748725

research-article2018
EUSXXX10.1177/0013124517748725Education and Urban SocietyHassan

Article
Education and Urban Society
2019, Vol. 51(6) 785­–803
Teaching Humanities in © The Author(s) 2018
Article reuse guidelines:
Architecture Education: sagepub.com/journals-permissions
DOI: 10.1177/0013124517748725
https://doi.org/10.1177/0013124517748725
Investigating the journals.sagepub.com/home/eus

Potentials of Interactive
Photography Exposition
as an Inquiry-Based
Learning Tool

Doaa K. Hassan1

Abstract
If education could be considered the profession of the utilization of
knowledge, then this would be difficult to pass on, especially when we
talk about human sciences. In such disciplines, it is critical to develop
students’ ability to reflect philosophical contemplation, theories, and
different themes on the real life. Consequently, education in humanities is
a process through which the student and the lecturer alike are immersed
in the reviewing and making of knowledge. Therefore, this research aims
at investigating the potentials of the interactive photography exposition
as an inquiry-based learning tool. The study methodology depended on
carrying out an educational experiment where an interactive photography
exposition was held as a learning and assessment tool within the
curriculum of “Humanities in Landscape Architecture.” The study ended
up with the idea that the interactive photography exposition experience
promoted the making of knowledge; addition and transformation of the

1Ain Shams University, Cairo, Egypt

Corresponding Author:
Doaa K. Hassan, Faculty of Engineering, Ain Shams University, 1 El-Sarayat St.,
Abdo Basha Square, Abbassia, 11517 Cairo, Egypt.
Email: Doaa.kamal@eng.asu.edu.eg
786 Education and Urban Society 51(6)

preexisting knowledge occurred through different phases of the immersive

experience of photographs and themes interrelation and contrasting.

Keywords
students, teachers, urban education

Introduction
As Whitehead (1967) reported, “Education is the art of the utilization of
knowledge, this is an art very difficult to impart” (p. 4). Unfortunately, some
lecturers conduct courses without having precise knowledge of how students
can learn. Although many academics know how to learn best, they do not
cogitate whether the method they use to teach is grounded on enabling learn-
ing to happen. There is a continuous research on learning; because there are
no straightforward answers to the questions “how do we learn?” This is, in
fact, a relative process because education deals with particular objectives and
contexts that widely differ and with students as people, who are disparate and
ever changing (Fry, Ketteridge, & Marshall, 2009).
Most contemporary educational theorists rely on constructivist theories of
varying types to explain how human beings learn. The idea rests on the notion
of the continuous building and amending of structures in the mind that is
known as schemata. Schemata change due to new understandings, experi-
ences, and information. Namely, changing in schemata denotes that learning
occurred. In this respect, learning is not just adding more knowledge, but it is
the process through which changing or transformation occurs to the preexist-
ing knowledge of the learners (Fry et al., 2009). In this sense, it should be
acknowledged that planning for teaching and learning methods is one of the
fundamental roles of any academic staff. The methods involved are not car-
ried out in a vacuum, but in accordance with intended outcomes.
In the field of human science, it is really crucial to develop students’ ability
to reflect philosophical contemplation, theories, and different themes on the
real life. This is especially true when teaching a course concerned with human-
ities and the design of the built environment. Such disciplines are strongly
associated with acts of continuous reinterpretation and revision. Accordingly,
“teaching and learning” and “knowledge and understanding” are awkward
terms for humanities, that is, we cannot say that we do not use them, but they
will be tackled in a qualified way. In natural sciences, change in any subject is
a result of discoveries and technological factors. On the contrary, humanities
change continuously by the virtue of their being associated with culture that is
Hassan 787

