In the realm of architectural education, a novel approach is emerging that could reshape how future architects engage with building performance simulation (BPS) and, by extension, how the energy sector interacts with the design community. Martha Bohm, a researcher from the Department of Architecture at the University at Buffalo and the Edinburgh School of Architecture and Landscape Architecture, has published a study in the journal ‘Buildings & Cities’ (which translates to ‘Buildings & Cities’ in English) that explores the role of BPS in fostering ‘spatial-data sensemaking’ among architecture students. This research could have significant implications for the energy sector, as it aims to cultivate a generation of architects who are not just consumers but active performers of BPS, ultimately driving more energy-efficient and climate-responsive designs.
Bohm’s study delves into the pedagogical use of BPS tools to help students make sense of complex quantitative information, such as carbon emissions, during the early stages of building design. The research posits that by integrating BPS into architectural training, students can develop a deeper understanding of building-energy relationships and refine their intuition about interrelationships and trade-offs. This approach is particularly relevant in the context of the climate emergency, where the need for net-zero buildings is more pressing than ever.
The study involved an undergraduate architecture class where students used BPS to design buildings. Rather than focusing on precision, the pedagogy emphasized actionable information, using visual audits to build trust in the results. Bohm explains, “We downplayed precision in favor of actionable information. The goal was to help students make sense of performance data during design, managing uncertainty so they could extract meaningful cues and make informed decisions.”
A qualitative analysis of student reflections revealed that the use of BPS tools led to a deeper understanding of building-energy dynamics. Students appreciated the visual information provided by BPS, which supported design decision-making and argumentation. One student noted, “The visual outputs helped me see the impact of my design choices in a way that numbers alone couldn’t convey.”
The findings support the ‘performer’ paradigm of BPS instruction, demonstrating that the technical work of BPS analysis leads to making sense of an emerging design. This approach aligns with theories viewing architecture as a reflective practice, where students learn to design through thoughtful engagement with the results of their design choices.
For the energy sector, this research highlights the potential for more collaborative and informed design processes. As architects become more adept at using BPS tools, they can make more energy-efficient design decisions, ultimately reducing the energy demand of buildings. This shift could have significant commercial impacts, as energy-efficient buildings not only reduce operational costs but also enhance marketability and compliance with increasingly stringent building codes.
Bohm’s research is novel in its focus on the student experience and perception of BPS instruction. By providing insight into how students construct understandings of BPS, the study offers valuable guidance for educators and curriculum developers. As the architectural community continues to grapple with the challenges of the climate emergency, this research could shape future developments in architectural pedagogy and practice, fostering a more climate-responsive and energy-efficient built environment.