Internet Studios: Teaching Architectural Design Online between the United States and Latin America.
Alfredo Andia, Ph.D.
Assistant Professor
School of Architecture
Florida International University
Miami, FL 33199
Abstract
This paper analyzes the pedagogical use of high-end computer graphics, and of
low- and high-bandwidth Internet technology for international architectural
education between numerous universities in the Americas. The findings can be
applied to any discipline that consists of a large number of participants within
a design setting. The experiments, during the past two years, have allowed
design studios from seven schools of architecture to work concurrently in a
semester-long design studio located in Miami, Buenos Aires, Caracas, Santiago de
Chile, Valparaiso, Mar del Plata and Santa Fe de Argentina - with more than 130
students and 20 professors. The majority of the collaboration has been
accomplished by using low-bandwidth Internet communication such as Web
publishing, Chat, Web3D, RealPlayer, IP videoconferencing, CAD software, and
other technologies such as ISDN broadcasting. New grants, obtained from Global
Crossing, Cisco, and Lucent Technologies, from the Ampath project at FIU, Miami,
support future experimentation with high-bandwidth technologies on the Internet
2 Abilene Network.
Traditional Architectural Studios
Typically, design studios are at the core of the curriculum in architectural
teaching. Traditionally, these studios are held in rooms with drafting tables on
which students develop models, sketches, architectural drawings, and
perspectives of the projects assigned during the semester. Architectural studios
do not only simulate real time experience of an architectural office but also
offers very intense interpersonal environment for students to learn from each
other as they search for design solutions. Knowledge, solution strategies, and
design culture are transmitted by what Donald Schon [Schon, 1984] calls a
process of "tacit learning." "Tacit learning" cannot be
fully explained or fully structured. It is transmitted by examples, gestures,
acts, and developed by the investigation of problems as they arise.
Studio reviews, or design juries, are the traditional mode to assess student
architectural work. Conventionally, students pin-up their drawings to a wall
with their physical models in front and explain their design concepts orally to
the professors, visiting critics and students who gather around the pin-up
space. After the oral presentation is completed critics develop oral arguments
in favor or against different aspects of the student's design. After the
presentation and the critique are completed, the pin-up spaces are dismantled,
and the jury goes to review the next student.
The Objectives
The primary question we are confronted with is: how can we enrich the learning
environment, offered in the traditional design studio, with new media
technologies? This is a very complex question since most distance education
software design and online teaching experiences supports a more structured mode
of teaching and learning. Thus, the objectives of the experience are the
following:
- The exploration of technologies and techniques that support rich interaction among a large number of international participants with methodologies that sustain a variety of learning styles and technological conditions.
- The development of pedagogical strategies for these technologies and techniques with the objective of increasing the "speed" of architectural progress in these design communities.
- To reposition the creative processes of architecture in a highly digital environment by increasing not only skills but ultimately altering the design methodologies, imagination, and ambition in improving urban life.
Low-Bandwidth Technology: Chat, Web Publishing,
and IP Videoconferences
The initial experiments of the "Internet Studios" initiative explored
synchronous and asynchronous collaboration with low-bandwidth technology. This
was necessary due to the technological conditions in the Latin American schools
of architecture that participated.
The most popular method, for weekly synchronous reviews of student work, was a
combination of chat and web publishing that we called: "web-chat."
Students posted their weekly work on individual web pages, then professors and
visiting critics from all over the world set a time to review the students'
pages. Student web pages contained CAD renderings, process drawings, photographs
of physical models, video animations with Real-Player presentations, and Flash
animations. Students present this work, via web pages and chat, and then receive
instant responses from reviewers.
Weekly synchronous communication was also supported by unstructured IP
videoconferences through the low-bandwidth Internet (software: Netmeeting,
Vocaltec and CU-SeeMe). The IP videoconference technology worked well for
one-to-one communication among students and/or for professor coordination.
However, it was considered to be too disruptive for online reviews with a large
number of participants. Initially every effort was made to conduct reviews using
an IP videoconference format and supported by students web page publication.
