professional designers working on a design project (Davies, 2004). Teachers hold the role of “authority” or “expertise” in general, as they are the source of knowledge and also assessment; they also are “coaches” or “facilitators” guiding the students’ in their process of learning-by-designing; and sometimes they are friends or

“buddies” of students supporting them in their complicated route of graduating into the professional design world (Goldschmidt et al., 2010; Shao et al., 2007; Schön, 1985). Students, when giving each other feedback, take the role of a client or a customer evaluating a design project, they sometimes become teachers in critique sessions (Schön, 1988). In addition, teachers assign various roles to students as part of the requirements of the projects; students become researchers, interviewers, engineers, artists, presenters, inventors to complete the different tasks of a single design project (Sagun, 2003; Kvan, 2001; Zimring, et al. 2001). As mentioned earlier, design activity is a collaborative process, shared not only between designers themselves but also among many different practitioners, who get involved in the design process. In studio courses, such collaborations are enacted by students when completing some of the tasks teachers assign for these purposes. Such diverse social roles, interactions and communications, are necessary in design learning and teaching, so that students can view and evaluate the design process from different perspectives. This complex social environment in design studio is created by and built on the interactions and communications, which take place within the network of students and teachers. The basic form of interaction in studio is the “studio critique”.

Consequently, the studio critique is the medium of communication within the social environment. Through studio critiques, teachers transmit their design knowledge to students; and students communicate their ideas to teachers and other students (Uluoğlu, 2000).