Integrating Sustainable Manufacturing into Architectural Design Teaching through Architectural Design Competitions

Abstract

Sustainable manufacturing is essential for boosting resource allocation efficiency, as well as sustainable economic development, while the construction industry is one of the main sectors affecting it. However, the complexity of multidisciplinary integration of sustainable manufacturing makes it challenging to fully integrate into architectural design teaching. By incorporating architectural design competitions in architectural design teaching, we can encourage students to systematically reflect on the role of elements beyond traditional architectural design during the architectural design process to help them gain a more comprehensive understanding of sustainable manufacturing. The research results were obtained with a combination of both qualitative and quantitative analysis. We analyzed the survey data through grounded theory and presented the results graphically, which include a framework for promoting the learning of sustainable manufacturing through architectural design competitions in teaching architectural design. In order to gain an in-depth and comprehensive understanding of the teaching effect and to ensure the reliability and accuracy of the results, in addition to qualitative analysis, we also adopted statistical analysis to clarify whether the new teaching method is really effective. In evaluating whether there was a statistically significant difference in the understanding of sustainable manufacturing between students who participated in architectural design competitions and those who did not, according to the established teaching objectives, we found that a statistically significant difference did exist in the results, and further analyzed other contributing factors through regression analysis. Our research shows that introducing architectural design competitions into architectural design teaching is a feasible way to promote students’ understanding of sustainable manufacturing. In architectural design competitions, sustainable-manufacturing-related elements, such as resources and economy, were taken into consideration in line with various design elements, such as site, environment, ecology, and energy consumption, which were integrated into students’ design process of thinking, drawing, modeling, and presenting. In this way, students will have a clearer understanding of approaches to achieve sustainable manufacturing through architectural design. This research helps tap into the value and potential of architectural design competitions in delivering sustainable manufacturing during architecture education and can offer references for college teachers to conduct sustainability education.

1. Introduction

Sustainable manufacturing is characterized by the synergy between resources, ecology, economy, culture, and society [1,2,3,4,5]. It can promote optimization in industrial structures and balance economic growth with population expansion, environmental protection, and efficient resource extraction and allocation to place economic growth on a sustainable trajectory. It can also significantly and profoundly influence energy use, industrial development, the development and use of building materials, and the expansion of tourism and cultural activities [6,7,8]. The development of sustainable manufacturing prioritizes coordinated development to balance the three elements of population, resources, and environment with the three systems of ecology, economy, and society by attending to resource use and the carrying capacity of the environment to ensure that interactions between industrial development, resource utilization, and the natural environment are benign, sustainable, and optimal [9,10].

Sustainable manufacturing and sustainable development show common traits, and their mutual aim is to achieve shared goals by following the two fundamental principles of sustainability and equity through coordinated industrial development, protection of the natural environment, and guided social development. The development of sustainable manufacturing has unique characteristics as it is a product of the social division of labor and a set of corporate economic activities that have similar features. It must follow fundamental laws of industrial development and maintain appropriate allocations of resources across different industries and ensure good economic relationships between different enterprises in order to continually upgrade industrial structures. As both technology and society have developed, industries have increasingly valued sustainable manufacturing. The energy-intensive construction industry, which is often perceived to be an obstacle to the implementation of sustainable manufacturing [5,11,12,13], has extensive demands for natural resources and building materials [14,15,16,17,18], and it is responsible for prolific energy waste, environmental disruption, air pollution emissions, waste material production, and noise pollution.

Although the construction sector has a remarkable influence on sustainable manufacturing, the relationships between participants are complex. This complexity presents many obstacles to incorporating the concept of sustainable manufacturing into the teaching of architectural design [5,19]. Competitions, if included in curricula, can be effective vehicles for learning sustainable manufacturing [5,20]. Architectural design competitions have been held at many universities around the world. Well-known competitions include the Solar Decathlon, the UIA-HYP CUP International Student Competition in Architectural Design, the JDC-International Student Competition in Architectural Design, and the International Solar Building Design Competition. Although those broadly themed competitions, which are held in various formats, have gained the attention of architectural educators and researchers, the concept of an architectural competition as a learning technique is not incorporated into architectural design teaching [21,22,23].

In cases where teaching architectural design is divorced from teaching through architectural design competitions, the potential to promote sustainable manufacturing has been unfulfilled. The separation makes it difficult to introduce the concept of sustainable manufacturing as fundamental to the entire process of architectural design construction and introduces several problems for educators. For example, senior students majoring in architecture do not adequately understand the interactions and interdependence between architectural elements, such as form, environment, materials, technology, resources, culture, economy, and society. Thus, they cannot possess a thorough understanding of sustainable manufacturing based on holistic and systematic thinking. When applying their concepts and knowledge, they will, perhaps unconsciously, regard these elements as additional constraints on their designs rather than incorporating them into the architectural design process when exploring space, form, structure, and materials, as specified in the design standards, from the very beginning of a project, whether consciously or habitually. If students have an inadequate or incomplete understanding of sustainable manufacturing, their incorporation of it in architectural designs will be one-sided or inappropriate; the designs will not solve certain problems, and this ignorance will handicap their future careers as architects [5]. Architectural teaching can positively promote sustainable manufacturing, and in educating students, it is therefore necessary to develop the concept of sustainable manufacturing through architectural design competitions.

This thesis discusses the architectural design teaching method that Zhejiang University Of Science And Technology (ZUST) has conducted in conjunction with architectural design competitions over the years. The teaching method, which is committed to utilizing architectural design competitions as a style of architectural teaching that imparts the concept of sustainable manufacturing, seeks to further students’ understanding of sustainable manufacturing and strengthen the role of architectural design in making manufacturing more sustainable. Considering the great complexity and uncertainty of architectural design in architectural design competitions, and in order to avoid hindering students’ creativity when designing architectural space and architectural forms, we have not formulated a rigid architectural design teaching framework but a flexible one, centered around the different stages of architectural design competitions by delineating different factors in sustainable manufacturing. In doing so, a flexible method for teaching sustainable manufacturing has been created so that we can guide students to be aware and understand the meaning of sustainable manufacturing, thus helping them put the idea into practice in architectural design. This study is conducive for clarifying the role of architectural design competitions in promoting sustainable manufacturing, integrating sustainable manufacturing into architectural design teaching, and providing references for architectural educators and researchers for imparting the concept of sustainable manufacturing in architectural design.

2. Literature Review

Over the past 20 years, an increasing number of architectural design competitions have emerged. Well-known ones include the Solar Decathlon, UIA-HYP CUP International Student Competition In Architectural Design, JDC-International Student Competition In Architectural Design, and International Solar Building Design Competition. Their themes related to sustainable manufacturing are presented in Table 1. Accompanying the emerging architectural design competitions are a growing number of architectural educators and researchers who are beginning to pay heed to the role and value of architectural design competitions in architectural design teaching and sustainable manufacturing as a whole. Some studies have shown that competitions such as the Solar Decathlon can link sustainable manufacturing to many aspects of architectural design teaching [21,24], such as functional architectural design, site planning, energy use, construction, material applications, and new technology applications [25,26,27,28,29,30,31]. In addition, competition goals are also closely related to sustainable manufacturing, including the following: (i) encouraging professionals to minimize their buildings’ impact on the environment by applying superior materials and techniques; and (ii) popularizing renewable energy, energy efficiency, responsible energy use, and available technologies to the public [26]. Some studies show that architectural design competitions can become a platform for learning about green building, energy, analysis tools for energy consumption, and innovative applications for energy-saving technologies [21,32,33,34], involving energy efficiency, electric loads, solar energy supply, and electric energy balance [24], offering the required performance indicators, experimental data, and demonstration cases for solving problems in the architectural sciences [24,34,35,36,37].

