Category Archives: ARP

ARP 02: Reflections on Inclusive Practices Intervention and Ethical Action Plan

Leave a Reply

Mapping my Action Research 

I am basing my Action Research Project on the intervention I undertook for the Inclusive Practices Unit. I therefore see my ARP starting with a fresh round of reflections on that intervention. Following that, I will go through steps 1–5 as set out with the Action Research Cycle (based on McNiff and Whitehead 2009). Considering some changes and expansions I want to make to the intervention, I decided to consider my ARP cycle as part of an Action Research Spiral (Kemmis and McTaggart, 2000, cited in Koshy et al., 2010) which starts with the IP intervention.

To map my ARP cycle, I brought together McNiff and Whiteread’s cycle and Kemmis’ and McTaggart’s ARP spiral. Diagram: Laura Linsi

IP Intervention: ‘Hairy Drawing’ workshop

For the IP unit, I designed a collective drawing workshop which was building on similar workshops my teaching partner Roland Reemaa and I had previously carried out in a few different teaching contexts, e.g. with undergraduate architecture students at CSM, as well as master students from Delft Technical University. I carried the IP intervention out in the autumn of f the academic year 24/25 in the same teaching context where I’ve chosen to act for ARP—the vertical design studio (2nd and 3rd year architecture students) we run at CSM Spatial Practices. The collective drawing workshop is based on the concept of ‘Hairy Drawings’ (East, 2009), which I further developed into a collective drawing method that is applicable to an undergraduate teaching context.

For the IP unit, I had identified individualistic practices in architecture and architectural education to contribute to two social justice issues: (1) they discourage practitioners from engaging with the diversity of the people they design spaces for; (2) in university context, these practices hinder students’ engagement with the diverse lived experiences of their studio peers. Thus, the aims of the intervention were: (1) to share knowledge and varied perspectives on the site that everyone develops an architecture project for; (2) to build stronger relationships within the group of students, and to encourage collaborations and critical friendships beyond the workshop. A full description and reflection on the workshop is included in the following post: https://certifyinglaura.myblog.arts.ac.uk/2025/01/21/intervention-reflection-hairy-drawing-ws/

Reflections on the intervention

I reflected on the IP intervention independently, as well as with my co-tutor Roland Reemaa, and decided to undertake some changes for my ARP.

What I missed in the IP process:

  1. Although I got some feedback, I missed a deliberate reflection from the students on the method;
  2. A reflection from students on how they had or hadn’t taken the knowledge from the collaborative excercise further into their individual projects; 
  3. Students considering their positionality more deliberately; 

For ARP, I therefore decided to:

  1. Gather and analyse data more deliberately, e.g. by interpreting the drawings together with the students, as well as by myself. I also decided to interview a focus group of students.
  2. See the workshop as a part of a holistic site research cycle, i.e. expand the period I consider the impact of the intervention. This includes the laying of the groundwork for the collective drawing workshop as part of my ARP, as well as interpreting as data the individual work students undertake after the workshop. 

With my co-tutor Roland Reemaa, we discussed the day of the workshop itself. We thought the following things had worked well: 

  1. A simple technical task at the start (preparing base drawings in groups);
  2. Giving prompts for what to draw;
  3. Time constraints (no time to overthink or to be too precious about the graphics; to incentivise simultaneous drawing by several people);
  4. Collective discussion in the end (to give the work value and to hear each other voices across smaller groups); 
  5. Not asking groups to “finish” drawings in their own time, i.e. focusing on process rather than outcome;

With the changed scope I wanted to implement as part of my ARP, we decided on some changes together with Roland: 

  1. to give them a pre-task at the collective site vist with the aim tp encourage taking field notes as an instrument of discovery (Webb and Webb, 1932, cited in Tjora, 2006, p. 429);
  2. to give them a quick creative task to be carried out in pairs with the aim to get them thinking about the site through their own, and someone else’s perspective;

Ethical Action Plan

Writing the Ethical Action Plan helped me to set my focus, and the tutorial and feedback session with my tutor Mallika were helpful for narrowing down the scope of the project and for creating a deliberate list of evaluation methods. Although Mallika warned me that I might end up with too much data if I consider the collective drawing workshop as part of a longer site research cycle that consists of several actions, I couldn’t resist doing just that, as it felt important to me that I get to analyse how students take what they learn as part of the workshop further into other tasks and ultimately their design project.

Bibliography:

[1] McNiff, J., & Whitehead, J. (2009). Doing and writing action research. SAGE.