always in a condition of transition. They change through internal debates and

revision of preferences and methods. Consequently, education in humanities
could be defined not as imparting of knowledge or skills. Rather, student and
lecturer alike are immersed in the reviewing and making of knowledge.
Instructors in this field do not tell their students what and how to think; they
try to boost them to think within a broad academic rationale (Fry et al., 2009).
There is a real need for more constructive activities that mainly depend
on student-based model. In this respect, it is significant to pursue the active
learning approach. It is an approach that is typically conceptualized by
opposing to teacher-based model which is a more passive method of learn-
ing. Incorporating active learning approach into traditional lecture, seminar
and tutorial classes can influence students’ higher order thinking. The active
learning approach gives students control over their own learning. The learn-
ers take the responsibility for important learning decisions. They must
explore and experiment with a task to derive certain ideas, concepts, rules,
principles, strategies, and so on. On the contrary, active learning approach
provides learners with the opportunity to mediate and control learning by
engaging in meaningful social interactions with other colleagues and instruc-
tors (Gogus, 2012).
One-minute papers, asking students to respond to a discussion question,
using interactive technology to get immediate responses from students, writ-
ing reflections, reviewing other’s work, assessing the materials, giving imme-
diate feedbacks, cooperative groups, developing comprehensive lists of the
concepts, role-playing, group presentations, and games are all techniques of
active learning (Gogus, 2012). However, the dilemma here is how to select
the best technique in a specific learning medium. Disciplines vary in their
objectives and intended outcomes which definitely affect the learning pro-
cess itself—the methods that could be adopted to enhance learning.

Literature Review
Teaching humanities is extremely crucial in architecture, because architec-
ture in its essence is associated with creativity that is mainly emerged as a
result of human needs. In spite of the dominance of science and technology
that rapidly turns creative ideas into practice, humanities still provide the
critical understanding of the limits of freedom to accept and cherish
(Bandyopadhyay, Lomholt, Temple, & Tobe, 2010). Therefore, and based on
what is mentioned in the introduction section, it is essential to always bring
students in a teaching/learning context of continuous shared experiences and
debates where meanings could be transformed into concrete reality. This
could bring us back to the concept of active learning. While we define the
788 Education and Urban Society 51(6)

active learning as “anything course-related that all students in a class session

are called upon to do other than simply watching, listening and taking notes”
(Felder & Brent, 2009, p. 2), the inquiry-based learning can be considered a
more structured approach to developmental learning. Students operate within
a framework supported by a driving question or problematic scenario which
conforms to what is said by Dewey, that thinking does not occur spontane-
ously but must be “evoked” by “problems and questions” (King, Goodson, &
Rohani, 1998). The inquiry-based learning requires guidance from the
instructor in the role of facilitator who provides structure and support that
guide students in their developmental stage (Victoria University, 2017). The
value of inquiry-based learning has long been recognized in schooling and
higher education undergraduate courses. Often associated with the work of
Dewey (1938) and Bruner (1966) and constructivist learning theory, inquiry-
based learning is commonly described not only as an active but also as an
interactive student-driven process, where knowledge is constructed rather
than transmitted. The meanings of inquiry-based learning in higher education
are multiple, contested, and subject to different interpretations within and
across disciplines and settings. There are a number of education practices that
have been associated with inquiry-based learning, such as problem-based
learning, discovery learning, project-based learning, experiential learning,
cooperative learning, or group-based learning.
Inquiry is viewed both as a means of gaining knowledge and new under-
standing and a method of teaching that prepares students to become research-
ers and lifelong learners (Preston, Harvie, & Wallace, 2015). This is the
virtue that promotes inquiry-based learning to be pursued in teaching
humanities, where students’ higher order thinking skills which include criti-
cal, logical, reflective, metacognitive, and creative thinking can be boosted.
In this sense, it is essential to mention Bloom’s taxonomies (cognitive,
affective, and psychomotor), which all have lower levels which provide a
base for higher levels of learning. Comprehension and application form
linkages to higher order skills in cognition. Higher order thinking skills
include analysis, synthesis, and evaluation and require mastery of previous
levels, such as applying routine rules to familiar or novel problems (King
et al., 1998). This model was revised where the higher order thinking skills
became analysis, evaluation, and creation (see Figure 1). In brief, learning
occurs when instructors succeed in developing students’ cognitive skills
through the recall of information to a higher level of thinking, such as under-
standing, applying, analyzing, evaluating, and creating (Armstrong, 2017).
In such approach, peer communication and student–teacher relationships
strengthen student motivation and promote responsibility for one’s own
learning (Yalamanchili, Vaddi, & Anne, 2015).
Hassan 789

Figure 1. Bloom’s cognitive levels of learning.