Table 1. Competition Themes Related to Sustainable Manufacturing.

Competition	Location	Year	Theme	Introduction
Solar Decathlon	Washington, DC, USA	2011	Solar-powered house	To demonstrate creative clean energy solutions by constructing cost-effective and energy-efficient solar-powered buildings which are also equipped with energy-efficient appliances and renewable energy systems.
	Madrid, Spain, Europe	2012	Highlighting energy efficiency	To work in tandem with power distribution networks in a reasonable and visible way that prioritizes energy efficiency; to develop housing solutions that can accommodate more residents; to reap the benefits of sustainable mobility by using electric vehicles and a balanced electricity demand.
	Datong, China	2013	Solar-powered houses equipped with green technology	To build a 60-to-100-square-meter house that is completely solar-powered and that meets daily needs.
	Irvine, CA, USA	2013	Solar-powered houses	To design, build, and operate solar-powered houses that are cost effective, energy efficient, and appealing.
	Paris-Versailles, France, Europe	2014	To provide housing that answers today’s three challenges: energy, environment, and society	To provide housing that answers today’s three challenges: energy, environment, and society, solve major issues related to future houses and focus on the six following issues: 1. density; 2. mobility; 3. sobriety; 4. innovation; 5. affordability; 6. local context.
	Irvine, CA, USA	2015	Solar-powered houses	To design, build, and operate solar-powered houses that are cost effective, energy efficient, and appealing.
	Santiago de Cali, Colombia, Latin America, and Caribbean	2015	Social housing construction in a tropical climate	The project needs to adapt to tropical climate conditions and respond to social housing issues, show concern for regional relevance and social housing, which, due to the cultural and climatic context of the competition, seems particularly suitable for an analysis of the confrontation between active and passive, as far as conditioning is concerned.
	Denver, CO, USA	2017	Solar-powered houses	To challenge student teams to design and build full-size, energy-efficient, solar-powered houses that blend design and smart energy production with innovation, market potential, and energy and water efficiency.
	Dezhou, China	2018	Innovating green technology	Aiming for permanent usage, the competition requires teams to build a solar house with a finished area of 120–200 square meters with integration of new energy, green building, electric vehicles, energy storage, smart home, new materials, lifestyle, scientific research, education and talents, cleaning and heating, and residential environment.
	Dubai, United Arab Emirates, Middle East	2018	Middle East climate, innovation, sobriety, mobility	In the desert heat, these homes are cool oases of innovation. All proposals focus on solving the issues and needs for the sustainable living in the Middle East with high temperatures, high humidity, and dust. The designs should be based on the four principles of climate, innovation, sobriety, and mobility.
	Szentendre-Budapest, Hungary, Europe	2019	Renovating existing building stock	The competition highlights architectural solutions aimed at renovating the existing building stock. The challenges for competing teams are as follows: the use of local, recycled materials, the high-level integration of solar and solar systems, the use of high-performance composite materials, and the bioclimatic design and nature-based solutions to the problem of overheating in summer.
	Ben Guerir, Morocco, Africa	2019	Conceptualizing low-energy-consuming buildings	This competition is aligned with the following objective: to conceptualize low-energy-consuming buildings that reach the bid of net-zero energy buildings. In order to emphasize the significance of Solar Decathlon AFRICA, the contestants had to integrate regional sustainable raw materials while working on the components of the building.
	Santiago de Cali, Colombia, Latin America, and Caribbean	2019	Disaster resilience and recovery	Solar Decathlon Latin America and Caribbean focuses on important issues related to our built environment, but it also has a unique focus on accessible housing, affordability, and regional relevance. The project highlights challenges of disaster resilience and recovery.
	Wuppertal, Germany, Europe	2021	Sustainable architecture and living in urban areas Renovating and extending the existing building stock Urban energy transition	Specifically, buildings after the Second World War were often constructed with inexpensive building materials and inflexible floor planning. The transformation of these buildings integrates them into the urban energy transition. Closing the gaps between two buildings can repair the cityscape and inspire an entire neighbourhood. The addition of one or more extra storeys and decorations to an existing building can revive the urban space, increase urban density, and create a platform for intensive solar energy utilization.
	Zhangjiakou, China	2021	Sustainable development, smart interconnection, and living health	The competition falls on the 2022 Winter Olympics and focuses on the construction of the national renewable energy demonstration zone, the capital water conservation functional zone, and the ecological environment support zone. The three propositions of “sustainable development, smart interconnection, and living health” are the challenges of this competition.
	Dubai, United Arab Emirates, Middle East	2021	Sustainable energy use	Through the Innovation Centre, DEWA aims to raise awareness about sustainability while building national capabilities and increasing competitiveness. SDME 2021 decided to focus on seven interrelated pillars as follows: sustainability, future, innovation, clean energy, mobility, smart solutions, and happiness.
	Golden, CO, USA	2023	High-performance buildings	The Solar Decathlon showcases the future of the built environment: high-performance buildings. The competition can reduce carbon emissions, improve construction productivity, make buildings more affordable for families, and provide greater comfort and healthier indoor environments.
UIA-HYP CUP International Student Competition in Architectural Design	web	2017	Architecture in transformation	Cities must not keep evolving simply by expanding. They need exciting buildings that interact with surrounding areas to make the chosen existing space “mutate”.
	web	2018	Architecture in transformation-urban co-living: customizing modules for community	Co-living meets everyone’s insatiable needs to network, to learn continuously, and to potentially team up in various entrepreneurial ventures Parallel lives should be abandoned. Co-living can create community, which depends on curated compatibility of the residents together with real spatial sharing.
	web	2019	Happy spaces, i.e., integrating architecture and landscape	The competition requires teams to recognize the character of the site and create its ‘sense of place’ and to complete the transformation of negative spaces into positive ones by bringing out its inspiring and attractive qualities.
	web	2020	Architecture in transformation—City Puzzle and Puzzle City	As the impacts of excessive growth on people and the environment become inevitable, the analysis and understanding of the interaction between city, architecture, and inhabitants; and how we chose to shape our cities, buildings, and public spaces will indeed determine and relate to many other facts that help determine our approach to future cities.
	web	2021	Architecture in transforming countryside dilemmas	China’s rural development has been largely based on top-down industrial planning. Like in many places in the world, this brought modernity to the countryside and offered dramatic improvements in the quality of life for many. It however also meant that historical, natural, and cultural quality concentrated in age-old ways of living suffered. We need to reflect on how future rural planning will be implemented.
	web	2022	Architecture in transforming folding landscapes: prototypes for an urban–rural union	This competition calls for prototyping a new rural–urban union that challenges the standard binary relationship between the two. We are searching for prototypes that “fold” the rural and urban landscapes together, to propose an integrated rural–urban infrastructure (using urban-farming techniques within a chosen context) to create a productive, hybridized future.
International Solar Building Design Competition	Xi’an, China Quanzhou, China	2017	Sunshine and care for the elderly	In the context of aging, by optimizing architectural design methods and integrating appropriate renewable energy technologies, we intend to provide sustainable energy through solar power to provide a safe, healthy, comfortable, convenient, and green life for the elderly.
	Hebei, China Zhejiang, China	2019	Sunshine and cultural travel	In response to the rural revitalization strategy, we seek to discover methods to further activate various rural resources, enhance the added value of rural development through various carriers, such as research bases and post stations, to keep rural development on a green and sustainable track.
	Fujian, China Xinjiang, China	2020	Sunshine and childlike dreams	To implement national policy to promote the construction of kindergartens in urban residential areas, and strive to offset the shortcomings of rural preschool education, we intend to integrate ecological and green concepts into preschool education with kindergartens.
	Xizang, China Conceptual Design	2021	Sunshine and low-carbon community	Aligned with the strategic goals of China’s 2030 carbon peak and 2060 carbon neutrality, we strive to transform energy use, promote the development of a low-carbon society, and build a green and healthy living environment that is centered around low-carbon, green, and sustainable concepts.
	Sichuan, China	2022	Sunshine and stations in nature	The competition focuses on the construction of research stations in reserves and explores methods for the harmonious coexistence between people and nature, as well as new ways to maintain the stable ecosystem.
JDC- International Student Competition In Architectural Design	web	2019	Art spaces located on cities’ waterfront	In a city, an art space located on its waterfront reflects the city’s culture, history, and lifestyle, and conveys the urban features of different cities. The art space is a medium that depicts stories that showcase the city’s characteristics and serves as a place for citizens and tourists to explore the city.
	web	2020	Super residence	A “Super Residence” that is designed based on conceptuality could be a community which provides a protective barrier while keeping connection to the outer environment, or a community with freedom by relieving “suspend mode”. The Super Residence consists of a number of “Super Units” that can ensure people in “home quarantine” can live independently in the “Super Units” for a relatively long time.
	web	2021	Hypergraph community	The “Hypergraph Community” is designed based on the concept of the hypergraph and provides residents with a hypergraphic or hyperlink mode of communication. It realizes and visualizes the “Hypergraph” in mathematical concepts. The project should include a “Hyperedge Container”, which can be used as a place for people of a certain attribute to live, perform, and communicate.