[2] Koshy, E., Koshy, V., & Waterman, H. (2011). What is action research?. In What is action research? (pp. 1-24). SAGE Publications Ltd, https://doi.org/10.4135/9781446288696.n1

[3] Tjora, A.H. (2006). Writing Small Discoveries: An Exploration of Fresh Observers’ Observations. London: Sage Publications. 

[4] East (2009).Expressing Interest. London: East, pp 147–150.

ARP 01: Collaborative Practices as Foundation for Social Justice in Architectural Design Education

Leave a Reply

Repairing the architectural curriculum

Architecture is predominantly seen as an individualistic practice and not a form of inclusive and caring labour. As the architectural theorist Elke Krasny frames it, 

“Despite this fundamental function of architecture to provide protection for humans from sun, wind, snow or rain, and to give the support necessary for maintaining the vital functions of everyday living, the idea of the architect is linked to autonomy and independent genius rather than connectedness, dependency, social reproduction and care giving.” (Krasny, 2019)

She continues, 

“[The reasons] have to do with the classed, sexualized and racialized division of power and labor that historically excluded spatial practices performed by black, indigenous people, people of color, women or workers from the idea of Architecture with a capital A as it was discursively shaped by Western thought.” (Krasny, 2019) 

To ensure a more equitable future for architecture—one that includes a range of spatial practitioners and recognises a range of spatial practices that are vital for repairing the damage the profession is accountable for in relation to social as well as climate justice—, we need to rethink the curriculum of architecture, including the methods and ways of doing we teach to aspiring architects.

Architects Registration Board analysed the representation of different groups (gender, ethnicity, religious, geographical location) of the architects’ profession in 2022. As I’ve highlighted, the results show a lack of diversity. Expanding the ways architects practice and what type of practice is considered architecture, could be one way of improving this. (ARB 2023)

ARP Focus and Research Question

In this context, I’ve chosen to specifically focus my Action Research Project on teaching collaborative methods to architecture students. My research question is:

How to encourage collaborative practices in a design studio with a diverse group of students within an individualistically oriented course structure and discipline?

I will focus my action research project on the first phase of teaching within the architectural design studio at the Central Saint Martins BA Architecture course. It is where we explore one of the first stages of any architecture project—site research. Site research methods typical to the discipline of architecture aim to be ‘objective’ and ‘neutral’ (e.g. desktop-based mappings and data collection, reliance on spatial abstractions (CAD drawings, 3D models)). Their aim is to remove the professional from their subjectivity. However, this claim for objectivity fails to acknowledge that these methods were developed in colonial contexts from a Western bias. They also fail to recognise on-ground human experiences and thus lay foundation for exclusivity and injustice in architectural projects.

My intention is to challenge these methods in my teaching practice and encourage students to recognise their personal experiences, share them with their peers, and examine the site collectively through autoethnographic methods. My thesis is that understanding a site from a range of vantage points is a start for making architectural practice socially more just and architectural practitioner more empathetic. The project builds on my intervention for the Inclusive Practices module and sets out to develop it as a comprehensive teaching approach.

Several mostly public realm focussed London architecture practices have been pioneering methods of collaborative site research, e.g. East, MUF, Erect. East architects, landscape, urban design co-organised and held a community workshop at the Arden Estate Hall to discuss their WIP for the masterplan project ‘Connecting Hoxton’. (East, 2025)

Context of teaching practice

As part of this project, I will be working with a group of 22 second- and third-year architecture students, who are developing an individual architectural design project across one academic year. I will focus on the first phase of the architectural design studio—site research—with the aim to introduce (1) collaborative research practices, (2) encourage critical friendships between the students, and (3) develop empathy within the diverse (ethnically, neurologically, socially and culturally) group. I believe the three notions are fundamental to an inclusive learning environment.

[500 words]

Bibliography:

[1] Krasny, E. (2019). ‘Architecture and Care’, in Fitz, A. & Krasny, E. (eds) Critical Care: Architecture and Urbanism for a Broken Planet. Vienna & Cambridge MA: Architekturzentrum Wien & MIT Press, pp. 33‑43.

[2] Architects Registration Board (ARB) (2023). Architects Today: analysis of the architects’ profession in 2022. ARB. Available at: https://arb.org.uk/architects-today/ (Accessed: 15 November 2025).

[3] East (2025). ‘[Community workshop at the Arden Estate Hall]’ [Instagram], 16 July. Available at: https://www.instagram.com/p/DMLWGwmMoA4/?utm_source=ig_web_copy_link&igsh=MzRlODBiNWFlZA== (Accessed: 15 November 2025).