However, surprisingly, over time the combination of chat and web pages became
the preferred method for reviews, and videoconferences became unnecessary. The
web-chat technology was universally available (it only required a java enabled
web browser), and quicker for conducting instantaneous feedback. IP
videoconferencing proved to be useful to develop initial social contacts among
the teams.
Evaluating Studio Reviews: Real Classrooms vs.
Online Low-Bandwidth
Several experimental evaluations were conducted to compare real vs. virtual
studio reviews. In order to develop our study we conducted online and local
reviews at the same time and began to compare results from evaluations, to
record anecdotal references, and to document the behavioral differences of
participants based on each of the environments. The most important conclusions
of the evaluations are the following:
- Review Tolerance. We discovered that
participants in online reviews, via "web-chat" mode, tended to have
lower levels of time tolerance. Typically review teams using
"web-chat" would spend no more than 5 minutes per student project.
Comparatively teams in traditional real time settings are willing to spend up to
15 to 20 minutes per student.
- Oral vs. written explanations. Surveys expressed that student explanations via
chat were more direct, articulate, and memorable to the reviewer than oral
explanations.
- Oral vs. written response. Reviewers also expressed that comments online could
be written simultaneously and reviews can quickly notice the similarity of their
criticism regarding the student's work without having to wait for everybody to
speak.
- Electronic anonymity. Another important observation refers to the lower level
of diplomacy that can be experienced in chat environments, one can go directly
to point without having a physical facial reaction from the student presenting.
- Synchronous and Asynchronous review space. Another important observation
refers to the opportunities and contact time professors and reviewers look at
the student work; in traditional environments the reviewers can see the student
work only during the time of the pin-up. In the online environment reviewers
usually become familiar with the student web pages prior to the time when the
web-chat review occur.
High-Bandwidth Technology: ISDN Videoconference
and Internet 2 IP Multicasting.
We were able to test only ISDN videoconference technology in our Internet
Studios during 1999 and 2000. Due to cost constraints, we keep this technology
for very structured sessions, which occur only two to three times per semester.
Grants obtained, during the year 2000, will allow us to improve this situation.
During 2000, we obtained grants that will allow us to connect with major
academic networks in the Americas through the Inter-Oceanic Global Crossing link
with 40 Gbps. The grant offers a DS3 connection in every country where the
intercontinental network lands in Latin America and the Caribbean. The DS3
connection will link to our POP server in the US, which in turn will connect the
universities to Internet 2. In testing this new bandwidth we began to experiment
with node-rooms with wide IP Multicasting technologies such as "Access
Grid" on Internet 2. The "Access Grid" allows constant
videoconference concurrency of a large number of participants. Each video and
audio channel is connected at the speed of 800kbps, which allows for excellent
quality transmission. The experiment used a system that cost below $15,000. It
included 3 computers, 3 projectors, and a specially designed audio-video system.
Evaluating Studio Reviews in Real Classrooms
vs. Online-High Bandwidth Environments.
As we stated above, our experience using high-bandwidth technology is very
limited. However, from our initial evaluation we can find the following:
- Similar review culture. Design reviewers in real condition and the ones high-bandwidth networks tend to follow the diplomacy, time tolerance, and review format of traditional studio jury processes.
- Potential for distraction. Although time tolerance and review formats are similar, spectators of the multicasting tend to get more easily distracted than if they were in real review spaces. Techniques for moderating multicasting events have became elements for design. It is generally recommended to follow a very structured program. The experience also suggests that the tolerance, for online juries, lasts 1 to 1.5 hours, while in real environments they last approximately 3 hours.
- Potential for supporting new studio culture online. In our initial evaluations of IP multicasting technology such as the "Access Grid" on Internet 2 we can see that this technology has more value in building social relationships online, during the semester, than in the more structured reviews themselves. This is a very important factor in the studio experience and one that needs to continue in the future.
- Lack of spatial orientation spaces. Most of the high-bandwidth technology still resembles human interaction at the level of a television monitor. The evaluators observed that more work has to be done in the physical design and layout in order to engage audiences with the actions and behaviors that transpire in traditional studios.