Although architectural design competitions have garnered extensive attention from architectural educators and researchers, there are insufficient teaching-oriented studies that explore the role of architectural design competitions in promoting sustainable manufacturing. Many other studies have indicated that the concept of sustainable architecture should be integrated into architectural design teaching [32,38,39,40], but due to the limitations on class hours, teaching objectives, and the complexity of architectural design assignments, this integration in traditional architectural design courses lacks effective means and supporting scenarios. Some studies have explored the role of architectural design competitions in promoting sustainability education, but a lack of analysis exists on how to do so through architectural design competitions in architectural design teaching as a whole. The aforementioned circumstances are not conducive to the concept of sustainable manufacturing being fully integrated into architectural design teaching. In fact, with the help of the scenes and atmosphere created through simulated architectural design practices in the competitions, the connection between architectural design and sustainable manufacturing increases and becomes notable through the process of “industry-resources-material” transformation. Because manufacturing can be expanded to cultural and economic fields, the significance of sustainable manufacturing being integrated into architectural design teaching will continue to spread to society at large, which means the teaching effect will also become more prominent. It looks to be more comprehensive and far-reaching than sustainable architectural education that only focuses on saving materials and energy and reducing pollution. Overall, it is necessary to try to integrate the concept of sustainable manufacturing into architectural design teaching through architectural design competitions to bridge the gap between architectural design teaching and sustainable manufacturing.

3. Find a Flexible Method for Teaching Sustainable Manufacturing through Architectural Design Competitions

3.1. Teaching Cases

ZUST is renowned for cultivating application-oriented talent across mainland China. Its architecture major has adopted a five-year academic program that is widely emulated in Asian universities. Since 2018, ZUST has incorporated sustainable manufacturing into junior and senior architectural design courses through architectural design competitions. Four Zhejiang Rural Revitalization Competitions have been held to date, with the aim of innovatively boosting sustainable development in rural areas of China (see Table 2 for competition themes over the years) by involving industries related to rural culture, tourism, and social services. Since the first competition, over 100 ZUST students have participated and won accolades. The students guided by our team guided won nine gold, six silver, and five bronze awards since the competition started (Table 3 shows more award winners and their stories). Based on our teaching and experience over the past four years, we summarized a set of teaching methods that incorporate sustainable manufacturing into architectural design courses through architectural design competitions. Architectural design competitions prioritize innovative architectural designs that require inspiration and creativity, so the design process we developed is not followed rigidly, and randomness and uncertainty are always present. This teaching method therefore does not strictly adhere to a set framework to teach sustainable manufacturing. Instead, it is a flexible method for teaching sustainable manufacturing that can be adjusted within certain parameters.

Table 2. Previous Themes of Zhejiang College Students Rural Revitalization Creative Competition.

Title	Theme	Year	Introduction
“Nongxin Cup” the Zhejiang College Students Rural Revitalization Creative Competition	Creativity to improve the countryside	2018–2021	Aiming to solve practical problems, the competition is open to colleges, universities, and villages across the province, and has adopted the model of problems from villages, answers from colleges and universities, and promotion of projects. It is hoped that college students will incorporate the actual situation in the countryside, combine theoretical knowledge with social practices, help rural construction and development through innovative projects, and actively contribute their knowledge and skills to revitalizing the countryside.
“Beautiful Courtyard” Creative Competition		2019	From the perspective of deconstructing space, competitors create a unique and beautiful courtyard demonstration model and present a new look for the coastal countryside. It is hoped that college students will work together with villagers and rural craftsmen to design, optimize, and produce a beautiful rural scene, and embark on a path of rural revitalization and innovation. They will create a trendy rural community featuring “multi-party integration plus joint efforts” to rejuvenate the countryside through creativity, and improve rural social governance through community building to rebuild a beautiful hometown.
Lanxi Cultural Empowers Space Special Competition	Culture empowers spaces to nurture rural businesses	2020	To solve the issues of poorly utilized or vacant houses in rural areas, and to find a way to fully use them, the competition committee, in cooperation with the Lanxi Municipal People’s Government, selected 30 spaces in Huangdian Town, Yongchang Street and Nvbu Street, as the venues for the special competition. From business planning suitable for the countryside to scene creation, space layout, etc., it provides creative solutions and designs to promote the renewal, activation, and operation of old spaces in Lanxi City by exploring the Lanxi model of rural space activation.
Pujiang The First China Rural Live-streaming Competition	Introducing the countryside and helping farmers sell Goods via live-streaming	2020	The pandemic in 2020 has given birth to a surging live-streaming economy, which has set off a new wave of publicity, social networking and marketing. General Secretary Xi Jinping said during his inspection in Jinmi Village, Shaanxi: “As an emerging business format, e-commerce cannot only raise the impoverished out of poverty by promoting their agricultural and sideline products, but also promote rural revitalization. It has great potential.” Live-streaming helps create a new mode for rural revitalization by spreading the charm and history of countryside life and promoting agricultural products.
The First Liangzhu Cultural Creativity Special Competition for College Students in the Yangtze River Delta	Passing down Liangzhu culture and enjoying the beauty of Pingyao	2020	This event aims to build a bridge of cooperation between Yuhang District and universities, leveraging the innovative vitality of college students to further display and publicize Liangzhu culture. It also strives to facilitate the integrated development of agriculture and cultural tourism in Pingyao to promote traditional culture and Zhejiang’s model of urban–rural integrated development.
Linhai “Golden Business Card” Cultural and Creative Special Competition	Unleashing new vitality to Polish golden business cards	2020	In recent years, the high-quality and characteristic agricultural product industry in Linhai City has developed rapidly, earning it the reputation of the hometown of the Chinese seedless tangerine, Chinese tea, Chinese bayberry, and Chinese broccoli. These four “golden business cards” have already gained considerable popularity inside the province and beyond, but lack sufficient influence. The competition aims to build a bridge of cooperation between Linhai and colleges and universities across the entire province to further stimulate the creative vitality of college students, promoting the four high-quality characteristic agricultural products of Linhai City, including tea, bayberry, tangerine, and broccoli, in terms of brand planning, visual design, publicity and promotion, marketing, etc. In so doing, it will make the four “golden business cards” of Linhai shine even more.
“Yellow River Intangible Cultural Heritage Lights Up the Hometown Henan” the First National College Students Rural Revitalization Creative Competition	Intangible cultural heritage lights up the countryside	2021	The competition aims to leverage the creativity of college students to create a number of intangible cultural heritage exhibition spaces, innovative products, communication activities, and tourism destinations in the Yellow River Basin, transforming the advantages of intangible cultural heritage resources in Henan Province into the advantages of promoting the integrated development of culture and tourism, and enhancing the innovation, dissemination, and influence of intangible cultural heritage, as a gift for the centenary of the founding of the Communist Party of China.
The First National College Students Rural Revitalization Creative Competition-Research Travel Competition	Research travel enlivens the countryside	2021	This competition designates Huanghu Town, Yuhang District, Hangzhou City as the field for research through travel to fully tap rural cultural tourism resources, and foster and expand the rural research travel industry. It will boost rural revitalization, and the implementation of excellent research and hands-on activities for rural primary and middle school students in the region, providing high-quality research travel courses, research travel routes, and research travel spaces for Huanghu Town.
Linhai Digital Agriculture Special Competition	Digital empowerment	2021	With a theme of digital agriculture in Linhai City, this competition explores the scene creation of digital rural agricultural construction to promote the digital development of Linhai agriculture, as well as the building of Linhai digital agriculture, rural area, and farmer collaborative application platform, establishing a Zhejiang model for digital agriculture construction.
Songyang Rural Cultural and Creative Special Competition	Cultural and creative empowerment	2021	The competition, with the theme of rural culture and creativity in Songyang County, focuses on cultural and creative empowerment. Relying on Songyang cultural resources, it leverages cultural connotations, and explores a new model to integrate rural cultural resources and innovative urban development in a bid to further Songyang’s cultural and creative industry and improve the quality of life in the countryside. It seeks to achieve the goal of making villages better through multidimensional innovation and through better integration of agriculture and cultural tourism with industrial development.
Cangnan Future Village Special Competition	Future village building	2021	Focusing on Cangnan’s future rural building, this competition explores the creation of future rural building scenarios to create more rural business activities, boosting the development of rural agriculture, as well as culture and tourism, and establishing a Zhejiang model for future rural building.
Taishun Future Village Special Competition	Future village building	2021	Focusing on Taishun’s future rural building, this competition explores the creation of future rural building scenarios to create more rural business activities, boosting the development of rural agriculture as well as culture and tourism, and establishing a Zhejiang model for future rural building.
Lingnan Cultural Empowerment Space Special Competition	Cultural empowerment space	2021	This competition, which designates Lingnan Township, Shangyu District, Shaoxing City as the practice area for rural building, focuses on issues, such as bed and breakfasts, and garden beautification. It explores new ways to improve the environment and management of B&Bs, and beautify the living environment in rural areas, further integrating the development of agriculture with that of culture and tourism, creating rural B&B business formats, improving rural landscape, and laying a good foundation for better social climate and rural governance.
Deqing Digital Village Special Competition	Digital village	2021	With the theme of a digital village in Yuyue Town, Deqing County, this competition explores the creation of digital village construction scenarios to create more rural business activities, boosting the digitalized development of rural areas and establishing a Zhejiang model for digital village building.

