One of the most significant challenges in education today is the ongoing disconnect between theoretical knowledge and practical application. Many students and educators alike feel this gap creates a sense of separation, making it harder to see how ideas can be applied in real-world situations. Finding effective ways to better harmonize theory and practice is necessary for creating a more meaningful and engaging learning experience. In architecture training, for instance, bridging this divide can significantly enhance students’ readiness for their future careers.

Having a better understanding of pedagogy is important for any educator, whether you're teaching complex concepts like philosophy or guiding students through hands-on skills in architecture. In this article, we’ll explore some of the most common methods for combining theory and practice, aiming to highlight approaches that make learning more connected, relevant, and inspiring.

Practice-based methods

image host Figure 1: Detail analyzes of the practice-base pedagogy methods (Source: Author).

Trial and error

This method is one of the foundations of new workshop courses in the world. In this way, all professors expect students to identify the optimal results by increasing their experience and reaching an intellectual deadlock. The trial-and-error method begins when the theoretical insight ends. Theory provides most of the limited guidance. The topic of production, supply, and demand in trade is one of the best practice examples of trial and error; therefore, the general functional steps of the trial and error method are explained:

  • Expectations versus actual results: Entrepreneurs can order products in line with expected results.

  • Partial inevitability: Entrepreneurs can learn in the production process because planning is partially done.

  • The Law of Unintended Consequences: The distinction between expected and realized outcomes indicates that efforts to achieve better outcomes may worsen the situation;

  • Location-adaptive product planning: Experiences in one area of ​​a product show only limited information about global planning (Callander, 2011: 2277, 2284).

Process-based learning

The PBL system is designed to engage students in the design process and design decisions, so the following goals are suggested for process-based design training in workshop style:

  1. Design applications must be unique and include unfamiliar designs;

  2. Limiting design constraints and encouraging the production of other alternatives;

  3. Students should participate in collaborative groups and be effective in collective decision-making;

  4. Students should develop control over their design programs and learning issues to generate classroom discussions.

  5. Using the learning outcomes of previous design programs to develop future courses (Nabih, 2010: 97-98).

Inquiry-based learning

Inquiry-based learning is a thoughtful and engaging approach in modern education that has gained a lot of support over the past few decades. As Salama (2010) explains, this method helps students deepen their understanding of the topics, makes lesson goals clearer, and sparks genuine curiosity and enthusiasm in the classroom. It’s a way to make learning more meaningful and inspiring for students. Pedaste et al. (2015) define five general research steps for this method: orientation, conceptualization, research, discussion, and conclusion.

With these steps, the student is encouraged to come up with hypotheses and questions about theoretical topics as well as through guided research and discussions, and group discussions with others, and to reflect on his/her thinking and teaching.

Evidence-based learning

EBL can also be called sample-based education. This method is one of the methods that professors have practiced in many disciplines to this day. Evidence-based practice decisions to develop and deploy evidence-based learning programs are valid, not ephemeral myths or folk wisdom. This method is supported by the transfer of learning through a variety of functional examples. These examples help learners to automatically acquire new skills by repeating mental practice (Clark, Nguyen, & Sweller, 2006: 16, 214).

This approach combines new tools and technologies with traditional ideas, creating a more engaging and adaptable learning experience. Its main goal is to gather meaningful examples and insights that help students understand relationships, see differences, and explore their own perceptions. By doing so, it encourages students to develop new skills and grow more confident and curious as they learn.

Cognitive skill learning

Kirschner (2002) states that by using this method, we emphasize one of the most basic factors of theoretical courses, namely memory. In this approach, it is attempted to address, in theory, working memory constraints by encoding multiple information elements of a coherent element in cognitive schemas, by automating rules, and by using more than one continuous method.

The first step in this teaching approach focuses on memory as a way to retrieve and hold information. Over time, this information moves into the student's working memory, making it available for use. In the later stages, the student will be asked to apply his or her acquired skills by processing and engaging with others in a variety of ways. This process helps them grow more confident and connected as they learn.