In this respect, exhibitions/expositions can be a powerful inquiry-based

learning tool that can promote the higher order thinking skills in the field of
humanities, not in its traditional manner, but through adopting an interactive
mode where peer communication and student–teacher discourses take place.
Despite that the term exposition refers to projects, presentations, or products
that demonstrate whether, and to what degree, students have achieved the
expected learning outcomes (namely, being an assessment tool), the interac-
tive mode promotes the potentials of this method to be a constructive learning
tool that combines discovery learning, experiential learning, cooperative
learning, or group-based learning at the same time. In brief, expositions can
be both a learning experience in itself and a means of evaluating academic
progress and achievement (The Glossary of Education Reform, 2014).
Expositions significance can be concluded in the following:

Engaging students in an in-depth collaborative inquiry that provides the

opportunity for students to demonstrate independence and responsibility for
their own learning and exploring multiple perspectives.

Guiding students in synthesizing and reflecting their knowledge.

Providing an authentic process for evaluating student understanding.

Joining students and instructors in a collaborative experience (International

Baccalaureate Organization, 2008).

Therefore, this research will focus on the effectiveness of carrying out an

interactive exposition as an inquiry-based learning tool in addition to its
potential as a means for evaluating the academic progress.
790 Education and Urban Society 51(6)

Method
This research is an educational experiment that depends on carrying out
an interactive photography exposition as an inquiry-based learning tool in
the field of humanities in architecture. This experiment was expected to
test the ability of students to realize understanding, applying (linkage to
higher order thinking skills), analyzing, and evaluating skills (higher
order thinking skills) due to the revised model of Bloom’s cognitive lev-
els of learning.

Experiment Design
This educational experiment was achieved via experiencing teaching/learn-
ing in a humanities course. This experiment aims at exploring the potential of
an interactive exposition as a learning tool relevant to the virtue of the
humanities discipline as mentioned before.

General information. This part refers to the basic information of the experiment:

•• The interactive photography exposition was examined through its

application in a course titled “Humanities in Landscape Architecture.”
•• The number of students who attended the course was 19, but 18 stu-
dents shared in this experience.
•• Term: Fall 2016.

Course theme. The question of this experiment upon which the interactive
photography exposition was held, was as follows: How can students experi-
ence the built environment via applying their studied themes?

Experiment goal. The main goal of this experiment is exploring the potential
of an interactive photography exposition as an inquiry-based learning tool
that can boost understanding, applying, analyzing, and evaluating skills
which, in turn, promotes the making of knowledge (addition and transforma-
tion of the preexisting knowledge).

Experiment structure. By the end of week 9, students were asked to select one
of the studied themes to apply it on their real life by experiencing different
spaces. Four captured shots connoting this theme should be stuck on a card-
board sheet (50 cm × 70 cm), with a comment card beside each photograph
for the participation by the other colleagues. Exhibitor’s comment card
should be stuck on the back of the cardboard (to avoid any prejudice that
Hassan 791

Figure 2. Preparing the interactive photography exposition product.

might affect participants’ opinions). On this card, the exhibitor defined his or
her selected theme explaining how it was reflected on the photographs (see
Figure 2). Accordingly, this experiment had two main phases, first, experi-
encing the built environment to prepare the exhibited product, and then pre-
senting it via an interactive mode. Through these phases, the students could
construct knowledge as follows:

•• In the first phase, while students were experiencing their environment

to apply their selected theme, they actually tested their understanding
and applying as levels of thinking. They needed to define the studied
themes to engage mental process beyond habitual response
(International Assembly for Collegiate Business Education, 2016).
They needed to distinguish and show how these themes became con-
crete in their real world.
•• In the second phase, on the day of the exposition, students were
expected to achieve another two higher levels of thinking. First, when
they commented on their colleagues’ work (an hour session), they
actually needed to analyze and evaluate. Students should cite evidence
and develop a logical argument to make a judgment based on specific
criteria (see Figure 3). Second, when the discussion took place (an
hour session), the captured photographs were compared first to what
was written by each exhibitor. Then, another level of analysis and
evaluation was accomplished via comparing what was written by each
exhibitor and what was written by the other participants in relation to
792 Education and Urban Society 51(6)

Figure 3. Students were commenting on their colleagues’ work.

the captured photographs. In this part, more comprehension, analysis,

and evaluation could be achieved, and hence the learning process
could be assessed (International Assembly for Collegiate Business
Education, 2014-2016).