Table 3. Representative Award-winning Cases in the Zhejiang Rural Revitalization Competition Guided by Our Team.

Name of Works	Award Level	Introduction to Design Concepts	The Link between Design Concepts and Sustainable Manufacturing	Architectural Design Schemes
Byte Dancing under the Bamboo Hat	Gold Award	Drawing inspiration from bamboo hats, the team combines ancient architecture and new media trends to create a landmark building that facilitates the development of the local loquat industry.	It involves historical and cultural inheritance, as well as loquat sales via live-streaming to drive sustainable manufacturing.
Empowering Shuiting She Ethnic Township —Design Scheme of She Ethnic Tourist Reception Center in Xifangwu Village	Gold Award	A multifunctional special tourist reception center is designed around the Chinese character “she” and combined with local culture and regional architecture.	It reflects sustainable manufacturing from the aspects of inheriting traditional culture from the She ethnic minority and promoting the local tourism development.
Creator Space in Pastoral Nanshan Village	Gold Award	It reshapes people’s sense of belonging and identity by digging deep into local cultures. It creates an organic living and office environment where entrepreneurs are welcomed, and novel rural development models are adopted.	It focuses on sustainable manufacturing and reshapes the cultural and creative industries in rural areas.
Bringing Century-old History Back to Life—Design for Reconstruction and Expansion of the Qianhuang Village Revolutionary History Museum in Jinhua City	Gold Award	It combines local traditional architectural elements with modern styles to create a museum for mass audiences.	It reflects sustainable manufacturing from the aspects of promoting the protection of ancient buildings and historical inheritance.
Rural Acupuncture—Designing the of B&B Complex in Shizhu Village, Shengsi County	Gold Award	Retaining the original building, it adopts the revolutionary concept of allowing villagers to participate in the facade design, creating a modular B&B design through the strategy of urban acupuncture.	It reflects sustainable manufacturing from the aspects of involving modular facade design, and boosting the renewal of the B&B industry.

We combined our analysis of the theme and requirements of the Zhejiang Rural Revitalization Competition and our understanding of sustainable manufacturing in formulating key nodes common to the architectural design stages for competitions and for teaching sustainable manufacturing. The architectural design stages and key nodes are identified in the flexible method. We divided the flexible method into four stages: research, categorizing research material, developing architectural designs, and building architectural models. We separated the key nodes into three categories: locality, materiality, and physicality. The relationship between the stages and key nodes is one–many rather than one–one, which means that a stage can involve two or three key nodes. Likewise, the stage in which a key node sits is not fixed and can be adjusted according to the needs of the designer. Although the architectural design stages we adopted seem traditional in terms of formal architecture teaching, they have characteristics that are clearly related to architectural practices. The entire method used to compete in the competition is determined by the key nodes and is variable and diverse. It should also be noted that the key nodes are critical within the flexible method because they are points at which sustainable manufacturing incorporated in the method intersects with architectural design. The nodes can also be considered as translating the architectural language of the architectural designs that are responses to the Zhejiang Rural Revitalization Competition to boost sustainable manufacturing. We now describe in more detail the flexible method for teaching sustainable manufacturing around key nodes.

3.2. The First Key Node: Locality

Locality focuses on the connections between architectural design and the site environment and landform. We required students to fully understand the natural environment, topography, and local customs around the site and to act in accordance with sustainable principles to keep the original site intact and to produce designs that fully utilize elements of the site, such as any original height differences, rivers, and vegetation.

Locality usually involves three design stages: research, categorizing research materials, and developing architectural designs. We used two research techniques in the first stage: an on-site survey and visits with local villagers living near the site. The survey gave us a clearer picture of the characteristics inherent to the natural topography of the site and village size, thus providing a foundation for incorporating locality into architectural designs. The visits with villagers allowed us to identify and understand the composition, lifestyles, and actual needs of the population, together with the industrial structure and special resources of the site, along with its human-related characteristics. The research provided reference material for incorporating locality into architectural designs in the contexts of sustainable manufacturing development and regional culture. We then analyzed all research data and summarized the characteristics of different types of data to provide guidance incorporating locality into the architectural design. In developing the architectural design, we elucidated specific strategies for the design to ensure locality through analysis of the spatial scale, form, and function of the construction.

3.3. The Second Key Node: Materiality

Materiality refers to the selection of locally sourced materials available for the architectural design process. In previous competitions, we used locally sourced materials for architectural designs as much as possible, including stone, wood, bamboo, and broken tiles. This approach ensures that local materials are used wherever possible in architectural designs and helps students to familiarize themselves with the local industrial chain.

