Learning from Problems, Failures, and Unexpected Ideas: A Reflection on Real Life Learning Experience Through Community-based Projects

Abstract

At the heart of any lifelong learning is the learning itself. In the pursuit of the knowledge learning, the potential of the community-based project suggests the interdependence between educators, students and community. Students as the learner take responsibility of their own project. Meanwhile, the whole community involves and contributes to the lifelong and lifewide learning efforts. Partnership between students, educators, and community improve the performance and build the enthusiasm to the development of the lifelong learner’s whole personality to be ready for any possible circumstances.

This paper presents several cases of community-based projects that students have practiced at Department of Architecture, Universitas Indonesia in the Everyday and Architecture class. The objective of this community-based project is to expose the students with real life architecture intervention and experience of participatory design approach. The students found various underlying lessons in this community-based project which promote the collaboration between the students’ ideas and the community aspiration. They found the genuine layer of community culture, how to communicate and negotiate with the community. They learned not to discredit failures, but to learn that failures are an inherent part of the process. They discovered the layers of “unexpected ideas” within the learning process and learned how these ideas can be applied as method and further references. They learned to address the problems in different ways. They did appreciate the problems and were taking steps and appropriate manners to respond and adapt to it. The whole learning process promoted the role of the students not only as experts in their field but to be more sensitive with various everyday issues in the community.

Full text

ICOLACE 2014
3rd International Conference On Learning And Community Enrichment
Traders Hotel, Singapore
Sunday 22 June – Wednesday 25 June 2014
PROCEEDINGS
from the 3rd
International Conference
On Learning And
Community Enrichment
(ICOLACE)
Traders Hotel
1A Cuscaden Street
Singapore
22-25 June 2014
ISBN 978-0-9872206-2-2

ICOLACE 2014
3rd International Conference On Learning And Community Enrichment
Traders Hotel, Singapore
Sunday 22 June – Wednesday 25 June 2014
PROGRAM SUMMARY
Sunday 22 June
5.00pm - 7.00pm Registration at Traders Hotel, Temasek Function Room, Level 2,
1A Cuscaden Road, Singapore. Please ask at hotel reception for directions.
Monday 23 June
8.45am - 9.45am Late registration
9.45am Assemble in conference room and preliminary notices regarding conference
10.00am Official opening ICOLACE 2014
10.30am Presentation by teachers and students from Our Lady of Good Counsel
School, Singapore about local student involvement in lifewide learning
11.00am Morning tea
11.25am Return to conference room
11.30am Presentations by Conference delegates (refer page 2)
1.10pm Morning wrap-up
1.15pm – 2.45 Workshop luncheon to discuss morning topics and document feedback
2.45pm – 5.35pm Presentations by Conference delegates (refer pages 2/3)
Tuesday, 24 June
9.45am Assemble in conference room and notices for Day 2
9.55am Welcome to Day 2 by Conference Chairperson
10.00am Presentations by Conference delegates (refer page 4)
11.00am Morning tea and poster display
11.15am Depart for visit to OLGC School to meet with teachers and students
1.15pm Arrive back at Traders Hotel for lunch
1.15pm – 2.45pm Workshop luncheon to discuss morning topics and document feedback
2.45pm – 5.00pm Presentations by conference delegates (refer page 4) and conference close
Wednesday, 25 June: optional visit to local schools to view local student projects
This event has now been scheduled for Tuesday 24 June departing Traders
Hotel at 11.15am and returning at 1.15pm.

