Clima emocional y estrés en la crítica académica del Taller de Diseño Arquitectónico V en modalidades híbridas y digitales
Barra lateral del artículo
Contenido principal del artículo
Resumen
La crítica en el taller proyectual sostiene aprendizajes formativos, pero su exposición pública puede intensificar tensiones cuando convergen plazos, incertidumbre proyectual y asimetrías evaluativas, especialmente en entornos híbridos y digitalizados donde el juicio queda registrado. El análisis examina bajo qué condiciones el dispositivo crítico mantiene exigencia formativa sin transformarse en amenaza identitaria, retraimiento o sobrecarga comunicativa. Metodológicamente se desarrolla un análisis documental hermenéutico-crítico que articula dos evidencias del mismo contexto anual: una investigación-acción participativa en cinco fases para diseñar e implementar un entorno híbrido-digital con Moodle, redes colaborativas y recursos multimedia, y un estudio de caso cualitativo con 28 estudiantes que integra ADDIE y principios de Merrill, evaluado con rúbricas en cinco dimensiones. Los hallazgos indican que la mediación digital redistribuye la crítica en microinteracciones más frecuentes y revisables, fortalece la trazabilidad del juicio y sostiene participación cuando existen reglas explícitas de diálogo, criterios compartidos, priorización de observaciones y derecho efectivo a réplica; sin estos soportes, la asincronía puede derivar en aislamiento y acumulación de demandas. Como aporte, se propone un protocolo operativo socioemocionalmente informado que integra encuadre, estructura, regulación y trazabilidad, orientado a fortalecer justicia pedagógica y seguridad psicológica sin reducir el rigor proyectual.
Detalles del artículo
Sección
Esta obra está bajo una licencia internacional Creative Commons Atribución 4.0.
Cómo citar
Referencias
Ajjawi, R., & Boud, D. (2017). Researching feedback dialogue: An interactional analysis approach. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 42(2), 252–265. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2015.1102863
Anthony, K. H. (1991). Design juries on trial: The renaissance of the design studio. Van Nostrand Reinhold.
Austerlitz, N., & Aravot, I. (2006). The emotional structure of the student–tutor relationship in the design studio. In A. Davies (Ed.), Enhancing curricula: Contributing to the future, meeting the challenges of the 21st century in the disciplines of art, design and communication (pp. 91–106). Centre for Learning and Teaching in Art and Design.
Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. W. H. Freeman.
Barsade, S. G. (2002). The ripple effect: Emotional contagion and its influence on group behavior. Administrative Science Quarterly, 47(4), 644–675. https://doi.org/10.2307/3094912
Branch, R. M. (2009). Instructional design: The ADDIE approach. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-09506-6
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
Brookfield, S. D. (1995). Becoming a critically reflective teacher. Jossey-Bass.
Carless, D., & Boud, D. (2018). The development of student feedback literacy: Enabling uptake of feedback. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 43(8), 1315–1325. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2018.1463354
Crowther, P. (2013). Understanding the signature pedagogy of the design studio and the opportunities for its technological enhancement. Journal of Learning Design, 6(3), 18–28. https://doi.org/10.5204/jld.v6i3.155
Crysler, C. G. (1995). Critical pedagogy and architectural education. Journal of Architectural Education, 48(4), 208–217. https://doi.org/10.1080/10464883.1995.10734644
Dewey, J. (2007). Experience and education. Simon & Schuster. (Original work published 1938)
Durgungoz, F. C., & Durgungoz, A. (2025). “Interactive lessons are great, but too much is too much”: Hearing out neurodivergent students, Universal Design for Learning and the case for integrating more anonymous technology in higher education. Higher Education. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-024-01389-6
Dutton, T. A. (Ed.). (1991). Voices in architectural education: Cultural politics and pedagogy. Bergin & Garvey.