Data Gathering Tools

Through this experiment of carrying out an interactive photography exposi-
tion, two major data gathering tools were applied.

Discussion session. Through the second phase of the experiment, the exposi-
tion day, two levels of analysis and evaluation were achieved; accordingly,
the data produced from the discussion session can be presented in terms of
the following:

•• Photographs and themes interrelation: This tool is concerned with

comparing photographs with the themes selected by every student in
an individual manner. The importance of this step was embedded in
checking to what extent the theme selected by every student was
strongly represented by their captured shots.
•• Contrasting: This tool means comparing the different views to investi-
gate consistency and interrelation between the intended themes
explained through the photos by each exhibitor and the other partici-
pants’ opinions. The result was illustrated in a qualitative manner via
analyzing comments and rating the levels of association by being simi-
lar, related, or confusing.

Questionnaire. A two-question questionnaire was designed to investigate stu-

dents’ feedback about the impact of carrying out such exercise on the learning
process. The questions were about reinforcing and meaningful (Teller, 2007)
aspects of the exposition. Being reinforcing means the influence of the exer-
cise on enhancing understanding of different themes. On the other hand,
Hassan 793

Figure 4. Questionnaire template.

being meaningful denotes to which extent the interactive exposition adds

value through relevant experiences and promotes change in students’ knowl-
edge (affects application, analysis, and evaluation skills). The questionnaire
used a 5-point Likert-type scale (see Figure 4).

Data Analysis Method

It is a case study research with a qualitative intent, seeking to explore the
potential of an interactive exposition as an inquiry-based learning tool. The
question of whether or not the use of the method is predicted to cause such
change in future cases does of course need quantitative analysis and then a
conclusive statistical inference of a fairly representative sample of a variety
of classes rather than focusing on one school of architecture. Hence, the
researcher used only “descriptive statistics” to describe data.

Findings
The findings of the interactive photography exposition are drawn in terms of
the results of the data gathering tools as follows:
794 Education and Urban Society 51(6)

Discussion Session
By comparing every student’s photographs and their selected theme and its
description written on the back of the cardboard, it was found that (see Table 1)

•• the majority of students succeeded to capture photographs denoting

their selected themes,
•• many photographs connoted other meanings that provide the opportu-
nity to be open to other interpretations, and
•• specific themes seemed confusing to be illustrated, such as topophilia
and aesthetic experience.

On the other hand, contrasting each exhibitor’s view with the other partici-
pants’ interpretations was achieved as shown in Table 1.
Comparing what every student wrote at the back of their cardboard with
what other participants wrote beside photographs revealed the following (see
Figure 5):

•• 72% denoted similar responses.

•• 17% connoted associations.
•• 11% was confusing; responses were extremely dissimilar.

Questionnaire
The questionnaire result revealed the following:

Reinforcing. Students agreed that the experience of the interactive photogra-

phy exposition was reinforcing to a great extent. This exposition as a learning
tool enhanced the understanding of the different taught themes, ideas, and
theories. About 54% rated the exposition as being reinforcing by “good,” and
38% described it as “very good” (see Figure 6).
In addition to what was presented in rating the aspect of being reinforcing,
students added valuable comments because they were allowed to add any
extra comment in their sheets as shown in Figure 4. Students’ comments in
this sense can be concluded as follows:

•• Applying themes in the real life by experiencing the surrounding envi-

ronment to reflect themes was very useful in assimilating the studied
topics not only in a theoretical way but also through the lived experi-
ence with all senses.
 Table 1. The findings of the interactive and discussion/contrasting phase