PROGRAM DETAIL
Day 1: Monday 23 June
10.00am – 10.30am
Official Welcome and Opening of ICOLACE 2014
10.30am – 11.00am
Presentation regarding involvement by students in local community projects,
Singapore by students and teachers from Our Lady of Good Counsel School
(OLGC)
Teacher: Ms Theresa Ng
Students: Estelle and Rhea (Primary 4 Integrity Class)
11.00am – 11.30am (Morning Tea)
11.30am – 11.55am
Learning from Problems, Failures, and Unexpected Ideas: A Reflection on Real
Life Learning Experience Through Community-based Projects
Yandi Andri Yatmo, Paramita Atmodiwirjo, Verarisa Anastasia Ujung, Tajrinaa Istiani
Universitas Indonesia, Indonesia
11.55am – 12.20pm
Teacher Educator to K-12 Educator to K-12 Student: Strategies to ignite a
passion for holistic approach to learning among prospective educators to help
them feel confident to promote a life-wide well-being of their prospective
students
Kiran Padmaraju and Linda Sherwood, Eastern Illinois University, United States of America
12.20pm – 12.45pm
Shakespeare Reading Club: Introducing Shakespearean Drama to Children
Wing Bo (Anna) Tso, The Open University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong
12.45pm – 1.10pm
A snapshot of the development of generic learning outcomes: Implications to
New Senior Secondary (NSS) school reform in Hong Kong
Sammy King-fai Hui, The Hong Kong Institute of Education, Hong Kong
1.10pm – 1.15pm
Morning summary by Chairperson
1.15pm – 2.45pm: Workshop Luncheon to review morning topics and document feedback
2.45pm – 3.10pm
Teacher Leadership Development in schools: a factor towards students’ lifewide
formation
Daisy Anajemba, Los Angeles Unified School District, United States of America

Day 1: Monday 23 June (continued)
3.10pm – 3.35pm
The Robot Competition: a project-based learning approach for enhancing STEM
education
Yi-Ching (Sophia) Chen. National Taiwan Normal University, Taiwan
3.35pm – 4.00pm
Obstacles in Growth of Learning English Communication Skills for Arab
Students: An Investigative Study at Samtha College, Jazan University(KSA)
Abha Singh, Jazan University, The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia
4.00pm - 4.15pm Afternoon tea
4.15pm – 4.40pm
Measuring students’ perceptions of the educational environment of a new pharmacy
school using the DREEM questionnaire
Pei Nee (Penny) Wong, Taylor’s University, Malaysia
4.40pm – 5.00pm
Noduts and Draguates
Chris and Christine Picone, Australian College of Kuwait, Kuwait
5.00pm – 5.30pm
Lifewide PROGRESS Reports as a framework to nurture self-management by
students of setting goals and reviewing progress. Workshop led by
Chris Picone, Australian College of Kuwait, Kuwait
5.30pm – 5.35pm Concluding comments from Day 1 by Chairperson

Day 2: Tuesday 24 June
10.00am – 11.00am
Transforming Low Performing Students to High Performing Community Leaders.
Workshop led by:
Arcie Mallari, Silid Aralan, Philippines
11.00am – 11.15am Morning tea
11.15am – 1.15pm
Optional visit to local schools to view student project work towards sustainable
development.
Interested delegates to meet Chairperson in foyer of Traders Hotel at 11.15am.
1.15pm – 2.45pm: Workshop Luncheon to review morning topics and document feedback
2.45pm – 3.10pm
Children as “Interior Architects”: Creative Learning and exploring of classroom
furniture.
Paramita Atmodiwirjo, Noor Fajrina F. Istiani, Universitas Indonesia, Indonesia
3.10pm – 3.35pm
Reinforcing notions of duty and rights
Geetanee Napal, University of Mauritius, Mauritius
3.35pm – 3.50pm Afternoon tea
3.50pm – 4.50pm
Discussion session towards establishment of International Association for
Lifewide Learning (IAFLL) as formal structure for
 networking by educators engaged in lifewide educational research and
programs and as
 umbrella organization for convening future ICOLACE conferences.
4.50pm
Official close of conference by Chairperson