Materiality usually involves three design stages: research, categorizing research materials, and developing architectural designs, and sometimes involves building architectural models. In research, our goal was to explore and understand materials that have potential use in architectural designs and to catalog them by conducting on-site surveys and visiting villagers. The catalog includes both renewable materials and recyclable materials that have been neglected but which highlight local cultural values. In categorizing the research, we analyzed the research data and compared textures, examined environmental protection, and assessed the difficulty of using different materials to narrow the range of available materials. We selected some as key objects until the initial selection of material for use was completed. In addition, we summarized the state of the local industrial chain with respect to processing selected materials as we attempted to use locally processed materials. We considered the possibility of using the selected materials as objects of utility and cultural and creative products and how much cultural value and economic effects are accrued from their use. This is a sophisticated way of thinking about sustainable manufacturing and energizes the local industrial chain. We required students, in developing architectural designs, to relate closely to materials through the stages of conception, preliminary scheme design, and design model making (two-dimensional and three-dimensional models) and to be capable of having better command of materials in architectural design and subsequent construction.

3.4. The Third Key Node: Physicality

Physicality refers to emphasizing the connection between the architectural design and actual construction. Although a competition does not require the architectural design to be actualized, we still emphasize the materialization of an architectural design. We believe that emphasis on constructability in architectural design promotes sustainable manufacturing and prevents the conceptualization and design exercise from becoming an empty gesture.

We usually approach physicality from two directions: developing architectural designs and creating architectural models. In developing designs, we guide students to an architectural design studio to learn from experienced architects, which is a far cry from having them attend a traditional architectural design class. Architects will offer suggestions from a professional point of view and cover construction, sustainable manufacturing, ecology and environmental protection, and energy conservation in architectural designs. This experience allows students to learn about the real-life challenges they will encounter when implementing architectural designs and enables them to reflect on their shortcomings, as well as ways to improve them. In creating models, apart from computer models, students constructed a 1:100 physical model (Figure 1) made from the components specified in the design (Figure 2). The physical model can make up for the lack of realism inherent in the virtual model, which helps students to improve architectural designs and helps them to marry the architectural design with what will be constructed.

Figure 1. 1:100 physical model. Notes: (a) the physical model of award-winning case called Stream Bank Leisure Spot in Gushi Town; (b) the physical model of award-winning case called Silkworm Culture Center; (c) the physical model of award-winning case called Empowering Shuiting She Ethnic Township; (d) and the physical model of award-winning case called Byte Dancing under the Bamboo Hat.

Figure 2. The physical model of the components specified in the award-winning case called City on the Stems of Plants.

4. Research Methods

Because this teaching research lacks directly applicable theories, we adopted grounded theory as the research method to analyze the interview data for the following reasons. First, given the aforementioned context, grounded theory can compensate for the lack of depth and validity of traditional qualitative research and quantitative research to a certain extent by exploring theories from raw data. Second, it is highly applicable in causal identification, process interpretation, and new factor exploration, all of which are conducive with the characteristics of this teaching research. Third, studies have shown that for teaching, qualitative analysis proves to be more effective than quantitative analysis in analyzing problems [41].

To gain a full picture of the teaching effect and to ensure the reliability and accuracy of the research results, we applied statistical analysis in addition to grounded theory, which means the research combines both qualitative and quantitative analyses. This method has been utilized in research on the challenges facing architectural education [9,42], and the two types of analyses are complementary. Qualitative analysis based on grounded theory shifts toward the macro level and is designed to reveal the characteristics and internal connections of architectural design teaching and architectural design competitions when promoting the learning of sustainable manufacturing to formulate a new teaching theory of architectural design integrated with sustainable manufacturing. Quantitative analysis based on statistical analysis focuses on the micro level, which aims to clarify whether architectural design teaching of sustainable manufacturing through architectural design competitions is truly effective or not.

4.1. Qualitative Analysis Method Based on Grounded Theory

To understand how much students have learned about sustainable manufacturing, we conducted interviews with twenty-eight participants in architectural design competitions, including three sophomores, ten juniors, six seniors, five fifth graders, and four graduates, among whom eight students participated in two competitions in different years. The number of interviews met the requirement that the sample size of qualitative research is generally controlled between 20 and 30 [43].

We asked ten questions about architectural design competitions and sustainable manufacturing (Table 4). To facilitate the interview and obtain more true and objective data, we informed the students of the purpose and precautions of the interview prior to the interview and emphasized the requirement for them to express their true feelings. The interview lasted about two to three hours for each student. We recorded the interviews, which were checked and reviewed in a timely manner. If anything was unclear, we asked the interviewee for confirmation via phone or message. We followed the steps of grounded theory. First, we performed primary coding on the interview data, namely open coding. To ensure the analysis was accurate, open coding was conducted in a sentence-by-sentence coding manner (Table 5). On the basis of reading and arranging the interview data, we streamlined and refined words or sentences according to three coding levels, namely labeling (the coding prefix is marked with the letter “a”); initial conceptualization (the coding prefix is marked with the letter “A”); and core conceptualization (the coding prefix is marked with the letter “AA”), and obtained 36 core concepts (Table 5). We then proceeded to the second step: axial coding. According to the “condition-strategy-result-paradigm” model, we classified, compared, and organized the 36 core concepts obtained through open coding based on four aspects, to find out the logical and category relationship between the core concepts, which resulted in bringing that number down to six main categories (Table 6). The third step was selective coding. From the detailed analysis of the six categories obtained in the axial coding, we settled on two core categories and sorted out their connections with the core concepts and main categories through the paradigm model and presented the entire study around the “storyline” of two core categories (Table 6).

Table 4. Interview outline.

NO.	Question Item
1	What do you think is the difference between the competition and typical architectural design?
2	Throughout the competition, what new understandings did you come to regarding the constructability of architectural schemes?
3	Throughout the competition, in what areas do you think you have gained?
4	What do you think is the largest hurdle you encountered during the competition? How did you overcome it?
5	Throughout the competition, in what areas did you realize you need improvement?
6	Was the participation of senior students helpful in the competition? In what ways?
7	What did you learn about sustainability from the competition? How will it be reflected in your architectural designs?
8	What new understandings do you have on the sustainability of rural industries through the competition?
9	In what ways do you think rural industries can be integrated into architectural design?
10	Throughout the competition, what social responsibilities do architects need to have?

Table 5. The process of open coding.