Edmondson, A. (1999). Psychological safety and learning behavior in work teams. Administrative Science Quarterly, 44(2), 350–383. https://doi.org/10.2307/2666999
Fleischmann, K. (2025). Making tacit knowledge explicit: The case for online peer feedback in the studio critique. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 35, 699–721. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-024-09911-8
Garrison, D. R., Anderson, T., & Archer, W. (2000). Critical inquiry in a text-based environment: Computer conferencing in higher education. The Internet and Higher Education, 2(2–3), 87–105. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1096-7516(00)00016-6
Gray, C. M. (2022). Critical pedagogy and the pluriversal design studio. In D. Lockton, S. Lenzi, P. Hekkert, A. Oak, J. Sádaba, & P. Lloyd (Eds.), DRS2022: Bilbao (Research paper). Design Research Society. https://doi.org/10.21606/drs.2022.238
Gross, J. J. (1998). The emerging field of emotion regulation: An integrative review. Review of General Psychology, 2(3), 271–299. https://doi.org/10.1037/1089-2680.2.3.271
Hamilton, L. G., & Petty, S. (2023). Compassionate pedagogy for neurodiversity in higher education: A conceptual analysis. Frontiers in Psychology, 14, 1093290. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1093290
Hasirci, D., Albayrak-Kutlay, Y., Edes, B. Z., Caliskanelli, M., Tatari, H., & Rolla, S. (2023). Highlighting community and identity through an online interior architecture studio project: Ambassador’s Residence Project. Journal of Design Studio, 5(2), 245–264. https://doi.org/10.46474/jds.1337271
Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77(1), 81–112. https://doi.org/10.3102/003465430298487
Hobfoll, S. E. (1989). Conservation of resources: A new attempt at conceptualizing stress. American Psychologist, 44(3), 513–524. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.44.3.513
Kamel, M. A. E., & Khalil, M. W. I. (2025). Burnout in architecture students: The role of studio culture norms. TPM: Testing, Psychometrics, Methodology in Applied Psychology, 32(S4), 1362–1380. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.18068076
Karasek, R. A., Jr. (1979). Job demands, job decision latitude, and mental strain: Implications for job redesign. Administrative Science Quarterly, 24(2), 285–308. https://doi.org/10.2307/2392498
Kolb, D. A. (1984). Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and development. Prentice Hall.
Lazarus, R. S., & Folkman, S. (1984). Stress, appraisal, and coping. Springer.
McGuire, M. (2025). Feedback, reflection and psychological safety: Rethinking assessment for student well-being in higher education. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2025.2548590
Merrill, M. D. (2002). First principles of instruction. Educational Technology Research and Development, 50(3), 43–59. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02505024
Morkel, J. D., & Cronjé, J. C. (2022). Alone in a group: Ten characteristics of the live online critique. Journal of Design Studio, 4(1), 5–19. https://doi.org/10.46474/jds.1087021
Nicol, D., & Macfarlane-Dick, D. (2006). Formative assessment and self-regulated learning: A model and seven principles of good feedback practice. Studies in Higher Education, 31(2), 199–218. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075070600572090
Oporto Berrios, J. I. (2025). Diseño instruccional híbrido para la enseñanza del diseño arquitectónico con ADDIE y principios de Merrill. Criterio. Revista Multidisciplinaria, 5(9), 74–89. https://doi.org/10.62319/criterio.v.5i9.49
Oporto Berrios, J. I. (2026). Ecología pedagógica del taller de arquitectura híbrido: Mediación docente, agencia estudiantil y diseño instruccional en la UTO-FAU. Revista LOCUS, 10, 81–97. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.21177175
Oporto Berrios, J. I., & Oporto Rosso, S. M. (2025). Mutación digital y praxis proyectual: Filosofía, tecnologías emergentes y transformación crítica del Taller de Arquitectura V. Ciencia Xplora, 2(1), 92–109. https://www.dicyt.uto.edu.bo/revista-ciencia-xplora-dicyt-uto/
Ozorhon, G., & Lekesiz, G. (2021). Re-considering the architectural design studio after pandemic: Tools, problems, potentials. Journal of Design Studio, 3(1), 19–36. https://doi.org/10.46474/jds.927181
Pekrun, R. (2006). The control-value theory of achievement emotions: Assumptions, corollaries, and implications for educational research and practice. Educational Psychology Review, 18(4), 315–341. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-006-9029-9
Romano, A. M. (2023). Giro epistemológico en la proyectualidad y su enseñanza. AREA, 29(1), 1–14. https://dialnet.unirioja.es/servlet/articulo?codigo=8924077
Salama, A. M. (2015). Spatial design education: New directions for pedagogy in architecture and beyond. Ashgate.
Schön, D. A. (2022). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action (2nd ed.). Basic Books. (Original work published 1983)
Seo, E., & Park, J. (2025). Stage-specific perceived stress (SSPS) in architectural design education: A Korean–Chinese cross-cultural study. Journal of Asian Architecture and Building Engineering. Advance online publication, 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1080/13467581.2025.2598969
Shulman, L. S. (2005). Signature pedagogies in the professions. Daedalus, 134(3), 52–59. https://doi.org/10.1162/0011526054622015
Siemens, G. (2005). Connectivism: A learning theory for the digital age. International Journal of Instructional Technology and Distance Learning, 2(1), 3–10.
Smith, C. (2022). Socio-constructivist pedagogy in physical and virtual spaces: The impacts and opportunities on dialogic learning in creative disciplines. Architecture MPS, 22(1), Article 1. https://doi.org/10.14324/111.444.amps.2022v22i1.001
Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning, and identity. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511803932