Presenter’s selected theme Other participants’ comments

Main theme Details on each photograph Main theme Details on each photograph Rating
1. Spatial Verticality and horizontality Prospect and refuge —
psychology Front and back
2
Openness and enclosure
Center and periphery
2. Prospect and — Most of the participants —
refuge interpreted photographs as
prospect and refuge, but only 1
one participant interpreted
them as topophilia
3. Common Spatial psychology Common psychological Spatial psychology/
psychological Color psychology structure and responses/ symbolism
structure and Center and periphery prospect and refuge/space Color psychology/
responses Verticality and horizontality and place symbolism 2
Refuge/place
Symbolism/spatial
psychology
4. Common Scale of human perception — Symbolism
psychological Spatial psychology-verticality and Spatial psychology-verticality
structure and horizontality and horizontality 1
responses Symbolism Symbolism
Color psychology Color psychology
(continued)

795
 Table 1. (continued)

796
Presenter’s selected theme Other participants’ comments

Main theme Details on each photograph Main theme Details on each photograph Rating
5. Prospect and Refuge Prospect and refuge Prospect and refuge
refuge Refuge Refuge
1
Prospect Prospect
prospect Prospect
6. Design with all Design with earth and water (vision Design with all senses Vision
senses and olfactory) Design with light (vision)
Design with light (vision) Vision
1
Design with vegetation/texture Design with light (vision)
(tactile)
Design with color (vision)
7. Design with all Design with built elements-paving/ Design with all senses Design with all senses
senses texture (tactile) Tactile
Tactile Design using rough texture 1
Design using rough texture (tactile) (tactile)
Olfactory Design with color (vision)
8. Gestalt — — Continuance
theory and Unified whole
1
perception Continuance
Repetition/similarity
9. Prospect and Prospect Prospect and refuge Prospect
refuge Refuge Prospect (vista)/refuge
1
Prospect Prospect (vista)
prospect Prospect (panorama)
(continued)
 Table 1. (continued)

Presenter’s selected theme Other participants’ comments

Main theme Details on each photograph Main theme Details on each photograph Rating
10. Aesthetic — Social experience/prospect and —
experience refuge/design with natural 3
elements
11. Symbolism — Symbolism — 1
12. Place — — Topophilia/space and place
Topophilia/physical contact
2
Topophilia/refuge/place
Topophilia/place
13. Design with all — Design with all senses Design with landscape
senses details
Design with water
1
Design with water and
vegetation (tactile)
Design with light (vision)
14. Prospect and — Prospect and refuge/space and Prospect (panorama)
refuge place Refuge (place)
1
Prospect (interrupted)
Refuge
15. Topophilia — Design with all senses/prospect —
3
and refuge/topophilia
(continued)

797
798
Table 1. (continued)

Presenter’s selected theme Other participants’ comments

Main theme Details on each photograph Main theme Details on each photograph Rating
16. Common — Common psychological Spatial psychology
psychological structure and responses (verticality)
structure and Spatial psychology
responses (horizontality) 1
Spatial psychology (center
and periphery)
Color psychology
17. Common Color psychology Common psychological Color psychology
psychological Spatial psychology (verticality) structure and responses Spatial psychology
structure and Color psychology (verticality)
1
responses Spatial psychology (openness and Color psychology
enclosure) Spatial psychology
(openness and enclosure)
18. Symbolism — Symbolism — 1
Rating legend
Similar 1 Related 2 Confusing 3
Hassan 799

Figure 5. Themes interrelations.

Figure 6. The interactive photography exposition as being reinforcing.

•• Limited variety in the themes selected was noticed, which affects the
experience to some extent. Some topics were understood thoroughly,
whereas others were not mentioned at all.

Meaningful. Students agreed that the experience of the interactive photogra-

phy exposition was meaningful also. This exposition as a learning tool added
value through relevant experience and promoted change in students’ thinking
(additional concepts and interrelations were realized). About 38% rated the
exposition as being meaningful by “4” and 31% described it as fully “useful”
(Figure 7).
In this aspect of being meaningful, students also added specific comments
as follows:
800 Education and Urban Society 51(6)

Figure 7. The interactive photography exposition as being meaningful.