Original Sentences	Open Coding (Initial Conceptualization)	Open Coding (Core Conceptualization)	Perspective
a1: Architectural design competitions are more forward looking and experimental. a2: The architectural design competition focuses more on factors that involve the research and investigation of the site, humanities, environment, and social issues. a3: Sustainable manufacturing is reflected in the aspects of conserving resources, reducing energy consumption, protecting ecology, and going green. a4: Villages need to develop characteristic industries according to their own natural conditions to achieve sustainability. a5: Industrial development needs to consider the labor force participation to provide more jobs for people in rural areas. a6: Integrate the characteristic elements in the industry into architectural design concept. a7: Sustainable manufacturing can be evidenced in architectural designs by using local unique materials and retaining local cultural characteristics. a8: Sustainable manufacturing requires a unique concept, based on which a series of industrial chains are created. a9: Strengthen the development of cultural industries to make rural industries more attractive. a10: Innovative local architectural designs can attract tourists and promote local economic growth. a11: Architects need to design resident-friendly buildings with humanistic care that meet the real needs of the local area. a12: The architectural design competition is an upgraded version of the architecture course, which elevates every aspect of architectural design to a higher level. a13: Compared with traditional architectural design courses, research into architectural design competitions is more reality based. a14: The architectural design competition requires investigation into all aspects surrounding the site, including culture, region, social environment, and natural features. a15: The architectural design competition is similar to the practice of architectural design. It will not only test the students’ design ability, but also their ability to adapt and make decisions. ……	A1 Industrial Development A2 Integration of Sustainable Manufacturing into Architectural Design A3 Adaptation to Local Conditions A4 Use of Local Materials A5 Low-carbon Concepts A6 Green Economy A7 Upgraded Industrial Chain A8 Architectural Design Concepts A9 Cultural Features A10 Rural Tourism A11 Natural Conditions A12 Actual Needs A13 Industrial Clustering A14 Architects’ Social Responsibility A15 The Social Significance of Architectural Design A16 Industrial Competitiveness A17 Viral Architecture A18 Economic Growth A19 Leisure Industry A20 Improved Public Facilities A21 Architects’ Sense of Responsibility A22 Public Buildings A23 Rural Life A24 Villager Engagement A25 Government Engagement A26 Lower Resource Waste A27 Original Architectural Design Practice A28 Real Problem Solving A29 Experience from Real Architectural Design Scenarios A30 Sympathy and Empathy A31 Deeper Thinking A32 Active Learning A33 Active Reflection A34 Goal Guidance A35 Industrial Organization A36 Self-organization A37 Other Organizations A38 Industrial Base ……	AA1 Industrial Pattern	Industrial
		AA9 Tertiary Industry
		AA10 Cultural Tourism Industry
		AA17 Industry and Ecology Coordination
		AA18 Industry and Economy Coordination
		AA7 Industry and Resource Coordination
		AA3 Eco-space	Ecological
		AA4 Energy-efficient Architecture
		AA5 Low-carbon Architectural Designs
		AA12 Ecological Transformation
		AA13 Ecological Capacity
		AA14 Reasonable and Efficient Use of Resources
		AA16 Ecological Culture	Cultural
		AA2 Traditional Materials
		AA8 Cultural Inheritance
		AA25 Cultural Prosperity
		AA26 Cultural Significance of Architecture
		AA28 Cultural Innovation
		AA6 Ecological Value	Economic
		AA22 Satisfactory Services
		AA23 Enabling an Employment Environment
		AA24 Visitor-Magnetizing Architecture
		AA29 Consumer Groups
		AA30 Resource Management
		AA15 Ecological Resources	Resource
		AA27 Cultural Resources
		AA11 Resource Endowment
		AA31 Allocation of Public Facilities
		AA32 Resource Reallocation and Sharing
		AA33 Multi-party Participation	Learner
		AA34 Architectural Design Practice Cognition
		AA20 Architect Identity Recognition
		AA35 Constructivism Learning
		AA36 Diagnostic and Reflective Learning
		AA19 Understanding of Architects’ Social Responsibility
		AA21 Understanding of Value and Significance of Architectural Design

Table 6. The result of selective coding.

Core Conceptualization
Core Categories	Main Categories	Conditions	Strategies	Results
Architectural Design–Sustainable Manufacturing Interactive Elements	Basic Elements of Sustainable Manufacturing Development	AA1 Industrial Pattern	AA17 Industry and Ecology Coordination	AA16 Ecological Culture
		AA9 Tertiary Industry	AA18 Industry and Economy Coordination	AA6 Ecological Value
		AA10 Cultural Tourism Industry	AA7 Industry and Resource Coordination	AA14 Reasonable and Efficient Use of Resources
	Supporting Elements for Architectural Design Learning	AA34 Architectural Design Practice Cognition	AA20 Architect Identity Recognition	AA19 Understanding of Architects’ Social Responsibility
		AA36 Diagnostic and Reflective Learning	AA35 Constructivism Learning	AA21 Understanding of Value and Significance of Architectural Design
Elements of Sustainable and Coordinated Manufacturing	“Industry-Ecology” Coordinated Elements	AA3 Eco-space	AA5 Low-carbon Architectural Designs	AA4 Energy-efficient Architecture
		AA15 Ecological Resources	AA12 Ecological Transformation	AA13 Ecological Capacity
	“Industry-Culture” Coordinated Elements	AA2 Traditional Materials	AA26 Cultural Significance of Architecture	AA28 Cultural Innovation
		AA27 Cultural Resources	AA8 Cultural Inheritance	AA25 Cultural Prosperity
	“Industry-Resources” Coordinated Elements	AA11 Resource Endowment	AA31 Allocation of Public Facilities	AA32 Resource Reallocation and Sharing
	“Industry-Economy” Coordinated Elements	AA29 Consumer Groups	AA24 Visitor-Magnetizing Architecture	AA22 Satisfactory Services
		AA33 Multi-party Participation	AA30 Resource Management	AA23 Enabling an Employment Environment

To ensure the quality of the research, we performed a theoretical saturation test on the codes. We coded the interview data of the reserved nine students (about one-third of the total) and discovered that no new categories were generated. We therefore deemed the theory constructed in the research saturated. In addition, we invited scholars and experts in the field to review the preliminary findings of the research and make recommendations on the findings.

4.2. Quantitative Analysis Method Based on Statistical Analysis

The statistical analysis of this study is targeted at the teaching effect of sustainable manufacturing with the flexible method. Considering the fact that Bloom’s taxonomy can reveal students’ cognitive level, we also adopted the method to formulate teaching objectives. As a tool for evaluating teaching objectives, Bloom’s taxonomy can reflect the relationship between acquiring knowledge and ability development in terms of the knowledge dimension and the cognitive dimension, which includes six aspects: memory, comprehension, application, analysis, evaluation, and creation, and each of them contains different sub-categories [44]. We primarily analyzed teaching according to the taxonomy of the cognitive dimension and its sub-categories, as shown in Table 7.

Table 7. Teaching Objectives Formulated in Combination with Bloom’s Taxonomy.

Cognitive Dimension	Sub-Categories	Description	Examples
1. Memory	1.1 Recognition	Evoke past experience and memories when encountering sustainable manufacturing content	Understand the resources and ecology concerning sustainable manufacturing
	1.2 Recall	Recall precisely what they have learned in the field when encountering sustainable manufacturing content	Itemize content about resources and ecology concerning sustainable manufacturing
2. Comprehension	2.1 Interpretation	Clarify the meaning of sustainable manufacturing from different perspectives	Clarify the meaning of sustainable manufacturing from the perspective of architectural design
	2.2 Illustration	Find and explain examples of concepts or principles of sustainable manufacturing	Describe the aspects of sustainable manufacturing that may be involved in architectural design
	2.3 Categorization	Determine which category certain sustainable manufacturing content belongs to	Recognize that the use of traditional materials represents a form of resource sustainability
	2.4 Conclusion	Summarize the meaning and key points of sustainable manufacturing	Summarize the strategies and methods of applying sustainable manufacturing in architectural design
	2.5 Deduction	Make inferences and judgements based on the laws or rationale of sustainable manufacturing	Forecast the benefits of sustainable manufacturing for architectural design
	2.6 Comparison	Discover the similarities and differences of individual aspects of sustainable manufacturing	Explain the differences and similarities between resources and ecologies involved in sustainable manufacturing
	2.7 Explanation	Draw a relationship diagram of the aspects involved in sustainable manufacturing	List the prerequisites and conditions for promoting sustainable manufacturing in terms of resources
3. Application	3.1 Execution	Complete a certain architectural design task with the concepts and knowledge of sustainable manufacturing	Create architectural designs based on traditional local materials
	3.2 Implementation	Select and apply sustainable manufacturing knowledge to finish unfamiliar design tasks	Use local traditional materials for detailed design, such as building structures
4. Analysis	4.1 Difference	Based on restrictions, distinguish between relevant and irrelevant or important and unimportant parts related to sustainable manufacturing	Based on the existing site conditions of architectural design competitions, distinguish elements in the architectural design that are relevant and irrelevant to sustainable manufacturing
	4.2 Arrangement	Clarify the hierarchical structure and interactions of each part of sustainable manufacturing	Present the hierarchical structure of various parts of sustainable manufacturing through diagrams
	4.3 Combination	Discover the hidden elements related to sustainable manufacturing in architectural design	Explore ways architectural design can promote sustainable manufacturing by combining traditional materials and roof shapes.
5. Review	5.1 Examination	Verify the rationality of operations or strategies for applying sustainable manufacturing knowledge in architectural design	List the inconsistencies in architectural design competitions in which sustainable manufacturing knowledge is applied in designs
	5.2 Judgement	When practicing sustainable manufacturing in the architectural design program, discover the errors or contradictions in the process, and provide a new and suitable implementation process	Suggest better ways to apply sustainable manufacturing knowledge in architectural design competitions
6. Creation	6.1 Summary	Provide a variety of alternative ideas or assumptions to promote sustainable manufacturing based on its needs	Based on summarizing existing strategies for applying the concepts of sustainable manufacturing in architectural design competitions, further propose optimization strategies
	6.2 Plan	Develop plans or procedures for the application of sustainable manufacturing concepts and methods in architectural design competitions	Write a description or outline for how to apply sustainable manufacturing knowledge in architectural design competitions
	6.3 Completion	Complete the program design of architectural design competitions	Complete the program design for the Zhejiang Rural Revitalization Competition (2022)