PROCEEDINGS
Day 1 – Session 1:
10.30am – 11.00am
Presentation regarding involvement by students in local community projects,
Singapore by students and teachers from Our Lady of Good Counsel School
(OLGC)
Teacher: Ms Theresa Ng
Students: Estelle and Rhea (Primary 4 Integrity Class)
Attachment 1A OLGC Green Program PowerPoint
11.00am – 11.30am (Morning Tea)
Day 1 – Session 2:
11.30am – 11.55am
Learning from Problems, Failures, and Unexpected Ideas: A Reflection on Real
Life Learning Experience Through Community-based Projects
Yandi Andri Yatmo, Paramita Atmodiwirjo, Verarisa Anastasia Ujung
Department of Architecture, Faculty of Engineering, Universitas Indonesia,, Indonesia
Abstract
At the heart of any lifelong learning is the learning itself. In the pursuit of the knowledge
learning, the potential of the community-based project suggests the interdependence
between educators, students and community. Students as the learner take responsibility of
their own project. Meanwhile, the whole community involves and contributes to the lifelong
and lifewide learning efforts. Partnership between students, educators, and community
improve the performance and build the enthusiasm to the development of the lifelong
learner‟s whole personality to be ready for any possible circumstances.
This paper presents several cases of community-based projects that students have practiced
at Department of Architecture, Universitas Indonesia in the Everyday and Architecture
class. The objective of this community-based project is to expose the students with real life
architecture intervention and experience of participatory design approach. The students
found various underlying lessons in this community-based project which promote the
collaboration between the students‟ ideas and the community aspiration. They found the
genuine layer of community culture, how to communicate and negotiate with the
community. They learned not to discredit failures, but to learn that failures are an inherent
part of the process. They discovered the layers of “unexpected ideas” within the learning
process and learned how these ideas can be applied as method and further references. They
learned to address the problems in different ways. They did appreciate the problems and
were taking steps and appropriate manners to respond and adapt to it. The whole learning
process promoted the role of the students not only as experts in their field but to be more
sensitive with various everyday issues in the community.
Attachment 2A Yatmo Atmodiwirjo and Ujung PowerPoint
Attachment 2B Yatmo Atmodiwirjo and Ujung Paper

Learning from Problems, Failures, and Unexpected Ideas:
A Reflection on Real Life Learning Experience
Through Community-based Projects
Yandi Andri Yatmo, Paramita Atmodiwirjo, Verarisa Anastasia Ujung
Department of Architecture, Faculty of Engineering, Universitas Indonesia
yandiay@gmail.com, paramita@eng.ui.ac.id, verarisa.ujung@yahoo.com
Abstract
At the heart of any lifelong learning is the learning itself. In the pursuit of the knowledge learning, the
potential of the community-based project suggests the interdependence between educators, students
and community. Students as the learner take responsibility of their own project. Meanwhile, the whole
community involves and contributes to the lifelong and lifewide learning efforts. Partnership between
students, educators, and community improve the performance and build the enthusiasm to the
development of the lifelong learner’s whole personality to be ready for any possible circumstances. This
paper presents several cases of community-based projects that students have practiced at Department
of Architecture, Universitas Indonesia in the Everyday and Architecture class. The objective of this
community-based project is to expose the students with real life architecture intervention and
experience of participatory design approach. The students found various underlying lessons in this
community-based project which promote the collaboration between the students’ ideas and the
community aspiration. They found the genuine layer of community culture, how to communicate and
negotiate with the community. They learned that failures are an inherent part of the process. They
discovered the layers of “unexpected ideas” within the learning process and learned how these ideas
can be applied further. They learned to address the problems in different ways and took appropriate
steps to respond and adapt to them. The whole learning process promoted the role of the students not
only to learn to become experts in their field but also to be more sensitive with various everyday issues
of the community.
Keywords: learning, reflection, situated, community, architecture
1. Architectural Education Learning Processes: Some ‘Critical Gaps’
Community-based projects offer a dynamic potential in architectural education learning processes. The
processes include multiple opportunities for lifelong learning: for the students, for the educators and for
the community where the project is implemented. It offers an opportunity for students to experience
how knowledge could be applied into everyday practices.
There are different approaches in architectural education in the pursuit of lifelong learning processes.
Community projects give architecture students opportunities for multiple forms of engagement;
“Architecture needs to be understood within a broader framework than the surface of image, both in
terms of engaging with context and in terms of image, both in terms of engaging with context and in
terms of engaging with all the senses, through time and experience of use” (Blundell-Jones, Petrescu &
Till, 2005, p.xiii-xiv). The students could discover existing facts through their involvement with the
community they work with. Experiencing various forms of engagement with the community allows the
students to discover various aspects of everyday life, and this becomes relevant to architectural
practices and learning processes.

