‘The Unusual Heavy Industry, Inc. (UHI, Inc.) Office Planning Participatory/Simulation’ is an alternative method of teaching beginning interior design students. A participatory/simulation is an experiential event which demonstrates a process or procedure, and incorporates both objective information and subjective values. UHI, Inc. was developed to help design students 1) make the transition from simple to complex projects, 2) work as a design team, 3) recognize both process and content in decision making and 4) use microcomputers in a studio project as a tool and tutor. Experience with conducting UHI, Inc. suggests that a participatory/simulation is an effective, supportive and stimulating way to teach neophyte students to design complex projects.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AlexanderC., IshikawaS., SilversteinM., JacobsonM., Fiksdahl–KingI., & AngelS. (1977) A pattern languageNew York : Oxford University Press.
2.
Autocad 2 (tm) Drafting Package (1984) Autodesk Inc. publication106–007.
3.
BeckerF. D. (1981). Workspace: Creating environments in organizationsNew York : Praeger.
4.
Bosti (1981). The impact of office environment on productivity and quality of working life: Comprehensive findingsBuffalo, NY : Organization for Social and Technological Innovation.
5.
Cap Computer Aided Planning Inc. (1985). Steelcase Cap Library, 169 Monroe, N.W. Grand Rapids, MI 49503.
6.
ChingF. D. K. (1979). Architecture: Form, space and order (pp. 193–244 331–385). New York : Van Nostrand Reinhold Co.
7.
ColquhounA. (1972). Typology and design method. In GutmanR. (Ed.), People and buildings, (p. 404). New York : Basic Books.
8.
DuffyF. C. (1980). Office buildings and organizational change. In KingA. D. (Ed.), Buildings and society: Essays on the social development of the built environment (pp. 254–280). London : Routledge & Kegan Paul.
GutenschwagerG. (1979). Gaming, education and change. Journal of Architectural Education. 33, 30–31.
13.
HasellM. J. (1983). Gaming/simulation: A communication tool for architects and designers Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.
14.
HillierB., MusgroveJ., & O'SullivanP. (1972). Knowledge and design. In MitchellW. (Ed.), EDRA–3 Proceedings of The Third Annual Conference. Stroud–burg, Pa. : Dowden, Hutchinson and Ross.
15.
JonesC. J. (1970). Design methods: Seeds of human futuresLondon : Wiley–Intetscience.
16.
KleinJ. G. (1982). The office book: Ideas and designs for contemporary work spacesNew York : Facts on File.
17.
LedewitzS. (1985). Models of design in studio teaching. Journal of Architectural Education38(2), 2–8.
18.
O'MaraP. (1982). Office development handbookWashington, D.C. : Urban Land Institute.
19.
PenaW., PenaC., LockeJ. (1977). Problem seeking: An architectural primerBoston : Cannes Books, International.
20.
PolyaG. (1962). Mathematical discovery: On understanding learning and teaching problem solving. (Vol. 1). New York : John Wiley & Sons.
21.
PulgramW. L., & StonisR. E. (1984). Designing the automated officeNew York : Whitney Library of Design.
22.
RobinsonJ. W., & WeeksS. (1983). Programming as design. Journal of Architectural Design37(2), 5–11.
23.
SchoneD. (1981). Learning a language, learning to design. Architecture Education Study. 3, 349–414, 426.
24.
SeeligM., & SeeligJ. (1985). Architectural education: On flies, bees and the architectural studio. Architectural Record173(3), 51–53.
25.
SteeleF. I. (1973). Physical settings of organization development (pp. 2–25). USA : Addison–Wesley Publishing Co., Inc.
26.
SundstromE., & SundstromM.J. (1986). Work places: the psychology of the physical environment in offices and factoriesLondon : Cambridge University Press.