•• Discussing themes in relation to the captured photographs and com-

paring other point of views affected the concept of ideas association.
Themes were reexplained and interrelated with other themes, which,
in turn, affected changing schemata and, at the same time, enhanced
understanding.
•• It could have been more beneficial in this sense, if students had been
required to select themes without any repetition to cover all the studied
themes to enhance ideas associations.

Discussion
Based on the findings of the data gathering tools, discussion will be presented
to explain the efficiency of the interactive photography exposition as an
inquiry-based learning tool in teaching humanities in architecture.

•• The interactive photography exposition as an inquiry-based learning

tool that boosts different levels of thinking skills:

The findings of the photographs and themes interrelation showed that the
majority of students succeeded to capture photographs denoting their
selected themes. This proved that this experience enhanced students’ skills
in understanding and applying what they have learnt to a great extent.
The findings of contrasting each exhibitor’s work with the other partici-
pants’ interpretations revealed that students could read and interpret their
Hassan 801

colleagues in a similar manner. However, many photographs connoted

other meanings which, in turn, promoted the opportunity to be open to
other interpretations. Accordingly, students succeeded to discover new
meaning associations through their curriculum, which reflects achieving
higher levels of thinking, analysis, and evaluation. On the other hand, spe-
cific themes seemed confusing to be illustrated, such as “aesthetic experi-
ence” and “topophilia.” Students showed a wide range of different
responses. Actually, both themes are very comprehensive to be presented
in only four simple shots; in such cases, the holistic context should be
understood and this could be achieved through videos not static scenes.
However, many responses to “aesthetic experience” and “topophilia”
were accepted. In addition, students declared that specific topics became
clearer, whereas others were still vague in the lived experience. This hap-
pened because students were free to select any of the studied themes.
Therefore, this resulted in the inequality in understanding all topics in
depth. Nevertheless, this weak point in such experience is really difficult
to manage, because if we ask students to not repeat themes, they can easily
guess what is presented.
The findings of the students’ feedback through the questionnaire were
consentient with the findings of the other tool. Students confirmed that the
experience was both reinforcing and meaningful. They appreciated this
experience which enhanced their assimilation of different topics and
themes while addition and transformation of the preexisting knowledge
were realized. Definitely, this happened via reaching higher order thinking
skills through analysis and evaluation.

•• The interactive photography exposition as an evaluation tool:

Although investigating the potential of the interactive exposition as an

evaluation tool was not targeted, it is worthy to be discussed in this con-
text. Previous studies pointed out that exposition can be held by the end of
the courses to evaluate the intended learning outcomes. Expositions or
exhibitions are summative assessments, but the process of building up to
this final event should include ongoing assessment, feedback, and revision
(Brooke & Andrade, 2013). The findings of this research were in corre-
spondence with these previous studies. The findings of the photographs
and themes interrelation and contrasting, and the questionnaire as well,
brought out remarkable achievement in understanding, analysis, and eval-
uation skills. These concordant results emphasized the potential of exposi-
tions as an evaluation tool especially when adopting an interactive mode
that enhances testing a wide range of thinking skills.
802 Education and Urban Society 51(6)

Conclusion
Humanities incite a deeply interesting, passionate pedagogic enterprise (for
both teachers and students). However, the dynamism of that enterprise that is
derived from the relation between the abstract studied themes at the classroom
and the world beyond is the most crucial virtue of such discipline. Therefore,
justification, legitimization, and acceptance in terms of our concrete and
designed world are one of the key issues that should be considered deliber-
ately. In this respect, considering learning methods to achieve the optimum
assimilation of the studied themes, concepts, and theories is indispensable.
Accordingly, this article, as a case study research, aimed at exploring the
potentials of the interactive photography exposition as an inquiry-based
learning tool. The research was ended by explaining the inherent capacity of
expositions to enhance not only students’ understanding and application abil-
ities but also the higher order thinking skills of analysis and evaluation.
Holding expositions via an interactive mode among students promoted the
making of knowledge. In other words, addition and transformation of the
preexisting knowledge can occur through the different phases of this interest-
ing experience of photographs and themes interrelation and contrasting.
Students’ feedback was consentient with the findings of this experience.
Students showed great satisfaction about the value of the interactive photog-
raphy exposition in enhancing their understanding and building their knowl-
edge. Furthermore, the results brought out remarkable achievement in
understanding, analysis, and evaluation skills which also punctuated the
potential of expositions as an evaluation tool, especially when pursuing the
interactive mode that enhances testing a wide range of thinking skills.