The focus of this paper is to discuss the learning experience through community project from two
perspectives. First, we consider how architectural education learning process promotes partnership
among the students, the educators and the community. Second, we describe how the students learn
from the problems, the failures, and the unexpected ideas as a reflective way of learning. In particular
these two perspectives are discussed in relevance to the ‘critical gaps’ emerged in architectural
education as explained below.
The first ‘critical gap’ is the gap between learning and feeling. Knowledge as a body of facts, theories,
and techniques is usually presented to students in a “retrospective way” (Schon, 1988, p. 19) without
revealing the iteration and the research process behind it. Phenomena tend to be described through
“abstract and symbolic generalizations which could not convey the feel of the behavior of the
phenomena” (Salama, 2010, p. 280 cf. Schon, 1988). Such “feel” tends to be hidden by procedural
scientific methods. The students were neither encouraged to study the phenomenon nor to do
something to it. These situations may discourage active participation which involves learning and feeling
thoroughly. This may lead to the ‘critical gap’ between the students’ ability to learn about the
phenomenon versus their ability to feel about the phenomenon.
The second ‘critical gap’ is between the real and the hypothetical. In architectural design education,
educators often give students hypothetical design exercises which tend to neglect some contextual
variables (Salama, 2010). This represents a gap between the real and the hypothetical in architectural
design education. There are many contextual variables need to be investigated in the real cases. They
adhere to a system where the students engage with how the phenomena occurred within community
and environment. There are different variables that affect real-life situations. Accordingly, real-life
experiences can provide students with opportunities to understand the community aspirations within
practical realities.
The third ‘critical gap’ is between the normative architecture standard and the social role of the
profession. The normative architecture standard that is suggested for some cases in architectural
education may become inappropriate in certain real-life situations. The normative standard may be
imposed without the views of social role being articulated, and without the understanding of the value
in how the academic discourse in architectural education is examined and adapted within the
appropriate practical practices. “The danger with a normative technique is that it sees the user (once
again) as standard, there to be subjected to common methods. Instead, one has to accept that with
multiple users, multiple desires and multiple contexts, multiple forms of participation are necessary”
(Blundell-Jones, Petrescu & Till, 2005, p.xiv). This gap embraces again the real-life situation where the
unpredictable nature and conflictual possibilities may rise in the community-based project through the
understanding of the social role of the profession.
The final ‘critical gap’ is between the process and the product. Any forms of real engagement process
between students and community can generate different responses, methods, and strategies. These
include the experiences and occupations of space. Those experiences may be generated by sensory
interaction, verbal communication, and creative intervention in architectural process. But in some cases,
letting things develop and concentrating on the people and the processes rather than the products
remain unrevealed. This ‘critical gap’ suggested the need to understand the significance of process. In
this way, the achievement in any kinds of community-based practices should not be judged based on the
final product only, but based on the process of the practice.

To address these gaps in architectural education, it becomes important to develop a learning program
that contains both the substantive requirement of the architecture subject learning and the pedagogical
challenge to promote students’ engagement that is situated in the real-life practices. Situated learning
becomes a potential bridge in which the participation through the community-based project creates a
space for transformations. Based on the understanding that architecture as “a typical superstructural
activity ‘depends’ on transformations in the structures of society” (Carlo, 2005, p.12), situated learning
means exposing and acknowledging the participation as the crucial part of the transformation process.
2. Situated Learning as the Transitory Concept
Based on the perspective that there is no activity that is not situated, the situated-specific learning in
the context of everyday life in architectural education becomes necessary. The situated learning
promotes the “situated-specific learning so that the students could understand, and acquire the
competency, creativity and confidence to cope with the urgent tasks and changes arising throughout a
lifetime” (Longworth, 2005, p. 6). Situated learning as a theoretical perspective is an inseparable aspect
of social practice that entails learning as an integral constituent.
Situated learning as a transitory concept, a bridge, between the critical gaps, promotes the relationship
between knowledge and learning, between cognitive process and social practice. Situated learning
bridges the difference between a view that considers cognitive processes are primary and another view
which considers social practice is primary. In this community-based project, the ‘situatedness’ of the
activity between the students and the community appeared to be anything but a simple factual attribute
of everyday activity. This case implied an emphasis on comprehensive understanding which involves the
whole person: the students and the community as the learners in this community-based project.
The relationship among students, community, activity, and the built environment, represents the
“intrinsic condition for the existence of knowledge” (Lave & Wenger, 1991, p. 98) in the learning process
and the wider social role of education. The wider social role of education is expressed within the
understanding of problem and how to reconcile differences through the direct involvement in activities.
In the process, there is special attention to the two types of problems: substantive problem and the
pedagogical/ the didactic challenge. The substantive problem is when the project itself gets entangled in
a web of conflicting interests or situations. An atmosphere of openness and trust is therefore
indispensable through discussions leading to a thoroughly crafted memorandum of agreement, which
should be explicit and realistic about expectations (Abramson in Brand & Rincón, 2007, p. 53). The
pedagogical challenge is on how “to let the students face the ‘real’ world head on, to let them
experience the tensions, conflicts, and debates without violating their confidentiality” (Brand & Rincón,
2007, p. 53). In this way, situated learning establishes a partnership between the students and the
community into which community projects can embed both the substantive and didactic challenges.
As a consequence, situated learning is related to the learning curriculum as a field of learning resources
in everyday practice viewed from the perspective of the learners. “It does imply participation in an
activity system in which the participants share understandings concerning what they are doing and what
that means in their life and for their communities” (Lave & Wenger, 1991, p. 98). It concerns the process
by which the students become part of a community of practice.

