Meaning-making in the architectural design studio: a reflexive thematic analysis of students’ research and inquiry practices
Archnet-IJAR: International Journal of Architectural Research, ss.1-22, 2026 (AHCI, Scopus)
- Yayın Türü: Makale / Tam Makale
- Basım Tarihi: 2026
- Doi Numarası: 10.1108/arch-02-2026-0138
- Dergi Adı: Archnet-IJAR: International Journal of Architectural Research
- Derginin Tarandığı İndeksler: Arts and Humanities Citation Index (AHCI), Scopus, Avery, Art, Design & Architecture Collection (ProQuest), Art, Design & Architecture Collection (ProQuest), Arts Premium Collection (ProQuest), Materials Science & Engineering Collection (ProQuest), Technology Collection (ProQuest)
- Sayfa Sayıları: ss.1-22
- Anahtar Kelimeler: Architectural design studio, Architectural education, Inquiry-based learning, Meaning-making, Reflexive thematic analysis
- Yıldız Teknik Üniversitesi Adresli: Evet
Özet
Purpose – This study examines how students construct meaning around research and inquiry in an upper-level architectural design studio and how these processes support or hinder inquiry-oriented learning. Design/methodology/approach – Focus-group interviews were conducted with 28 students who had completed Architectural Design 4. Data were interpreted through a three-layer meaning-making framework – contextual (studio ecology), cognitive (epistemic work of inquiry) and reflective (reflection-in/on-action) – and analyzed using reflexive thematic analysis. Findings – The findings show that the studio can move students from imitative, product-driven work toward research-informed and self-directed inquiry. However, students often struggle to translate research, precedent analysis and theory into design decisions under time, assessment and representational pressures. Research limitations/implications – The study is limited to one institutional context and one studio level; therefore, the findings are not statistically generalizable. However, the three-layer framework offers a transferable lens for examining inquiry-oriented studio learning in comparable settings. Practical implications – Studio teaching should scaffold source reading, precedent analysis, research-question formation and research-to-design translation. Critique, tutor guidance, timelines, assessment and representational expectations should be aligned to sustain inquiry and student authorship. Social implications – Making inquiry processes explicit may support more reflective, context-sensitive and socially responsible architectural decision-making. Originality/value – The study links meaning-making theory with inquiry-oriented studio pedagogy and foregrounds students’ accounts to explain how research, theory, critique and reflection interact in architectural design education.