**2.2 Visuospatial thinking, multimedia and visual language skills**

What is specific to architectural learning is its reliance on the exchange of mainly visual messages in the process. This requires learners to understand and interpret them in a meaningful, accepted and consistent way. It also requires the participants to respond in kind, with the visual messages composed on their own that also convey an intended message in a meaningful and consistent way. Research has demonstrated the apparent differences how architects as experts and laypersons as non-experts perceive and understand visual representations (Bates-Brkljac, 2007). Introducing architectural or spatial issues, and with that sometimes very specific visual messages, opens new questions of 'reading' and 'writing' of visual messages by different participants involved in the learning process. In general we discern between three groups of participants in terms of visual reading-writing abilities in the architectural planning process [and consequentially learning in- and about- architecture]: 1) the group of experts that is able to read and write visual messages, but less able to express themselves by writing (architects, urban planners, designers, civil engineers, etc), 2) the group who express themselves primarily in writing but are also able to understand ('read') expert visualizations, but much less able to compose them and 3) the largest group of non-experts which is very limited in reading and writing abilities when it comes to visual messages, exchanged in architectural domain (Juvancic et al., 2011).

The e-learning *in* and *about* architecture profits from the graphic capabilities of ICT in the communication process already mentioned, which mainly uses visual messages to represent space and relations in space in two dimensions, while often through means of perspective or isometric, emulates also the third dimension. Readers being aware of immersive environments capabilities and features (i.e. in games and pervasive digital worlds), we will not go into the matter further here.

E-learning, which through ICT supports and includes multimedia possibilities, can offer an especially suitable learning environment for learning *in* and *about* architecture, but it needs to be further extended with specialized learning tools if it wants to satisfy the specifics of expert and non-expert architectural learning (as we will see later in the two showcases). The design principles for fostering visuospatial thinking in multimedia learning as suggested by Mayer (2005): multimedia, contiguity, coherence, modality, redundancy, personalization, interactivity and signalling principles hold true for learning *in* and *about* architecture as well. Some of them were proven through the experimental use of prototypical architectural educational interfaces (see subchapter 4.8) others were and are used assuming their importance as proven for other fields. Although Mayer does not specifically refer to manipulation of objects and presentations within his span of multimedia learning it needs to be emphasized that the principle cannot be overlooked, especially in the light of the situative perspective of dynamic learning (Greeno, 1998) and constructivist learning.

## **2.3 E-learning platforms, educational interfaces and the acquisition of new knowledge**

E-learning extends beyond multimedia learning – it integrates a curriculum, course design, contents (presented in different forms through presentations), learning outcomes, assessment, specialized tools and not least, usually relies on e-learning platform that serves as a medium, a meeting point, a link and a repository for the learning resources and a community forum for

Learning *about* architecture (for non-experts) can follow the same blended and constructivist approaches although the levels need to be adapted in terms of existing non-expert

What is specific to architectural learning is its reliance on the exchange of mainly visual messages in the process. This requires learners to understand and interpret them in a meaningful, accepted and consistent way. It also requires the participants to respond in kind, with the visual messages composed on their own that also convey an intended message in a meaningful and consistent way. Research has demonstrated the apparent differences how architects as experts and laypersons as non-experts perceive and understand visual representations (Bates-Brkljac, 2007). Introducing architectural or spatial issues, and with that sometimes very specific visual messages, opens new questions of 'reading' and 'writing' of visual messages by different participants involved in the learning process. In general we discern between three groups of participants in terms of visual reading-writing abilities in the architectural planning process [and consequentially learning in- and about- architecture]: 1) the group of experts that is able to read and write visual messages, but less able to express themselves by writing (architects, urban planners, designers, civil engineers, etc), 2) the group who express themselves primarily in writing but are also able to understand ('read') expert visualizations, but much less able to compose them and 3) the largest group of non-experts which is very limited in reading and writing abilities when it comes to visual messages,