3. Exploring the Situated Learning as Transformative Pedagogy
Over the last five years, we have developed learning program that include community based-projects in
the Everyday and Architecture class. The learning program consists of a series of community projects
that have involved both university participants (the students) and the community. The objectives of the
class are 1) to expose students to academic discourses and apprentice them into an academic
community practice and 2) to foster the capabilities of students to be critical thinkers, active learners,
and eventually responsive professionals. Everyday and Architecture class offers the chance for the
students to engage in a real project. It offers not only opportunities but also close attention to the
process within the situated learning experience. This paper focuses on the community projects in 2013
that entails critical question yet lessons within the cognitive and social practice awareness.
The tasks of the Everyday and Architecture class were not aimed at crystallizing a ‘true’ definition of
successful participation, but rather to appreciate and find inspiration in the breadth of approaches. The
students explored the issues and interviewed the community about the everyday life surrounding their
environment. This process enabled them to generate various development scenarios, which included:
unsuitable for development, barely suitable for development and highly recommended for
development. Such conceptual models were developed during lively class discussions. The students’
objective was to investigate design possibilities for any issues that emerged in a community. The task
was a way to situate learning and to integrate a range of knowledge and skill to make such intervention
through a group in a limited time frame.
There are three groups formed by the students. Each group consisted of 20 students. Each group was
involved in several stages within the given timeline of approximately two months. The stages are:
identification of the existing phenomenon of everyday life, interaction with the community,
development various development scenarios, investigation of design possibilities, action, and reflection.
Each group was responsible to choose the different contexts of community to work with.
The first group (Fig.1) chose a neighborhood community in RT 004/ RW 06 Srengseng Sawah, South
Jakarta. This group began their inquiry by making an acquaintance with the neighborhood context. The
students established connections through some dialogues with some different groups of people in that
neighborhood. They learned how to collect data through observation, survey, and interview with the
neighborhood community.
Figure 1. Group 1: “Developing Neighborhood Community Garden”

The second group (Fig. 2) chose the kindergarten community in An-Naba Kindergarten, Depok, West
Java, which had eleven children and two teachers. The students’ project was focused on the
kindergarten’ everyday activities. Through this community project, this group attempted to contribute
to the learning process of the kindergarten children.
Figure 2. Group 2: “Transforming the Kindergarten Classroom”
The third group (Fig.3) chose a youth community “Rumah Joglo Junior”, Lenteng Agung, South Jakarta.
“Rumah Joglo Junior” is a youth center which is intended to be the communal place where social
activities emerged. There are various activities that take place in this youth center, such as dancing,
singing, playing musical instrument, discussing, and crafting. Those activities are performed not only by
the children and teenagers but also by the group of housewives around the area.
Figure 3. Group 3: “Revitalizing the Community Youth Center”
After the students chose the contexts for their community projects, they discussed any potentials and
opportunities in the community and then chose one particular issue that they wished to respond to
through architectural intervention. The open dialogue between the students and the community
characterized the situated learning process that included the opportunities for problem solving. In this
project, each group of the students was encouraged not to see themselves as passive actors; they