Through questionnaires, we examined how well those teaching objectives were achieved to evaluate the teaching effect of sustainable manufacturing. We associated the teaching objectives with the items from the mature scale [45,46] used to evaluate teaching effects, and finally determined 16 questions to evaluate the teaching effects (Table 8) after testing and optimizing. More specifically, through the 16 questions, we measured how well those teaching objectives were achieved (for example, Teaching Objective 1.1 was measured by Question 1; Teaching Objective 3.2 by Question 4). The fundamental idea of evaluating the teaching effect is that according to the intended teaching objectives, we evaluated whether there is a statistically significant difference in the understanding of sustainable manufacturing between the students who participated in architectural design competitions and the students who did not; if there is one, regression analysis is applied to further analyze the factors that affect the understanding of sustainable manufacturing.

Table 8. Survey Questions for Evaluating Teaching Effects.

NO.	Question Item
1	In the teaching of architectural design, teachers explicitly demonstrated knowledge of sustainable manufacturing.
2	In the teaching of architectural design, teachers clearly presented the method of achieving sustainable manufacturing through architectural design competitions.
3	Teachers are adept at continuously interacting positively with students.
4	Teachers actively maintain students’ interest in learning sustainable manufacturing.
5	Teachers encourage students to think positively about integrating sustainable manufacturing into architectural design.
6	Teachers provide practical feedback for learning sustainable manufacturing.
7	Teachers adopt effective measures to test how well students have mastered and understand what they have learned.
8	The final results of architectural design teaching are closely related to the knowledge of sustainable manufacturing.
9	The overall quality of the sustainable manufacturing knowledge imparted in the teaching of architectural design is satisfactory.
10	The imparted sustainable manufacturing knowledge pique students’ interest easily.
11	In the architectural design course, you have acquired satisfactory sustainable manufacturing knowledge.
12	In the teaching of architectural design, teachers excel at illustrating sustainable manufacturing knowledge.
13	The overall quality of sustainable manufacturing teaching in the architectural design course is satisfactory.
14	In the architectural design course, you have a strong ability to acquire sustainable manufacturing knowledge on your own.
15	You have clear motivation to learn sustainable manufacturing.
16	By the end of the course, you have a much better understanding of sustainable manufacturing than at the beginning.

Different from the sample size required for conducting in-depth interviews based on grounded theory, the survey required more students who participated in architectural design competitions as the research sample. To improve data quality, the survey was anonymous. Furthermore, to reduce possible common method bias, we collected data over two rounds at three-week intervals. At time 1, questionnaires were distributed to 230 students. Specifically, we briefly introduced the purpose of this research in the introduction part of the questionnaire, and then we invited students to fill in the three items regarding how many times they participated in competitions, how many times they conducted field research, and how many times they made models, with variables controlled. After this round of the survey, we sifted the questionnaires and finally obtained 221 valid ones, with a valid response rate of 96.1%. At time 2, we sent new questionnaires to the previous 221 valid respondents at time 1 and asked them to score the teaching effects of sustainable manufacturing. At the end of this round, we received 216 valid questionnaires, with a valid response rate of 97.7%. In the final sample (216 students), the majority of respondents were male (63.00%); and the largest proportion of students were 23 years old (30.60%); those in the fifth year accounted for the most of the respondents (27.30%); 40.70% of the students took the course for the first time in the second year; 28.7% of the students learned about one sustainable manufacturing theory before taking the course; and 109 students participated in architectural design competitions while 107 did not, which means the number of participants and non-participants in design competitions was comparable.

We divided the 109 respondents who participated in architectural design competitions and the 107 students who did not into the experimental group (Group A) and the control group (Group B), respectively. Through T-testing, we examined whether there was a statistically significant difference between the experimental group and the control group in terms of the teaching effect of sustainable manufacturing. When p < 0.05, it means that there is one.

If it does exist, regression analysis is applied to determine the factors that affect the perception of sustainable manufacturing. Because the teaching included the adoption of the flexible method for teaching sustainable manufacturing, we inferred that the contributing factors are not only related to the number of times students participated in architectural design competitions, but also related to the three key nodes of locality, materiality, and physicality. Based on the aforementioned analysis and existing research on teaching effect evaluations [9,42,47,48], we made the following hypotheses:

Hypothesis 1. 

The number of competition participation times was positively related to the teaching effect evaluation.

Hypothesis 2. 

The number of field research times was positively related to the teaching effect evaluation.

Hypothesis 3. 

The number of model making times was positively related to the teaching effect evaluation.

X1. the number of competition participation times was measured with a single item: “How many times have you attended a course that was integrated into architectural design competitions?” (1 = 0 time; 2 = 1 time; 3 = 2 times; 4 = 3 times; 5 = 4 times; 6 = 5 times and above).

X2. the number of field research times was measured with a single item: “How many times have you participated in field research on the site design?” (1 = 0 time; 2 = 1 time; 3 = 2 times; 4 = 3 times; 5 = 4 times; 6 = 5 times and above).

X3. the number of model making times was measured with a single item: “How many times have you participated in creating mock-ups?” (1 = 0 time; 2 = 1 time; 3 = 2 times; 4 = 3 times; 5 = 4 times; 6 = 5 times and above).

Y. We tested the teaching effect of sustainable manufacturing through an adapted 16-item scale. We used a five-point Likert scale in the survey (1 = “strongly disagree”, 5 = “strongly agree”). Sample items included “In the teaching of architectural design, teachers explicitly demonstrated knowledge of sustainable manufacturing” and “In the teaching of architectural design, teachers clearly presented methods for achieving sustainable manufacturing through architectural design competitions”. The Cronbach’s alpha of this measurement instrument was 0.973.

Control variables. According to existing research on teaching effect evaluations [47], we controlled for factors that may have influenced this research, such as the age, gender, current grade of the student, the grade when the student first participated in relevant competitions, and the amount of sustainable manufacturing theories students learned before taking the course.

5. Results

The research results were obtained with a combination of qualitative analysis and quantitative analysis. First, the findings of the qualitative analysis were presented graphically, which included a framework for promoting sustainable manufacturing learning through architectural design competitions in teaching architectural design. Second, the findings of the quantitative analysis were displayed as follows. Finally, the thesis briefly discussed how the quantitative analysis findings relate to this framework to promote sustainable manufacturing learning.

