Pedagogy 2025

Abstract

This paper explores the pedagogical features of implementing “charts” in the teaching of architectural design. In particular, it focuses on the comparison between two value-based charts and how they respectively impacted design thinking and making in an undergraduate design studio. The first chart is Malcolm Wells’ Wilderness Value Scale (1969), which draws primarily on qualitative data. The second is an updated version developed by the Society of Building Science Educators, titled the Regeneration-Based Checklist (1999), which aligns more closely with quantitative frameworks such as LEED (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design) and BREEAM (Building Research Establishment Environmental Assessment Method). Both charts were implemented in a third-year design studio that addressed the design of a mixed-use pavilion in one of Portland’s densest neighborhoods. Students engaged with the charts not as scoring mechanisms, but as tools for critical thought, mapping values, confronting contradictions, and reimagining sustainability as a regenerative and context-sensitive approach to design. Framed within a broader lineage of architectural value-inspired charts (such as the CIAM and Team X grids) this paper reflects on two tools that emerged from the environmental concerns of the late 1960s and were revisited in the 1990s. By foregrounding negotiation over prescription and ambiguity over standardization, these charts remain relevant in helping students cultivate a reflective design practice, one grounded in ecological awareness and capable of situating architectural work within complex cultural and environmental contexts.