Studio. It’s the epitome of being an architecture student everywhere. We all have a studio class no matter where we go. But what is studio? Why would it be beneficial to other majors? But, most of all, why should Illinois Tech shift its focus to offering a class like this to all majors?
Well, first off, what is studio? Studio is a six-credit course that all architecture students in the world must take. It’s typically 3-6 hours, depending on the institution. Unlike a standard lecture or seminar class, the class takes place in a usually large, open space, where each person gets their own large workspace or workstation. If you want to get a feel for what that looks like, just go to Crown Hall on any given Monday, Wednesday, or Friday during the hours of 2 p.m. to 6 p.m. Often times, you see (and hear) lots of commotion, collaboration, and conversation happening in studios. Work spread across desks, models everywhere, and people moving around with books, wood, or sketch pads. Some may be hanging things on walls, others might be making models, or some might be quietly working at their desk. Regardless, they are all participating in a studio class.
Studio for architects is what many would think the physical embodiment of collaboration would be. Many who aren’t architecture majors are afraid to even walk into Crown because it almost seems intimidating to just walk into a space like this. To many of my friends who are computer science, engineering, or business majors, Crown seems like a dream space to be in for their own major. A friend who is in cybersecurity stops by my studio desk and gets jealous each time he stops by.
The idea of a studio class for other majors isn’t new, though. It is the basis for the Interprofessional Project (IPRO) classes offered in the Institute of Design (ID). However, its major flaw is that it still places too much emphasis on lecturing, rather than encouraging students to think creatively and come up with their own ideas. See, the studio only has lectures once a week, and only for half the class. IPRO’s, however, meet once or twice a week, have lecture content each time, and leave only a back third or quarter of the class to studio-like learning. Instead of allowing students to work together to come up with solutions for their projects, it swings and misses the goal of what the IPRO classes have the potential to be.
While the IPRO classes are a fantastic idea, they lack true studio-like education and collaboration by still stuffing students with lectures during each class. The other issue with IPRO’s is that, while working with other majors is a great idea, majors should also get their own studio-like classes. The mechanical engineers could design and build their own mechanical projects in these kinds of classes, working together to find solutions to problems without getting lectured all the time. The computer science majors could have a workstation studio class where all they do is code personal projects to buff up their portfolios and creatively develop solutions in a space where they can actively work together. The chemists could have their own giant labs specifically for safely experimenting on their own and gaining experience that could enhance their own skills. I think you get the point, though.
Studio classes can be a little intense, especially around midterm and finals season. It may not even be for everyone, but it should definitely be something that exists and is encouraged. Offering major-specific “studio” classes that happen two to three times a week for three to four hours could be revolutionary and really bring our school to the front of the line when it comes to education and how we teach our own students. Students deserve to have a class where they can work together and collaborate freely using large workstations or workspaces that could support their major. Definitely food for thought.