New Proposals
Our evaluations and observations will be translated into the following specific
projects for this new academic year:
- An improved low-bandwidth review space. Two schools of architecture that belong to the "internet studio" consortium are designing and testing a video-chat interface for design review. The video-chat combines, in a single web page, three frames. In the bottom right frame there is a chat area, on the bottom left frame is an embedded RealPlayer video window for live broadcast, and in the top frame of the web page there is a space where students can publish their work.
- WebCam for low bandwidth social space. During the Fall of 2001, two schools are working on including web cams into their studio space with CU-SeeMe web based conferencing to allow more social interaction among students in the studios.
- Synthetic World: "iStudio," for
low-bandwidth interface. We are also beginning to work with developing 3D-worlds
that can structure "community behavior" in virtual systems. We have
initiated this work based on critical observations of similar experiments such
as MUS, MOOS, DIVE [Carlsson and Hagsand,1993], MASSIVE [Greenhalgh and Benford,
1995], and many other popular virtual world versions developed today. The
"Virtual Studio Space" prototype, named "iStudio,"
investigates the software design and human behavior of studio life with digital
conditions. The design of the prototype does not attempt to recreate the space
of the traditional studio, but to support the community actions in design
education. Three large Box-Rooms appear when one enters the "iStudio":
1. The exhibit room: a room where students virtually pin-up their process during
the semester.
2. The review rooms: four virtual rooms where virtual reviews are held.
3. The forum: a space for building virtual community life. In this space private
meetings are held in secluded rooms, and public meetings, such as exhibitions
and lectures, occur.
One of the most important aspects in a virtual world is the need to rebuild the
human body. The body helps to develop a sense of scale, and a feeling of
community. Once the world is entered the user can always see the red-body of the
all the avatars that are using the system; one red-avatar represents each user.
The eye and the body are attached but separate concepts in the "iStudio."
The body of the avatar only moves horizontally in the planes visited; however,
the user can freely move visually in 3D. The hand and the body are attached but
separate concepts in the "iStudio." Whenever the user touches one of
the elements in the 3D space it triggers an action of user movement. This way
the user can travel quickly between student files, rooms, and boxes.
Communication among users is done via chat. Via local software the text in the
chat is transformed into voice. Icons in the world can also trigger other
communication applications to open, such as IP videoconferences, web page
browsing, etc. Students are required to design their own exhibit space and
review rooms. Files such as JPGS, CAD, Videos, and audio files are uploaded into
the "iStudio" via a simple web page. Each one of the virtual walls can
be edited remotely by using java applets in the student web pages.
The "iStudio" is designed to render different spaces in stages, so the
user never sees the complete world at one time. The idea is to keep the world
accessible to users with low-bandwidth technology - less than 1000 polygons and
with a reduced number of texture maps at all times.
- Grants for "last mile"
high-bandwidth projects. Six international companies are finishing off an
Inter-Oceanic fiber optic network and by 2002 it is expected that the
transmission capacity from the US to Latin America alone will soar to more than
4000 gigabits per second, a significant increase when compared to the 15 gbps
completed in 1999.
However, despite this progress the "last mile," between the
universities and the national nodes, has been recognized as the most difficult
aspect of wiring in Latin America at the Summit of the American Presidents held
in Santiago de Chile in 1998. The "Internet Studio" experience is
being used to demonstrate the usability of the technology. Members of the
"Internet Studio" consortium are working closely with national
institutions and consortiums such as Ampath (FIU, Miami), Retina and Educ.ar
(Argentina), and Reuna (Chile) to develop "last mile" grants and
projects that will allow high-bandwidth access by the Latin American schools of
architecture.
- Space design for high-bandwidth video-spaces. One of our frequently observed situations, when high-bandwidth videoconferences are conducted, is that they engage the participants at the level of a television screen. As architects, some of the participants are taking the initiative to design new video spaces, were multi-casting occurs, that can absorb other senses of the human body. For example one group is working on developing a prototype of an "Internet Studio" room in which video projectors enlarge human figures to 1:1 scale. The walls in which the image is projected is no longer a video-wall but an area of social interaction in which ad hoc events can occur. Another technique is to project horizontally by using blue-screened table surfaces, where physical models and drawings can be placed, viewed, touched, and acted on remotely.