actively interacted with the community, establishing any kinds of transformative ideas as they
developed their own perspectives during the process. In this way, students began to see how their
subjectivities may also contribute to either critical or in-depth responses that also paved the way for
learning how to engage in various forms of transformative pedagogy.
4. Reflecting on the Process
What did they say about the project? Understanding how the students deal with the real community
project became essential. By listening to their thoughts and experiences, we could consider the role of
situated learning. So, it is important to address the educational value of the students’ experiences:
which decisions could best promote learning, and what situations could generate the reflections.
Learning from the student’s own words embraces the critical discussion on what is the proper way to
integrate community-based project into architectural education. The important things are the discussion
of the processes and lessons learned, because learning through experience emphasizes doing, feeling
and observing within the positive values. The positive values include responsibility, commitment, and
prior generic skills of communication, critical thinking and creativity. These approaches are linked with
such positive behaviors as promoting openness to diversity, social tolerance, and personal and
interpersonal development. It becomes necessary to discover how students’ engagement with
community projects could promote those learning outcomes.
4.1. Recognizing the need; addressing the issue through strategies in action
This finding is revealed from the three groups of students in the community-based projects (Fig. 4). The
challenge of the project brief gave the freedom to the students to choose both the community and the
issue to respond. How they read, listen, and identify the situation triggered multiple and various
strategies in action. The first group learned about how to stimulate a series of participatory activities in
order to imply the design strategies in the neighborhood community. Within the particular issue in the
kindergarten community, the second group learned the way of “‘absorbing’ and ‘being absorbed in’”
(Lave & Wenger, 1991, p. 95). Meanwhile, the third group learned much about how to develop critical
thinking on conflicting issues within the society.
The first group addressed the initial planning versus the real conditions that promoted multiple targets,
multiple approaches, multiple purposes and expectations. They used their skills to interview a family or
the neighborhood community member when they came to the site for the first time. But then, through
the process they realized that their initial planning was inappropriate with the real conditions. This
situation led them to consider the multiple targets in the community.
The second group created a space for dialogue to attract the kindergarten children’ attention. “It
crucially involved participation as a way of learning – of both absorbing and being absorbed in – the
“culture of practice”” (Lave & Wenger, 1991, p. 95). The students assembled their general idea of what
constitutes the practice of the community. They sketched “who was involved; what they did; what
everyday life was like; how people who are not part of the community of practice interacted with it;
what other learners are doing; and what learners needed to learn to become full practitioners” (Lave &
Wenger, 1991, p. 95).
The third group faced the challenge of dealing with conflicting issues within the community. This is
related to the substantive problem when the project itself gets entangled in a web of conflicting
situations. So, their critical thinking was needed in order to respond to the challenge and to develop
cooperative skills. The conflicting issues were identified as the triggers to set the proper response and
attitude. In this project, this group was encouraged to negotiate with the real condition in the youth

community. They found a critical issue which included the lack of positive view among the people in the
community toward the utilization of the youth center. Some people in the community thought that the
youth center seems not so effective and optimal. Then the students decided to gather qualitative data
on how the community responded to the youth center.
We identified how the students in this group recognized the need according to the following words:
Kami memiliki program untuk intervensi yaitu agar Joglo dapat lebih diterima dan terasa dimiliki oleh
warga. Dan salah satu langkah awalnya adalah pendekatan ke warga tentang apa itu Joglo dan membuat
sesuatu untuk menarik perhatian dan menjadi sesuatu yang dapat memperkuat rasa kepemilikan terhadap
Joglo dan kegiatan yang berlangsung di dalamnya. (The program of our intervention was intended to make
the youth center, Joglo, could be more accepted by the community and to improve the sense of belonging
to the Joglo. One of the initial steps was an initiative to introduce the essence of the Joglo in an attractive
way in which the sense of belonging was further being developed)
Based on the data and the direct experience, they demonstrated the ability to approach the community
through the dialogue, the creative workshop, and the negotiation of the intervention planning. From
this finding, we suggest that sufficient opportunities for the students to understand the strength and
weaknesses within the society are really important in this process.
Figure 4. Recognizing the need; addressing the issue through strategies in action
4.2. Expanding the possibilities: Problem is not (always) the problem
The challenging problem of the community project is to address the structural character of the needs
and community aspirations. This one is related to the critical gap between hypothetical (ideal) and real.
Recognizing that the problem exists sometimes led the students to realize that problem is not (always)
the problem. So, understanding the nature of the problem and how it might be addressed is crucial.
Instead of making quick assumptions about what the community needs, this group tried to expand the
possibilities of their intervention. The know-how is there but then when they found that their

