Asee peer logo

Peer Review Plus: A Case For Combining Architectural Design Studios Earlier

Download Paper |


2004 Annual Conference


Salt Lake City, Utah

Publication Date

June 20, 2004

Start Date

June 20, 2004

End Date

June 23, 2004



Conference Session

Technical Issues in Architectural Engineering

Page Count


Page Numbers

9.983.1 - 9.983.14



Permanent URL

Download Count


Request a correction

Paper Authors

author page

Joseph Betz

Download Paper |

NOTE: The first page of text has been automatically extracted and included below in lieu of an abstract

Session 2406

Peer Review Plus: A Case for Combining Architectural Design Studios Earlier

Joseph A. Betz State University of New York at Farmingdale

Abstract Student peer review is an important learning tool used in design courses where the end product or solution is measured in terms of good, better and best as opposed to right or wrong. It allows students the opportunity to receive feedback, give criticism and learn about their designs in context. This paper examines the use of peer review in the first year architectural design studio as a pedagogical tool. Student attitudes and perceptions are measured using a series of controlled experiments showing that real differences exist within defined peer groups as well as in the strategic objective behind the peer review. It promotes the idea of combining first-year architectural design with upper level design studios, something that is usually never considered for many logistical reasons. It develops the concept of "peer review plus," where a more experienced or knowledgeable peer reviews, comments and confirms a novice peer's work. The goal of this paper is to promote greater use of peer review and provide an "outside the box" solution for improving this challenging first year design course.

Introduction When we talk about peer review, it is important to know that real differences exist within a defined peer group and in the type of review that is being conducted. These differences are a result of an individual's unique experience, knowledge or social status within a peer group and the strategic objectives behind the review. These differences can be observed by the choices peers make in selecting whom they choose to review their work and how they perceive the benefits. These differences and preferences can be shown through a series of controlled peer review experiments, using participant feedback surveys.

The first year architectural design studio is an especially challenging learning environment for students. Everything seems new to students, including how the architectural language itself is presented, the design methodology, the creative studio setting, and the review and criticism process. This learning environment transforms a student's thinking of architecture from one of undisciplined, familiar and unstructured to one that is critical, rigorous and conceptual. Peer review becomes a tool to reinforce and promote the value system of good, better and best in terms of proper architectural design in this new environment.

"Proceedings of the 2004 American Society for Engineering Education and Annual Conference & Exposition Copyright © 2004, American Society for Engineering Education"

Betz, J. (2004, June), Peer Review Plus: A Case For Combining Architectural Design Studios Earlier Paper presented at 2004 Annual Conference, Salt Lake City, Utah. 10.18260/1-2--13368

ASEE holds the copyright on this document. It may be read by the public free of charge. Authors may archive their work on personal websites or in institutional repositories with the following citation: © 2004 American Society for Engineering Education. Other scholars may excerpt or quote from these materials with the same citation. When excerpting or quoting from Conference Proceedings, authors should, in addition to noting the ASEE copyright, list all the original authors and their institutions and name the host city of the conference. - Last updated April 1, 2015