Problem-solving strategies

Problem-solving is are strategy for solving problems that arise from the design of a problem. The processes involved in understanding this structure include analyzing relationships between suspicious elements and identifying patterns within relationships. When constructing a problem profile, it may activate certain processes of examining that knowledge in the student's memory (Gick, 1986: 101, 102).

Some people think that problem-based learning only applies to students working in the field of teaching and independent study; this is mistaken thinking. Problem-based learning is a costly and extensive learning environment that is independent of studies with advice, various resources, suggestions, reports, and problems associated with providing and receiving feedback (Barrett, 2017: 2, 6).

Theory-based methods

image host Figure 2: Detail analyzes of the Theory-base pedagogy methods (Source: Author).

Interpretive Phenomenological Analysis (IPA)

IPA is one of the teaching methods introduced in education over the past few decades, and, based on its structural conditions, focuses on meaning and processes, not on events and causes. About interpretive phenomenology, at the individual level, is conceptualization. This means first focusing on an experience (for example, an event, process, or relationship) and then focusing on the results (Larkin, Thompson, 2012: 102-104).

This approach starts by genuinely listening to people's experiences, ideas, and the data they've shared. Through conversations and thoughtful questions, we gather valuable insights. In the end, this process helps us identify and create training areas that are meaningful and relevant to their needs, making the learning experience more personalized and effective.

Gestalt

Psychology suggests that the mind has comprehensive, self-organized tendencies. Individual elements may make sense, but an integrated whole has more meaning than the sum of its parts. In his studies, Jackson (2008) also expresses that Gestalt is a type of cognitive factor that is not generally observable. This may be contrary to the general perception and perception of the student's educational experience because changes in cognitive structures occur over time.

In Gestalt education, the goal is to gently help students organize and understand their own minds, encouraging them to become more aware of themselves and their experiences. To support this, a variety of caring and engaging tools are used, such as sketches, notes, group activities, and other interactive methods, that create a warm and supportive environment for personal growth and discovery.

Summary

By truly understanding these methods, we open ourselves up to exploring each subject more deeply and meaningfully, whether through theoretical learning or hands-on experience. Sometimes, we wish to blend these two approaches into one harmonious way of learning, and while this can be quite challenging, it’s also very rewarding.

In a study I conducted back in 2021, I introduced a practical approach called phono-pragmatism, which aims to create a flexible and usable framework for combining theory and practice. I look forward to sharing more about this method in a future article.

References

Barrett, T. (2017). New Model of Problem-based learning: Inspiring Concepts, Practice Strategies and Case Studies from Higher Education. Maynooth: AISHE.
Callander, S. (2011). Searching and Learning by Trial and Error. American Economic Review, 10(1), 2277–2308.
Clark, R. C., Nguyen, F., & Sweller, J. (2006). Efficiency in Learning Evidence-Based Guidelines to Manage Cognitive Load. San Francisco: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Gick, M. L. (1986). Problem-Solving Strategies. Educational Psychologist, 21(1-2), 99-120.
Jackson, I. (2008). Gestalt – A Learning Theory for Graphic Design Education. JADE, 27(1), 63-69.
Kirschner, P. A. (2002). Cognitive load theory: implications of cognitive load theory on the design of learning. Learning and Instruction, 12, 1-10.
Larkin, M., & Thompson, A. R. (2012). Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis in Mental Health and Psychotherapy Research. In A. Thompson & D. Harper (Eds.), Qualitative research methods in mental health and psychotherapy: a guide for students and practitioners (pp. 99-116). Oxford: John Wiley & Sons.
Nabih, H. E. (2010). Process-Based Learning: Towards Theoretical and Lecture-Based Coursework In Studio Style. International Journal of Architectural Research, 4(2-3), 91-106.
Pedaste, M., Mäeots, M., Siiman, L. A., & Jong, T. d. (2015). Phases of inquiry-based learning: Definitions and the inquiry cycle.
Salama, A. M. (2010). Delivering Theory Courses in Architecture: Inquiry Based, Active, and Experiential Learning Integrated. International Journal of Architectural Research, 4(2-3), 278-295.