ro | en
Argument › No. 17/2025

Architectural Pedagogy for a Sustainable Future. Design with Petrinzel Village Community

https://doi.org/10.54508/Argument.17.09

  • / Department of architecture, Faculty of construction, cadaster and architecture, University of Oradea, RO
  • / Civil Engineering and Building Services, Technical University of Cluj-Napoca, RO
  • / Doctoral School of Geography, University of Oradea, RO

Abstract

This paper examines how architectural pedagogy can address sustainability challenges by embedding participatory and situated approaches in design studios. Current models often privilege individual authorship and abstract problem-solving, overlooking the social and ecological dimensions of architecture. The aim is to test how design studios can cultivate students as critical and creative agents of change by engaging with real communities.

This research is based on a participatory action research (PAR) project to reactivate an abandoned school in Petrinzel, Romania. The methodology combined studio teaching with PAR stages of planning, action, reflection, and evaluation. Students engaged in activities such as hands-on workshops, focus groups with stakeholders, shared cooking, field observation, and reflective sketching, followed by critiques and final design proposals.

Findings show that a situated learning helped students adapt preconceived ideas into context-sensitive designs, integrating traditional materials and practices with innovative solutions. Challenges included the absence of community evaluation and built prototypes, underlining the ethical need for reciprocity.

We conclude that embedding PAR in design studios fosters relational, situated, and reflective learning, expanding both the role of the architect as mediator and the educator as co-learner, better equipping students to respond to ecological and social crises.

Keywords

architectural pedagogy, sustainability education, participatory action research approach, “clacă”, situatedness