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research,
authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding
The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or
­publication of this article.

ORCID iD
Doaa K. Hassan http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7167-3443

References
Armstrong, P. (2017). Bloom’s taxonomy. Nashville, TN: Center for Teaching,
Vanderbilt University. Retrieved from https://cft.vanderbilt.edu/guides-sub-
pages/blooms-taxonomy/
Hassan 803

Bruner, J. S. (1966). Toward a theory of instruction, Cambridge, Mass.: Belkapp Press.

Bandyopadhyay, S., Lomholt, J., Temple, N., & Tobe, R. (2010). The humanities in
architectural design. London, England: Routledge.
Brooke, G., & Andrade, H. (2013). Student-centered assessment: Exhibitions. Boston,
MA: Jobs for the Future. Retrieved from http://www.jff.org/publications/student-
centered-assessment-resources
Dewy, J. (1938). Logic: Theory of Inquiry. Henry Holt and Company.
Felder, R. M., & Brent, R. (2009). Active learning: An introduction. ASQ Higher
Education Brief, 2(4). Retrieved from http://www4.ncsu.edu/unity/lockers/
users/f/felder/public/Papers/ALpaper(ASQ).pdf
Fry, H., Ketteridge, S., & Marshall, S. (2009). A handbook for teaching and learning
in higher education (3rd ed.). London, UK: Routledge.
The Glossary of Education Reform. (2014). Retrieved from http://edglossary.org/
exhibition
Gogus, A. (2012). Encyclopedia of the sciences of learning. Portland, U.S: Springer.
International Assembly for Collegiate Business Education. (2016). Bloom’s taxonomy
of educational objectives and writing intended learning outcomes statements.
Lenexa, KS: Author.
International Baccalaureate Organization. (2008). Exhibitions guidelines. Cardiff,
UK: International Baccalaureate.
King, F. J., Goodson, L., & Rohani, F. (1998). Higher order thinking skills. Educational
Services Program, the Center for Advancement of Learning and Assessment.
Preston, L., Harvie, K., & Wallace, H. (2015). Inquiry-based learning in teacher edu-
cation: A primary humanities example. Australian Journal of Teacher Education,
40, 73-85.
Teller, A. (2007). Assessing excellence in exhibitions: Three approaches. Exhibitionist,
26(2), 69-75. Retrieved from http://www.informalscience.org/assessing-excel-
lence-exhibitions-three-approaches
Victoria University. (2017). Active and inquiry based learning (Learning &
Teaching). Melbourne, Australia: Author. Retrieved from https://www.vu.edu.
au/learning-teaching/learning-teaching-at-vu/learning-teaching-approaches/
active-and-inquiry-based-learning
Whitehead, A. N. (1967). The aims of education. New York, NY: Free Press.
Yalamanchili, B. S., Vaddi, R. S., & Anne, K. R. (2015). Inquiry-based guided learn-
ing to enhance interest and higher-order thinking in engineering graduates: A
computing education perspective. Proceedings of the International Conference
on Transformations 297 in Engineering Education (ICTIEE). doi:10.1007/978-
81-322-1931-6_35

Author Biography
Doaa K. Hassan is an Associate Professor at Architecture Department, Faculty of
Engineering, Ain Shams University, Egypt. She received her PhD from Ain Shams
University in 2010. Her research and teaching fields focus on themes of design
­education and creativity studies, theories of architecture and landscape architecture,
and social sustainability.