assumptions did not work in the real-life situation, they tried to look for alternative ideas. A student
form the second group wrote in his reflection that they learned not to rely on any assumption prior to
the exploration of the facts.
Thus there is a continuous process of learning and re-learning throughout every stages of the project.
Through the process, they recognized that the problems might sometimes contain its solution.
Particularly, the second group recognized that a problem existed in the kindergarten due to spatial
limitation. TK An-Naba has maintained the limited area for kindergarten activity for some time. The
kindergarten is located on the balcony of a mosque with a triplex partition as the boundary between the
kindergarten and the front area of the mosque (Fig.5).
Figure 5. Expanding the possibilities: Problem is not (always) the problem
Through the participatory process, the students tried to understand the nature of the problem and how
it might be addressed. They developed a plan to address the problem and to expand the possibilities of
intervention. The following texts describe the reflection from a student in this group:
Mereka memiliki cara-cara tertentu dalam menyesuaikan diri dengan tempat mereka belajar yang
sebelumnya saya kira hal ini adalah masalah. Justru, komunitas ini memiliki banyak ilmu. Alhasil, diam-diam
saya banyak menarik pelajaran baru sebenarnya dalam proses proyek komunitas ini . (They (the
kindergarten members) have particular ways to adjust themselves to the existing spatial condit ion that was
once predicted as a problem. This community indeed contains much knowledge. Unexpectedly, I learned
new insight from this community-based project.)
Understanding the nature of the problem was generated by such reflection upon questions: Could the
problem have been avoided or handled even better? Might the problem reoccur? In this way, we
identify that the students learned to practically use their skills of listening, explaining, questioning and
responding to either common or uncommon issues in the community. How the student reflected upon
this condition can be traced in the following writing:

Mereka dapat beradaptasi dengan tempat tersebut sesuai dengan kebutuhan mereka. Akhirnya, kami
mengangkat tema “Happy Sharing in a Small Space”. Alih-alih menganggap ruang yang terbatas sebagai
suatu masalah, lebih baik jika bergembira di ruang yang terbatas tersebut. (They can adjust themselves into
the spatial condition corresponding to their needs. Finally, we proposed a theme “Happy Sharing in a Small
Space”. Instead of considering the limited space as a problem, bringing such enthusiasm into the limited
space would be much better.)
The situated learning in community-based project incorporates active and collaborative learning
activities that are affected by the understanding of the problem in social activities that extend beyond
the classroom.
4.3. Failure as a part of learning
Throughout this community-based project, through such long and hard observation, negotiation, the
students sometimes face a failure. The students, particularly the first group, highlighted the experience
and awareness of failure as a part of the learning process (Fig.6). In their reflection, they realized that
their failure might lead simultaneously to a successful story of the community. How the students
recognized the failure as a part of learning can be traced in the following writing:
… kegagalan kami mencari perhatian ibu-ibu soal TOGA, memindahkan subjek kami menjadi warga anak -
anak. Yang selanjutnya menggiring kami kepada keberhasilan RT menciptakan area pendidikan usia dini
bagi anak-anak yang bermutu nasional. (…Our failure in seeking the women’s attentions about the TOGA
substituted our subject from the women to the kids. This shift led us further to realize another success of
this community in establishing the kids’ playgroup and education center with national standard.)
The innumerable failures were certainly identified as the characteristic of the learning process. How the
students have the feeling to sense the failure as a part of reality is important to be learned. Therefore
we must start by clarifying the basic differences between “planning ‘for’ users and planning ‘with’ them”
(Blundell-Jones et al, 2005, p. 13). Tends to fail – “This failure is usually attributed to the intervention of
forces opposed to the organic development of the collectivity and therefore hostile to the ‘wise plans’, a
credible but not an exhaustive explanation” (Blundell-Jones et al, 2005, p. 13). So, that is why the
students were more inclined to continue the learning process in this community-based project.
The first group identified the needs through the process that must be opened and reopened in a
continuous alteration of controls, reflections and reformulations as the practices not only follow
sequentially but also have a cyclical relationship. This relationship occurred within the context. So, any
tendency of failure must be related to the context as stated on the writing of the student:
Intervensi harus kontekstual; kegagalan mungkin sebuah pembelokan, adaptasi terhadap konteks.
(Intervention must be contextual; perhaps failure is a diversion, an adaptation upon the context.)
The members of the neighborhood community have different interests, make diverse contributions to
activity, and hold varied viewpoints. The more often the actors participate in this community-based
learning, the more liquid the design process would be encountered. According to the reflection of the
students, some factors that affected the failures are the inappropriate method and the rush of the
decision-making. Those factors indicated the perspective upon architectural process and context. How
to define failure was being addressed toward the differences between purpose and expectation. The
purpose and expectation in such participation are the good means of identifying any potentiality “in
which participation can be seen as a means of making architectural practice more relevant to, and more
engaged with, the everyday world” (Blundell-Jones et al, 2005, p. xiv).

