Integrative Learning Strategy in a Virtual Urban Design Workshop: with emphasis on five episodes of urban discovery

As the rampant pandemic unfolded and spread around rapidly, it institutionalized new obligations and reactions, one of which involved setting up online educational platforms. While the whole world is indeed experiencing new conditions, it has arguably, brought about new opportunities for revisiting the business-as-usual most fields including urban design have encountered. “Practice makes perfect” sounds like a familiar mantra in urban design problem-solving workshops, where students typically work in teams, get feedback throughout their desk crits, revise and resubmit projects in multiple iterations. Translating this premise in an urban design workshop boils down to spending hours in the field making key observations on the land use configuration and diversity, street network make-up, existing building conditions, and distribution of open/green space. These key layers, then, give some food for thought to any designer who attempts to craft solutions based on areas that need redevelopment or redesign (i.e., tearing down dilapidated or run-down buildings or retrofits), and then coming up with new design for areas slated for construction or requiring retrofit.The urban design pedagogy and studio literature underlines the gap between theory and practice. Epistemological and ontological concerns surrounding the discipline further complicate matters. To narrow this gap, this paper focuses on a recent workshop taught online at the Jundishapur University of Technology. While the COVID-19 pandemic imposed certain restrictions, the outcomes seem promising. Theorizing the five episodes of urban discovery (walking, observing, encountering, perceiving and interpreting), enabled nine urban design graduate students to engage in an integrative rather than a synoptic learning experience. This approach not only boosted the students’ self-discovery and confidence in observing, analyzing and designing their projects (plan evaluation, plan making), but also helped them to learn from peers rather than rehashing their instructors’ pedagogical intentions.As it eventually turned out, the students unanimously confirmed that those five episodes significantly affected their preconceived notions of observation, and analysis as precursors of creating urban design alternatives. For example, they alluded to the fact that they customarily observed land use make-up, building conditions, construction materials, development density, etc., in any given site. This mainstream modus operandi of practicing urban design has deep roots in the canons of the profession, ensuring that students can put together masterplans that translate the local needs into certain land use types, or quantify density, per capita and so forth.One of the key takeaways in using an integrative learning, as opposed to synoptic strategies focuses on motivating students in a dynamic atmosphere of learning by doing, “storytelling” (Sandercock, 2003), and reflection (Schön, 1983). In this particular study, the students spent a lot more time than expected doing fieldwork, observing and analyzing. The students, unanimously and enthusiastically, stated that despite the COVID-19 pandemic, they willingly spent exorbitant amounts of time (in some cases five to six hours a day), during the week to observing and engaging with the five episodes of urban discovery. Even the female students who might face cultural limitations acknowledged their extensive fieldwork. Despite some expected cultural limitations, especially during the rampant pandemic, spent equal if not more time compare to male students in the field. Compared to men, women face more difficulties spending time in the public realm, take notes and photos—especially in cities or urban districts where men dominate women in the first place. But against these actual limitations, women willingly spent time even during the afternoon and evening hours to complete their fieldwork or reflect by, at times, following their own instincts. Some of them stated with details how or whether they noticed any significant differences observing community engagement in the public space. With all upsides and downside, the students’ enthusiasm and passion promise future utility in using and incorporating these five episodes into urban design thinking and studio teaching. Surprisingly, instead of receiving pushbacks from the students, the instructors received positive feedback about incorporating theoretical debates in future studio/workshops. Contrary to expected attitudes typically observed in studio courses hoping to start the design stage as quickly as possible, the students in this workshop behaved surprisingly differently, and not only did not shy away from exposure to theories, but indeed, insisted on its undeniable benefits in boosting their design outcomes. Feedbacks like these reassure scholars wanting to recognize and reduce the theory vs. practice gap facing urban design both as a profession and an academic discipline.