J. Basic. Appl. Sci. Res., 3(8)591-598, 2013 © 2013, TextRoad Publication ISSN 2090-4304 Journal of Basic and Applied Scientific Research www.textroad.com *Corresponding Author: Omid Dezhdar (PhD). Department of Art and Architecture, Science and Research Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran; Email: odejdar@yahoo.com Pathology of Studio Learning Process Based on Analysis of Donald Schön's Research on Design Studios Omid Dezhdar 1 , Iraj Etesam 1 , Seyed Gholamreza Islami 2 1 Department of Art and Architecture, Science and Research Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran 2 Department of Architecture, University College of Fine Arts, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran ABSTRACT Design studio has been seen as the pivotal core in architectural learning and teaching. According to the majority of researchers in architecture profession, research, and teaching, the most efficacious places in teaching and learning architecture with key functions are design studios. Understanding the process of studio learning seems to require comprehensive realization of practices which take place in design studios. Considering the unavoidable importance of this learning environment, there have not been adequate researches on studio processing. This inadequacy has various facets among the most indispensable ones is the absence of appropriate description of studio practices based on an existing teaching theory. Although Schön is considered as the most prominent researcher in this regard who has conducted regular research on describing studio practices, his theories have not been criticized adequately. This study concerns with the pathological analysis of the learning process of design studios from the criticism of Schön's teaching content. Research methodology of the present study is qualitative one using content analysis of Schön's most significant text about design studios. Pathological findings are presented in four expository relationships among epistemological structure and studio pedagogy structure, teacher status in studio, student status in studio, and student-teacher interaction. KEY WORDS: Design Studio, Studio Learning Process, Donald Schön, Reflective Practice 1- INTRODUCTION The design studio has been described as "the distinctive holy-of-holies of architecture education" [1]. It is also the place of professional socialization and enculturation, that is, the studio where the ethos of a profession is born [2]. Many students actually spend most of their time in design studio, where they work, study, eat and even sleep [2, 3]. The design studio traces its origins back to the concept of apprenticeship in the atelier and transformed during the Ecole-des Beaux-Arts and the Bauhaus until it evolved into its present form [4]. Traditionally, the studio has been considered a place for individual design work and one-on-one mentoring between an instructor and student [5]. Investigating research contents regarding design studio analysis manifests increasing interest in this learning environment not only in architecture but in other fields of study. Although there have been few studies for explaining characteristics of studio teaching and learning which scrutinize and analyze comprehensive studio practices in a way that a comprehensive perception of design studios is not feasible. Thus, further regular studies are required for examining the interactions among vital components of studio learning. Ochsner [6] points out: There has been surprisingly little examination in depth of design studio as an educational environment. In particular, there seems to be almost complete silence on two questions: (1) the precise nature of the creative process in which students are asked to engage in design studio; and (2) the character of the interaction between students and faculty that would best enhance the students’ learning of design. Little is written on how faculty might enhance this interaction or how they might improve the quality of their design studio instruction. Schön is one of the most prominent researchers in analyzing and theorizing design studios. His focus on design studios is the result of his attempt for explaining professionals' knowledge and their way of coping with design problems. Hence Schön introduced design studio and showed its process as a model and pattern for other fields. Design studio represents the main foundation of his theory, i.e. 'reflective practice'. His most important work regarding design studios is his book Design studio: An exploration of its traditions and its potentials in which with presenting in design studios, he attempts to explain interactions among its various components and find functions for "reflective theory". The most highlighted features of this work include: 1- its text represents whatever happen in design studios and in fact manifests rich studio environment. 2- Schön's exposition of studio practices and its connection with epistemology bases is one of the most comprehensive explanations. 3- In this description nothing has been added to studio tradition and he merely describes studio practices and process. The majority of researchers consider Schön's expressions in this work as a reference for describing design practice. This public acceptance has blocked the criticism of this theory and thus there are few, if any, criticizing 591