Figure 6. Failure as a part of learning
As students analyzed the tendency of being failed in addressing the intervention idea, they further
developed their academic vocabulary and critical understanding of the situated learning process. This
process will nurture the professional attitudes among the students. The situated learning logic and
practice “would recommend simply facilitating live experience or face-to-face encounters between
students and community and trust in the process of mutual listening, knowing, wondering, asking and
interpreting” (Brand & Rincon, 2007, p. 55). Based on these students’ experiences, the study found that
community based learning can be well supported by a mutual learning and mutual listening throughout
the project.
5. Concluding Remarks
The community-based project is situated in the multiple ranges of relationships that address the critical
gaps in architectural education. The critical gaps are addressed through the community-based project by
involving the students to become part of the process with the community. The exploration of attitudes
and values represent interactive learning mechanisms with greater emphasis is placed on the
development of students’ critical thinking abilities. In architectural education, learning how the everyday
environment works is like learning the art of learning and planning with the community.
The situated learning process that enhances various challenges in the Everyday and Architecture class
makes learning becomes more attractive. Every single action or decision that has been made as the
response for any issue in the community is meaningful for the development of the situated learning
values. These values lie on the fact where the students as the reflective practitioner are closely related
to the community in such reflective process. In this regard, students saw themselves as learners gaining
new insights by reflecting upon what they were doing. Through this reflective process, or, more
specifically, through a situated learning process of planning with the community within unstructured
experience through various sets of issues, we arrived at a reflection of three main findings. Those
findings describe what the students learned. The students learned how to recognize the need and
address the issue through strategies in action, how to expand the possibilities where problem is not
(always) the problem, and how the failure is an integral part of learning.

The students found that the group-based problem-solving assignment was challenging to their critical
thinking on conflicting issued in the real case scenario. They enjoyed learners’ autonomy and could plan
to develop solutions amongst themselves through discussion and negotiation. Thus they were highly
motivated. This deep learning process enabled them to retain the knowledge and skills learnt. This
notion leads to the understanding of “lifelong, lifewide and also lifedeep learning” (Longworth, 2005, p.
45) as a term to describe the insights of architectural education, which increase the awareness and
understanding of particular issues in the wider world beyond our immediate environment.
References
Blundell-Jones, P., Petrescu, D. & Till, J. (Eds.) (2005). Architecture and Participation. Abingdon: Spon
Press.
Brand, R. & Rincón, H. (2007). Tackling Six Common Dilemmas in ‘Live’ Planning Projects. Journal for
Education in the Built Environment, 2(2), 36-60
Carlo, G. D. (2005). Architecture's Public. In P. Blundell-Jones, D. Petrescu & J. Till (Eds.), Architecture and
Participation (pp.3-22). Abingdon: Spon Press.
Ellis, W. N. (2000). Community Life-Long Learning Centers. In R. Miller (Ed.), Creating Learning
Communities (pp. 14-21). Washington: Foundation for Educational Renewal.
Lave, J. & Wenger, E. (2008). Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press
Longworth, N. (2005). Lifelong Learning in Action: Transforming Education in the 21st Century. London:
Taylor and Francis.
Salama, A. (2010). Delivering Theory Courses in Architecture: Inquiry-Based, Active, and Experiential
Learning Integrated. Archnet International Journal of Architectural Research, 4(2/3), 278-295.
Schon, D. A. (1988). Toward a Marriage of Artistry and Applied Sciences in the Architectural Design
Studio. Journal of Architectural Education, 41 (4), 16-24