This research reflects on the future of artificial intelligence (AI) technologies and Pattern Theory in architectural and design education and how it may inform the design process, projects, assessments, and research in this space. We are increasingly bombarded by new technologies and an abundance of information. The rapid evolvement of AI has created many uncertainties. Might AI take away our jobs? Will AI kill creativity? How will we know who has produced the work? How do we as educators and students make sense of these technologies and use it (or not) in our education and practice? Can we possibly discover through AI new tools and possibilities and ways of working that contribute positively to what we do?

Design education is an integral part of the architectural student’s journey. Traditionally, in the undergraduate course, emphasis is placed on the skills development of conceptual sketching, model making, storytelling, and various communications of the concept and design processes. However, these skills are often seen as separate parts and taught as such without always utilising the opportunities to integrate these various aspects and parts into a holistic process. Architectural artisanship is a vital part of design acumen and must be seen as a skill that facilitates the design process rather than a separate entity.

In this paper, the authors reflect on the findings from a building information modelling (BIM) literature review, which comprises contemporary literature from the past five years, considering national and international development of BIM implementations, focusing on the architecture, engineering, and construction (AEC) industries. This study acknowledges BIM as a digitalisation breakthrough that emerged in the third industrial revolution (3IR) and evolved rapidly within the Fourth Industrial Revolution (4IR). BIM technology instils the attribute of being a contributive team member in co-designed projects and facilitates effective project outcomes by reducing time, cost, wastage, environmental impact and energy consumption.

The multifaceted structure of higher education often limits the full integration of design and construction teaching in schools of architecture, but the potential for a greater intersection of these knowledge bases does exist. Design education in the architecture studio is typically taught through a linear process, where students are required to produce a concept design, followed by a series of design iterations and lastly, technification of the design. Similarly, in practice, this process is linear, starting with a design phase followed by a construction phase. In both scenarios, this process leads to a predictable design outcome. Contrastingly, a circular design process has the potential to allow for a more open-ended negotiation with material, technology, process, and making.

Are traditional architectural studio-based teaching methods and tools still applicable, or are they causing a communication barrier between a student and a lecturer? In architectural design studios, promptly submitting projects is a problem. The paper is based on a study conducted by the author between 2016 to 2018 and aims to determine whether information technology (IT), such as building information modelling (BIM), opposed to the conventional method (CM), can improve informed design communication during conceptual design critique sessions. Therefore, contribute to prompt studio-based design project submissions. The research's objectives include understanding BIM as a design tool compared to a visualisation tool to facilitate early design decision-making.

The purpose of this paper is to publish research findings on the use of automation and artificial intelligence as a sub-set of knowledge management domains in architectural organisations in South Africa. Automation and artificial intelligence are two aspects that the fourth industrial revolution deals with, and automation may drastically change the way humans work.

For this paper, research data was collected by means of a qualitative research study. Consisting of 14 semi-structured interviews. The paper presents a discussion and research on the use of automation and artificial intelligence in the service architectural organisations provide.

As a contribution to the decolonisation debate, we need to develop theoretical frameworks that are better suited to diverse contexts, specifically Africa, and we need to elevate local knowledge systems, thinking that originates from the African continent and architectural theory from African scholars. It also demands a shift from documentation (which we tend to do when studying Africa) to interpretation and the development of new theories and new methodologies of research and practice.

Decolonization is a globally relevant redress of local customs and practices that have remained altered since the times of historic colonial expansion. In South Africa, education forms one such set of customs and practices and the built environment another. Educators in the field of built environments share a responsibility to challenge the accepted norms under colonial systems and find ways in which to facilitate the creation of built environments that reflect the needs and aspirations of their society. Seepe (2004, pp. 160-174) urges us to rethink curriculum functioning, and attitude in the context of African traditions, conscientiously instilling relevance in both the system and the resulting products of that system. ‘In our curricula lies the very identity of our society.

This paper will explore the notion of ethics in the built environment, and professional accountability, topics which are generally sidelined or given little direct consideration in teaching and practice. However, this status quo is increasingly being questioned. Built environment educators and practitioners need now to develop the intellectual and skill resources to address new questions, formulate a position, and set guidelines to be able to incorporate and make these ‘measurable’ in the performance of educators and practitioners, and for achieving a level of accountability.

As a teacher of architectural design in the first year of the Bachelor of Architectural Studies degree at the University of the Witwatersrand, I found that the attrition amongst certain groups of "previously disadvantaged" students was noticeably higher than amongst white students. It became my focus to empirically adapt my teaching to try to facilitate the potential for a successful outcome for all students.

This paper describes the course before 2009, the pedagogical interventions that were made from 2009 to 2011 and the course outcomes. The interventions mainly consisted of practical reorganization, building up cognitive skills and academic behaviours. Current research should reveal whether or which interventions may have influenced the improved throughput.

There is wide acceptance that the studio stands central to architectural design education (Bakarman, 2003, 2005; Kuhn 2001; Forsyth., Zehner and McDermott 2007). It is a social environment (Gross, 1997; Chen and You 2010:152) which is characterised by communication, critique and collaboration. The studio is a physical place that facilitates pedagogy that supports community-centred instruction. It utilizes the theories of apprenticeship, social constructivism, socio-cultural theory of learning, collaborative learning, situated learning in communities of practice and enculturation.

Architectural and Interior design are disciplines that are by nature interdisciplinary. Whether in dialogue with engineers, builders, lighting designers or furniture makers, the architect and interior designer is forced to think in more than one register. The same applies in the creative sphere. In their own creative endeavours, architects and interior designers have always drawn on the ideas, concepts, theories and practices of other disciplines. Both the practice and conceptualisation of architecture and interior design then are interdisciplinary.

This paper describes the results of an academic assignment given to a group of undergraduate architectural design students, in which each student was required to conduct research and compose case-study reports on selected works of architecture to support individual identification of each of these works as “good”, “bad”, or “ugly”. Each student was free to select whichever works of architecture they wished as subjects for their research, and to illustrate these works by whatever means they found appropriate. Each student selected several buildings as examples, and each student composed a multi-page illustrated and written report summarizing their research and concluding with specific attributions for each selected work.

Full title: Learning From Synergies Between the Intersections of the Indigenous and
Modern in Settlement Planning Concepts and Traditions in Africa:

The study of indigenous knowledge systems (IKS) in the built-environment disciplines has for a long time been limited and trapped in the idyllic discourses of 'exotic’ or 'primitive' architecture, and the ‘organic’ nature of the development and planning of such built forms and settlements, by emphasizing the essentially transient nature of these built forms.

Professional undergraduate degree programs in built environment disciplines prepare students to become practicing architects, interior and landscape architects, industrial designers, planners and construction managers. However, students are rarely exposed to projects in their coursework or in work experience that challenge them beyond the theoretical, and adequately assist them in developing empathy for the needs of disadvantaged or marginalised groups in our society. Design students generally work on briefs provided by their studio leaders, and within discipline-specific groups of their educations programs.

A wide range of geometric principles, concepts and perspectives, invariably sourced in ancient times, offer potential as problem solving tools in the twenty-first century. This appears to be accepted by design teachers and instructors worldwide, but evidence for the wide-spread inclusion and systematic delivery of such material in the design curriculum of the first decade of the twenty-first century is largely lacking.

This paper seeks to extend Donald Schön’s often-referenced and widely-accepted observations that design, specifically architectural design, is a reflective “conversation with materials” consisting of a cyclical process of “reflection-in-action”. Specifically, the paper argues for the extended applicability of these observations to the question of analysis of existing architecture.