Download

References

  1. Baibarac-Duignan, C., & Medeşan, S. (2023). ‘Gluing’ alternative imaginaries of sustainable urban futures: When commoning and design met in the post-socialist neighbourhood of Mănăștur, Romania. Futures, 153, 103233. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.futures.2023.103233
  2. Braidotti, R. (2016). Postumanul. Hecate
  3. Borcan, C. (2025). Școala în oraș: proiecte „live“ la UAIUM. Revista Arta, 68–69, 42. https://revistaarta.ro/wp-content/uploads/2025/02/revista-arta-68-69-view-1.pdf
  4. Charalambous, N. & Christou, N. (2016). Re-adjusting the Objectives of Architectural Education, Procedia - Social and
  5. Behavioral Sciences, 228, 375-382. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2016.07.056
  6. Christiansson, J., Grönvall, E., & Yndigegn, S. L. (2018). Teaching participatory design using live projects: Critical reflections and lessons learnt. Proceedings of the 15th Participatory Design Conference: Full Papers - Volume 1, 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1145/3210586.3210597
  7. Davos Declaration. (2018). Towards a European vision of high-quality Baukultur: Davos Declaration 2018. World Economic
  8. Forum & Swiss Confederation. https://davosdeclaration2018.ch/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2023/06/2022-06-09-075742-context-document-en.pdf
  9. Crosbie, M. J. (2016, August 12). Shigeru Ban: Permanent impermanent. Assemble Papers. https://assemblepapers.com.au/2016/08/12/shigeru-ban-permanent-impermanent/
  10. Datey, A. (2023), Decolonising the design curriculum: making ‘sustainability’ accessible, understandable and practicable to second-year undergraduate architecture students. Archnet-IJAR: International Journal of Architectural Research. Vol. 17 No. 3. https://doi.org/10.1108/ARCH-10-2022-0228
  11. Escobar, A. (2018). Designs for the pluriverse: Radical interdependence, autonomy, and the making of worlds. Duke University Press.
  12. European Commission. (2024). New European Bauhaus investment guidelines. Publications Office of the European Union. https://new-european-bauhaus.europa.eu/system/files/2024-07/NEB%20Investment%20Guidelines.pdf
  13. Galoș, D., & Medeșan, S. (2023). From temporary spatial practices to permanent architectural forms. The case of “La Terenuri” from Mănăștur Neighbourhood, Cluj-Napoca. sITA, 10. https://doi.org/10.54508/SITA.10.13
  14. Goilav, A. M. (2024). The School of Bunesti, Arges, Romania: Hand-made Architecture, A Craft of Self-limitation. Journal of Traditional Building, Architecture and Urbanism, 5, 14–39. https://doi.org/10.51303/jtbau.vi5.744
  15. Granato, A. (2023). An architectural teaching and learning framework: Tackling the implementation of SDGs in architectural education. In A. Rubbo, J. Du, M. R. Thomsen, & M. Tamke (Eds.), Design for Resilient Communities: Proceedings of the UIA World Congress of Architects Copenhagen 2023, 807–814. Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-36640-6
  16. Haraway, D. (1988). Situated Knowledges: The Science Question in Feminism and the Privilege of Partial Perspective. Feminist Studies, 14(3), 575–599. JSTOR. https://doi.org/10.2307/3178066
  17. Herr C. M. (2014) Radical constructivist structural design education for large cohorts of chinese learners. Constructivist Foundations 9(3): 393–402. http://constructivist.info/9/3/393
  18. Hickey, A., & Riddle, S. (2023). Proposing a conceptual framework for relational pedagogy: pedagogical informality, interface, exchange and enactment. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 28(13), 3271–3285. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603116.2023.2259906
  19. Ilovan, O.-R., Măgerușan, A., Boțan, C. N., Dulamă, M. E., Ursu, C.-D., Mutică, P., & Jucu, I. S. (2020). Experiencing And Bringing Back The River In The Urban Flow: Someș Delivery. In V. Chis (Ed.), Education, Reflection, Development – ERD 2019, vol 85. European Proceedings of Social and Behavioural Sciences, European Publisher, 262–272. https://doi.org/10.15405/epsbs.2020.06.26
  20. International Energy Agency, & United Nations Environment Programme. (2018). 2018 global status report: Towards a zero-emission, efficient and resilient buildings and construction sector. United Nations Environment Programme. https://www.unep.org/resources/report/global-status-report-2018
  21. Kindon S., Pain R. & Kesby M. (2007). Participatory action research approaches and methods: connecting people, participation and place. Routledge.
  22. Manzini, E. (2015). Design, when everybody designs: An introduction to design for social innovation. MIT Press.
  23. McLaren, P.L. (1988), The liminal servant and the ritual roots of critical pedagogy. Language Arts, Vol. 65 No. 2, pp. 164-180.
  24. Morrow, R. (2014). Live Project love: Building a framework for Live Projects. In H. Harriss & L. Widder (Eds.), Architecture live projects: Pedagogy into practice. Routledge.
  25. Musa, M. (2020), Assessment, learning and power in the architectural design studio jury: a case from the United Arab Emirates. Archnet-IJAR: International Journal of Architectural Research, Vol. 14 No. 3, pp. 489-502, https://doi.org/10.1108/ARCH-01-2020-0009
  26. Office for National Statistics. (2020, December 21). Coronavirus and the impact on students in higher education in England: September to December 2020. https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/educationandchildcare/articles/coronavirusandtheimpactonstudentsinhighereducationinenglandseptembertodecember2020/2020-12-21
  27. Petrescu, D.; Axinte, A.; & Medeșan, S. (2025). Design-supported urban commons in collective housing estates in Eastern and Western Europe. Architecture and Culture, forthcoming.
  28. Shareef, S. S., & Farivarsadri, G. (2020). An Innovative Framework for Teaching/Learning Technical Courses in Architectural
  29. Education. Sustainability, 12(22), 9514. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12229514
  30. Thomsen, M. R., & Miller, N. M. (2022). Architecture for the UN sustainable development goals. A map of global efforts (Version 3rd edition). UIA2023CPH CITA Centre for Information Technology and Architecture.
  31. Transformative Design Education. (2021). New European Bauhaus Prizes. https://2021.prizes.new-european-bauhaus.eu/
  32. node/268757 United Nations. (2023). The sustainable development goals report 2023: Special edition. Towards a rescue plan for people and planet. United Nations. https://unstats.un.org/sdgs/report/2023/
  33. United Nations Environment Programme. (2022). 2022 global status report for buildings and construction: Towards a zero-emissions, efficient and resilient buildings and construction sector. United Nations Environment Programme. https://www.unep.org/resources/publication/2022-global-status-report-buildings-and-construction
  34. URB_O. (2011, April 6). Manifest. URB_O. https://urb-o.blogspot.com/2011/04/m-n-i-f-e-s-t.html.
  35. Vaida, V., Vaida, E., & Napradean, A. (2023). Hands-on Training Through the Ambulance for Monuments Project. Journal of Traditional Building, Architecture and Urbanism, 4, 190–203. https://doi.org/10.51303/jtbau.vi4.666
  36. Wang, Z., Liu, W., Zhang, Y., & He, H. (2024). The impact of COVID-19 on students’ mental health in higher education: A knowledge mapping analysis. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, 11, 350. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-024-03781-0
  37. Wesselius, J.C. (2017). A Woman’s Place: Place-Based Theory, Hermeneutics, and Feminism. In: Janz, B. (eds) Place, Space and Hermeneutics. Contributions to Hermeneutics, vol 5. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-52214-2_34