Conclusion
After our experiences, with several low-bandwidth Internet technologies, the
preferred method for virtual design reviews is the combination of student web
page publishing and chat. Initially favored technologies such as IP
videoconferencing was found to be useful in one-to-one conversations but did not
support large design review sessions. Several differences were found between
traditional review procedures and online ones. Time tolerance of online
reviewers tends to be smaller, student explanations and commentaries tend to be
more direct, precise, and shielded by electronic anonymity. This is a product of
the edited information found online and the constant accessibility reviewers
have in accessing student material during the semester. This experience has
triggered a set of observations and conclusions for conducting Internet studios,
in low-bandwidth conditions. They have been translated into a series of projects
we are currently pursuing. We are working to develop a better web page interface
with web publishing, chat, and IP video broadcasting. We are testing web-cam
technology to support spontaneous multimedia collaboration. Also, we are
developing virtual reality prototypes that support the creation of virtual
communities.
We have a limited experience with high-bandwidth technology and expect to work with it more in 2001, due to a series of grants that are permitting us to experiment with Internet 2 in Latin America. In our initial observations, we found that in situ design reviews, and the ones using high-bandwidth do not considerably differ. Similar cultural and behavioral codes are observed on both sides of the virtual experience. Among the slight differences we found were the higher potential for online audiences to be distracted, and the need for developing better spaces for interaction. These conclusions have prompted a number of initiatives for improving the physical design of interactive spaces. In the future the new designs will attempt to increase the engagement of the body and senses of the participants in their meetings.
In the past two years, we have proven that
technologically the experience can be accomplished, and all of the participants
acquired an increased appreciation of their ability to communicate, teach, and
learn remotely. As we continue to experiment with the technology, we are
starting to develop academic agreements and to develop curriculum to offer
post-graduate degrees in conjunction with the participating U.S. and Latin
American universities.
Acknowledgments
I would like to thank the professors, researchers, students, and the large
number of international reviewers that participated in the experience. The work
of the students, name of jurors and traces of the experience can be found at:
http://miami00.tripod.com. The professors and researchers that made this
experience possible, at the seven participating universities, are:
- Ricardo Castillo Von Bennewitz, Jaime Fontana, Ivan Klivadenko, Guillermo
Krovari, Jose Molina, Margarita Ostornol, Mario Paredes, Alberto Sartori,
Universidad UNIACC, Chile
- Director Arturo Montagu, Adrian Barcesat, Carlos Tessier, Ricardo Blinder,
Jorge Lestard, Eduardo Rodriguez Leirado, Centro CAO y Catedra Lestard,
Universidad de Buenos Aires, Argentina
- Dean Abner Colmenares, Marcel Erminy, Leopoldo Provenzali, Gustavo Llavaneras,
Universidad Central de Venezuela
- Dean Roberto Barria, Fernando Palma, Universidad Tecnica Federico Santa Maria,
Valparaiso, Chile
- Alfredo Stipech, Director Centro CID, Universidad Nacional del Litoral, Santa
Fe, Argentina
- Diana Rodriguez Barros, Director Centro CEAC, Universidad Nacional de Mar del
Plata, Argentina
- Alfredo Andia, Florida International University
References
[Carlsson and Hagsand,1993]
Christer Carlsson and Olof Hagsand, ``DIVE: A Platform for Multi-User Virtual
Environments'', Computer Graphics, 17(6), pp. 663-669, 1993.
[Greenhaugh and Benford, 1995]
Chris Greenhalgh and Steve Benford, ``MASSIVE: A Collaborative Virtual
Environment for Teleconferencing'', ACM Transactions on Computer-Human
Interaction, 2(3), pp. 239-261, 1995.
[Schon, 1984]
Donald Schon. The Reflective Practitioner: How Professionals Think in Action.
Basic Book, 1984.
Figure Captions
Figure 1. Weekly synchronous communication was supported by unstructured IP videoconferences over regular Internet (top picture). However, the most popular method for weekly synchronous reviews and communication, among schools of architecture, was via "web-chat" (bottom picture).
Figure 2. The "Virtual Studio Space"
prototype named "iStudio" investigates the software design and human
behavior of studio life in digital conditions. Students and Professors interact
in the prototype with avatars in two VRML review-rooms that are supported with
chat and web page links.