We can define architectural design studios as environments of simulation. Within this simulation limitations of real life
architectural problems are constructed, yet the constructed reality is far from the reality of existing practice.
In Architecture: Story of Practice, Dana Cuff, makes a sociological study of the architectural design practice and in
the volume she discusses design studios as limited versions of the actual design practice. As compared to the actual
practice in the studio the students are alone, there isn’t a multiplicity of actors involved in the process, and the design
problems are clearly defined. Cuff points out to these shortcomings and provides guidelines to overcome them.
One of the shortcomings mentioned in Cuff’s study is that: design studios do not represent the variety of actors that
are present in a real life situation. Cuff suggests to include representatives of different actors in the studio practice to
overcome this. If the studio fails to support itself with a variety of actors, to compensate the short coming of actors, the
instructors start taking the role of many possible participants of a design process. The instructors simulate: the user, the
owner, the engineer, the contractor and so on so forth. This type of an approach in the design studios leads to a certain
result: the ideological construct of the instructors becomes the foundation of the constructed reality of the studio.
This study explores the ideological construction of the design studio through active involvements with undergraduate
students. Through the findings of two discussion sessions, students’ own ideological positions, their relationship with
the external realities and limits imposed on such relations by the studio instructor’s own ideological stances are
Keywords: Design Education, Ideology, Studio, Limits of Education, Constructed Truth.
An Abstract to read the whole article login.......