The e-learning *in* and *about* architecture profits from the graphic capabilities of ICT in the communication process already mentioned, which mainly uses visual messages to represent space and relations in space in two dimensions, while often through means of perspective or isometric, emulates also the third dimension. Readers being aware of immersive environments capabilities and features (i.e. in games and pervasive digital worlds), we will

E-learning, which through ICT supports and includes multimedia possibilities, can offer an especially suitable learning environment for learning *in* and *about* architecture, but it needs to be further extended with specialized learning tools if it wants to satisfy the specifics of expert and non-expert architectural learning (as we will see later in the two showcases). The design principles for fostering visuospatial thinking in multimedia learning as suggested by Mayer (2005): multimedia, contiguity, coherence, modality, redundancy, personalization, interactivity and signalling principles hold true for learning *in* and *about* architecture as well. Some of them were proven through the experimental use of prototypical architectural educational interfaces (see subchapter 4.8) others were and are used assuming their importance as proven for other fields. Although Mayer does not specifically refer to manipulation of objects and presentations within his span of multimedia learning it needs to be emphasized that the principle cannot be overlooked, especially in the light of the

situative perspective of dynamic learning (Greeno, 1998) and constructivist learning.

**2.3 E-learning platforms, educational interfaces and the acquisition of new knowledge**  E-learning extends beyond multimedia learning – it integrates a curriculum, course design, contents (presented in different forms through presentations), learning outcomes, assessment, specialized tools and not least, usually relies on e-learning platform that serves as a medium, a meeting point, a link and a repository for the learning resources and a community forum for

knowledge pool, skills and their understanding of visual language.

**2.2 Visuospatial thinking, multimedia and visual language skills** 

exchanged in architectural domain (Juvancic et al., 2011).

not go into the matter further here.

the learners. The e-learning platforms, nowadays most often called Learning Management Systems (LMS), come in many varieties, sharing common aspects and elements that are suitable for a cross-section of common e-learning activities and tools for running and managing (blended) courses (i.e. Moodle is a good example applied to many levels of teaching and used for different topics and in different settings). The common and general e-learning platforms provide modular structure to facilitate specific needs and specialization. Knewton (Fischman, 2011) is an example that can take on different contents provided it follows more or less the same structure and can be framed within the multimedia options available in the system but still adapt the pace of learning to an individual learner.

Multipurpose e-learning platforms might satisfy the management needs of architectural expert and non-expert courses (and activities) but when it comes to learning they need further extensions with special modules and functionalities to provide for suitable interactive and engaging environment. For expert learning, the multidimensional environments and integration of tools used in architectural practices are of the essence, with further extensions of scripting and parametric design highly recommended (i.e. 3D Lab in VIPA case, described later). For non-expert learning, the much needed user friendly upgrades are educational interfaces that can show complex spatial phenomena through different presentation means and engage the learner in constructivist learning activities. Much more about the functionalities, extensions and aims of e-learning platforms in architecture is highlighted through two different examples later in the chapter (see subchapters 3.1 and 4.8).

Not only can the distinction between expert and non-expert learners be drawn on the basis of different levels of 'reading-writing, visual-message' skills and on the expectations regarding the understanding of complex spatial phenomena, but also on the basis of formal knowledge expected from them. While future experts possess certain formal knowledge in the field and need to acquire and complement it through the learning process, non-experts can rely only on their informal and tacit knowledge when dealing with architectural and environmental tasks.

While the future expert learner will, with the help of e-learning, cross the gulf of expertise (Quintana et al., 2002), gaining knowledge and skills to do his job successfully, the nonexpert will have to cross the gulf of knowledge in the field of architecture and gain insight into the field he is not familiar with and will not spent his life professionally practicing within its domain. However at the same time, his understanding of the field will play a crucial role in his decision making process and space interventions he will encounter during his lifespan of builder, active and passive actor in spatial environment and its 'inhabitant'. Given the sheer number of non-experts physically ('architecturally') intervening daily in their environments and deciding about it (through democratic processes), the non-experts are the major influencing factor in the environmental equation. This is where common aspects end and the e-learning prospects divide to two separate, equally important directions - for experts and non-experts - each with its own goals and agendas.
