The Effect of Teacher-Student Relationships On Student Creative Performances in Architectural Design Studio


Joyce Lodson 1,*, John Emmanuel Ogbeba 2

1 Department of Architecture, Federal Polytechnic Bauchi, Bauchi state, Nigeria.

2 Department of Architecture, Eastern Mediterranean University, Famagusta, Mersin 10, Turkey.

*Corresponding author: Joyce Lodson, Department of Architecture, Eastern Mediterranean University, Famagusta, Mersin 10, Turkey.

Published: January 19,2020


The relationship between tutor and student is fundamental at all levels of education, right from elementary all the way up to the higher institution. Teachers and students spend a great deal of time together in the classroom and it is important that there be good interactions between them because of the effect these interactions have on the students’ performances. Within the architectural set-up, the design studio is the platform where students spend the highest percentage of their time and it is here that they also engage in intensive one-on-one sessions with their tutors. This paper has attempted to consider the types of tutor profiles most common in architectural studios and how these profiles impact on the tutors’ relationships with their students. The paper has also attempted to ascertain the effect of students-tutor’s relationships on students’ creativity in the design studio. At the end, the paper has been able to highlight various types of tutor profiles found among design tutors. These include among others, the forceful and assertive hegemonic overlord, the propagandist entertainer and the liminal servant. It has been found that the tutors relate in different ways with their students based on their profile and that there is indeed a relationship between how the tutors relate with their students and the student’s creative performances. For instance, tutors who are assertive and forceful often make their students feel repressed and unable to express themselves freely. This in turn suppresses the creative abilities of the students. The paper recommends that there be a well-structured educational system set in place so that architectural educators know what is required of them and how to go about fulfilling those requirements.


Dorst, Kees, and Nigel Cross. "Creativity in the design process: co-evolution of problem–solution." Design studies 22, no. 5 (2001): 425-437.

Eigbeonan, A. B. (2013). Effective Constructivism for the Arch-Design Studio. International Journal of Architecture and Urban Development, 3(4), 5-12.

Ersoy, Z. (2011). ‘Building Dancing’: Dance within the Context of Architectural Design Pedagogy. International Journal of Art & Design Education, 30(1), 123-132.

Gentner, D. (2002). Psychology of mental models. In N. J. Smelser&P. B. Bates (Eds.), International encyclopedia of the social and behavioral sciences (pp. 9683–9687). Amsterdam: Elsevier Hewitt, Mark A. "Juvarra's Drawings for Central Plan Build-ings" Dichotomy (Architectural Journal of the University of Detroit), Vol. 6, (1983) pp. 17-29. See also Pommer, Richard Eighteenth-Century Architecture in Piedmont NYU Press (New York) 1967.

Goldschmidt, G., Hochman, H., Dafni, I. (2010). The design studio “crit”: Teacher–student communication. Artificial intelligence for engineering design, analysis and manufacturing, 24, 285-302.

Goldschmidt, G. (2002). "One-on-one": a pedagogic base for design instruction in the studio. Proc. Common Ground Design Research Society International Conference (pp. 430-437). Trenr: Staffordshire: University Press.

Hamre, B. K., & Pianta, R. C. (2001). Early teacher–child relationships and the trajectory of children’s school outcomes through eighth grade. Child Development, 72(2), 625-638.

Hassanpour, B., Utabeta, N., Ani, A.I.C. (2013). Tutor-baased approach toward sustainable architecture education. Social and Behavioral Sciences 102, 33-41.

Johannessen, J,A,. Olsen, B. (2011). Projects as communicating systems: creating a culture of innovation and performance. International Journal of Information Management, 31, 30-37.

Lueth, P. L. (2008). The architectural design studio as a learning environment: A qualitative exploration of architecture Design student learning experiences in design studios from first- through fourth-year. Doctor of Philosophy: Iowa State University.

Mark Gelernter (1995) Source of Architectural Form; A critical History of Western Architectural Form. Manchester University Press.

Nicol, D. & Pilling, S. (2000). Experiential learning or learning by doing in the studio. In S. Nicol D. & Pilling, Changing architectural educatio: Towards a new professionalism. Florence, KY: Routledge.

Ockman, J. (2012). Architecture school: three centuries of educating architects in North America. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Ramsden, P. (1992). Learning to teach in higher education. London: Routledge.

Schon, D. (1985). The design studio: an exploration of its traditions and potential. London: RIBA.

Sidawi, B. (2012). The impact of social interaction and communications on innovation in the architectural design studio. Buildings, 2, 203-217.

Uluoglu, B. (2000). Design knowledge communicated in studio critiques. Design Studies, 21 (1), 33-58.

Webster, H. (2004). Facilitating critically reflective learning: excavating the role of the design tutor in architectural education. Art, Design & Communication in Higher Education, 2 (3,) pp. 101–111.

Taylor, K. L. (1993). The role of scholarship in university teaching. Ca

How to cite this paper

The Effect of Teacher-Student Relationships On Student Creative Performances in Architectural Design Studio

How to cite this paper: Lodson, J., Ogbeba, J. E.(2020) The Effect of Teacher-Student Relationships On Student Creative Performances in Architectural Design Studio. The Educational Review, USA, 4(2), 30-37.