Material-Driven Architectural Pedagogy

A sociomaterial perspective


  • Pelman Pelman The Hebrew University of Jerusalem
  • Amit Raphael Zoran The Hebrew University of Jerusalem


Emneord (Nøkkelord):

Designbuild, Architectural Education, Material Experiences, Sociomateriality, Architectural Prototyping


Most contemporary architecture programmes use a pedagogical model in which students construct their design knowledge by engaging in an architectural project. Due to the size and complexities of the physical environments they study, students develop their design knowledge primarily by using representations of the material world. The learning opportunities afforded by the experience of materials hence are often overlooked. In this study, we seek evidence that material experiences have an agency on architectural teaching and learning. Using sociomaterial perspectives, we followed two architecture designbuild courses, analysed their students’ learning diaries, and contextualised them with the teacher’s pedagogical reflections. We found correlations between specific materials and specific knowledge, skills, and technological competencies and demonstrated how materials could be used as ‘learning agents’ in architectural education. The paper’s findings contribute to the development of a material-driven ped­agogy in which materials are used as ‘learning agents’ in architectural education.


Pelman Pelman, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem

PhD candidate

Amit Raphael Zoran, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem

Associate professor (PhD)


Aish, R., Glynn, R., & Sheil, B. (2017). Foreword. In R. Glynn & B. Sheil (Eds.), Fabricate 2011: Making digital architecture (DGO-Digital original, pp. 10–11). UCL Press.

Appadurai, A. (Ed.). (1986). The social life of things: Commodities in cultural perspective. Cambridge University Press.

Burnett, C., & Merchant, G. (2020). Undoing the digital: Sociomaterialism and literacy education. Routledge.

Carpenter, W. J. (1997). Learning by building: Design and construction in architectural education. John Wiley & Sons.

Corazzo, J. (2019). Materialising the studio: A systematic review of the role of the material space of the studio in art, design and architecture education. Design Journal, 22(sup1), 1249–1265.

Fenwick, T. (2015). Sociomateriality and learning: A critical approach. In D. Scott & E. Hargreaves (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of learning (pp. 83–93). SAGE Publications.

Fenwick, T., Edwards, R., & Sawchuk, P. (2011). Emerging approaches in educational research: Tracing the socio-material (1st ed). Routledge.

Fenwick, T., & Edwards, R. (2013). Performative ontologies: Sociomaterial approaches to researching adult education and lifelong learning. European Journal for Research on the Education and Learning of Adults, 4(1), 49–63.

Fernandez, J. (2012). Material architecture (1st ed.). Routledge.

Garg, P. (2019, July 30). How multi-sensory design can help you create memorable experiences.

Gibson, J. (1983). The senses considered as perceptual systems. Greenwood Press.

Groth, C. (2017). Making sense through hands: Design and craft practice analysed as embodied cognition. [Doctoral thesis, Aalto University].

Hasling, K. M. (2015). Learning through materials: Developing materials teaching in design education. [Doctoral thesis.] Design School Kolding.

Hawley, S. (2021). Doing sociomaterial studies: The circuit of agency. Learning, Media and Technology, 1–14.

Ingold, T. (2011). Being alive: Essays on movement, knowledge and description. Routledge.

Ingold, T. (2013). Making: Anthropology, archaeology, art and architecture. Routledge.

Israeli Central Bureau of Statistics (2020). Household and commercial waste by municipal status and type of treatment (In Hebrew and English).

Karana, E. (2009). Meanings of materials. [Doctoral thesis, Delft University of Technology].

Karana, E., Barati, B., Rognoli, V., & Zeeuw van der Laan, A. (2015, Aug. 30). Material driven design (MDD): A method to design for material experiences. International Journal of Design, 9(2).

Kraus, C. (Ed.). (2017). Designbuild education. Routledge.

Menges, A. (2012). Material computation: Higher integration in morphogenetic design. Architectural Design, 82(2), 14–21.

Moallem, M., Hung, W., & Dabbagh, N. (Eds.). (2019). The Wiley handbook of problem-based learning. Wiley-Blackwell.

Nimkulrat, N. (2010). Material inspiration: From practice-led research to craft art education. Craft Research, 1(1), 63–84.

Nottingham, A. (2017). Feel the fear: Learning graphic design in affective places and online spaces. International Journal of Art & Design Education, 36(1), 39–49.

Orlikowski, W. J. (2007). Sociomaterial practices: Exploring technology at work. Organization Studies, 28(9), 1435–1448.

Oxman, N. (2010). Material-based design computation. [Doctoral thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology].

Pallasmaa, J. (2009). The thinking hand: Existential and embodied wisdom in architecture. Wiley.

Pallasmaa, J. (2011). Architecture and the existential sense: Space, body, and the senses. In F. Bacci & D. Melcher (Eds.), Art and the senses (pp. 579–598). Oxford University Press.

Pelman, B. (2022). Architectural prototyping in architectural education: How design knowledge is constructed within physical-digital hybrid environments. Design Journal, 1–9.

Schön, D. A. (1987). Educating the reflective practitioner: Toward a new design for teaching and learning in the professions. Jossey-Bass.

Spence, C. (2020). Senses of place: Architectural design for the multisensory mind. Cognitive Research Principles and Implications, 5(1), 46.

Thomas, K. L. (Ed.). (2007). Material matters: Architecture and material practice. Routledge.

Vega, L., Mäkelä, M., Chen, T., & Seitamaa-Hakkarainen, P. (2021). Moments of entanglement: Following the sociomaterial trajectories of an intersubjective studio practice. FormAkademisk – Research Journal of Design and Design Education, 14(2).




Hvordan referere

Pelman, B., & Zoran, A. R. (2022). Material-Driven Architectural Pedagogy : A sociomaterial perspective. FormAkademisk , 15(1).




Cited by