5.1. Research Results of Qualitative Analysis

We present the research results graphically, which is consistent with the requirements of grounded theory to present research findings graphically [49]. Around the categories established in the coding stage, we developed a framework for promoting sustainable manufacturing learning through architectural design competitions in architectural design teaching (Figure 3). The framework consists of interactive elements of “architectural design-sustainable manufacturing” and coordinated development elements of sustainable manufacturing. The former includes the basic elements of sustainable manufacturing development and the supporting elements for architectural design learning. The latter covers the four main categories of coordinated elements: “industry-resource”; “industry-ecology”; “industry-culture”; and “industry-economy”. Overall, the two core categories in the framework intersect with each other, and the main categories form a T-shaped structure. Partially, in this structure, the basic elements of sustainable manufacturing development at the bottom constitute the cornerstone of the structure, providing a logical and theoretical basis for students to learn, understand, and realize sustainable manufacturing during architectural design competitions. In the middle of the T-shaped structure lie supporting elements for architectural design learning and “industry-resource” coordinated elements. This place also marks the intersection of “architectural design-sustainable manufacturing” interactive elements and coordinated development elements for sustainable manufacturing, forming the core of the entire structure and serving as a bridge between those two kinds of elements. Specifically, the former offers internalized knowledge and concepts for students to learn, understand, and realize sustainable manufacturing in architectural design competitions, while the latter, based on relatively direct observables, provides students with operational means to achieve sustainable manufacturing. On the top of the structure sit coordinated elements of “industry-ecology”, “industry-culture”, and “industry-economy”, which form the structure’s roof. This is related to students’ direction, goals (including short-term, mid-term, and long-term goals), and results of achieving sustainable manufacturing. It is also a reflection of students’ understanding and realization of sustainable manufacturing through architectural design throughout the competition. Among them, the “industry-ecology” coordinated elements play a key role in maintaining a balance on top and promoting long-term balanced development of culture and economy in the industrial system. The different elements interact and promote each other, which constitute a complex system for learning sustainable manufacturing through architectural design competitions in architectural design teaching.

Figure 3. A framework for promoting sustainable manufacturing learning through architectural design competitions in architectural design teaching.

5.2. Research Results of Quantitative Analysis

Through T-testing, we found the evaluation of the teaching effect of sustainable manufacturing between Group A and Group B showed statistically significant differences (t = 16.697, p = 0.000 < 0.05; Table 9), and the average score of Group A was higher than that of Group B in terms of the 16 questions. This shows that Group A exhibited a better evaluation of the teaching effect and fared well in completing the intended teaching objectives.

Table 9. T-testing.

Group A		Group B		t	p
Questions (Q1–Q16)
Average Score	Standard Deviation	Average Score	Standard Deviation
4.390	0.720	2.540	0.900	16.697	0.000

Because there was a statistically significant difference in the perception of sustainable manufacturing between Group A and B, we further analyzed the contributing factors through regression analysis.

(1)

Descriptive statistics

Table 10 shows the correction matrix and descriptive statistics for all variables in this study. Overall, these zero-order correlations indicated that the number of competition participation times was positively related to the teaching effect evaluation; the number of field research times was positively related to the teaching effect evaluation; and the number of model making times was positively related to the teaching effect evaluation. These results are consistent with the hypotheses of this study and provide preliminary evidence for the validation of the research hypotheses.

Table 10. Descriptive statistics.

Variables	Mean	S.D.	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9
Gender	0.630	0.484
Age	3.400	1.394	−0.042
Grade	3.410	1.323	−0.022	0.877 **
The grade when the student first participated in the course	2.210	1.158	0.000	0.552 **	0.541 **
The amount of theories they understand	2.910	1.398	−0.030	0.0473 **	0.468 **	0.406 **
Competition participation times	2.530	1.762	−0.032	0.0584 **	0.477 **	0.282 **	0.322 **
Field research times	3.160	1.508	−0.034	0.353 **	0.317 **	0.178 **	0.192 **	0.378 **
Model making times	2.580	1.142	−0.011	0.353 **	0.363 **	0.215 **	0.232 **	0.438 **	0.638 **
Teaching effect evaluation	3.458	1.040	−0.075	0.490 **	0.387 **	0.197 **	0.241 **	0.830 **	0.368 **	0.331 **	(0.973)

Notes: N = 216. ** p < 0.01. The diagonal represents reliabilities (Cronbach’s alpha). Gender coded (1 = males, 0 = females); Age coded (1 = 19 years old, 2 = 20 years old, 3 = 21 years old, 4 = 22 years old, 5 = 23 years old); Grade coded (1 = freshman year, 2 = second year of college, 3 = third year of college, 4 = fourth year of college, 5 = fifth year of college); The grade when the student first participated in the course coded (1 = freshman year, 2 = second year of college, 3 = third year of college, 4 = fourth year of college, 5 = fifth year of college); The amount of theories they understand coded (1 = 0 theory, 2 = 1 theory, 3 = 2 theories, 4 = 3 theories, 5 = 4 and above theories)

(2)

Hypotheses testing

We then calculated variance inflation factors to test for multicollinearity among the independent variables and found that they were all below the critical value of 10 [50], indicating that multicollinearity is not a serious problem.

Table 11 shows the results of the regression analysis. Hypothesis 1 predicted a positive relationship between competition participation times and the teaching effect evaluation. In line with this hypothesis, competition participation times were found to have a significant positive impact on the teaching effect evaluation (β = 0.489; p ≤ 0.01). Consequently, when students participate in more competitions, the better the teaching effect evaluation is. Hypothesis 2 expected a positive impact of field research times on the teaching effect evaluation. In line with this hypothesis, field research times were found to have a significant positive impact on the teaching effect evaluation (β = 0.083; p ≤ 0.05). Furthermore, hypothesis 3, which expected a positive relationship between model making times and the teaching effect evaluation, was significantly supported (β = −0.096; p ≤ 0.05).

Table 11. Results of regression tests.

Variables	Teaching Effect Evaluation
	Control Model	Main Effects Model
Gender	−0.106	−0.097
Age	0.499 **	0.037
Grade	−0.130	−0.014
The grade when the student first participated in the course	−0.090	−0.039
The amount of theories they understand	0.031	−0.017
Competition participation times		0.489 **
Field research times		0.083 *
Model making times		−0.096 *
R²	0.240	0.692
ΔR²	0.258	0.703
F value	14.591 **	61.330 **

Notes: N = 216. * p < 0.05; ** p < 0.01.

In summary, the above findings suggested that the three independent variables were positively related to the teaching effect evaluation. Thus, all hypotheses of this study were supported.

5.3. Linkage of Quantitative Analysis Findings to the Framework for Promoting Sustainable Manufacturing Learning

In this thesis, qualitative analysis and quantitative analysis are complementary to each other. Qualitative analysis based on grounded theory, which focuses more on the macro level, offers a framework and process to learn sustainable manufacturing, and is conducive to obtaining new teaching theories that integrate sustainable manufacturing into architectural design teaching. In comparison, quantitative analysis based on statistical analysis, which shifts towards the micro level, enables us to understand the teaching effect of sustainable manufacturing and obtain related feedback. That said, qualitative analysis underscores the building of different layers of sustainable manufacturing learning, which not only shows where analysis results can be applied, but also offers a deeper explanation for the results. To some extent, the more times a student participates in architectural design competitions, the easier it is to obtain information on the coordinated elements of “industry-resource”, “industry-ecology”, and “industry-culture”. The same results can also be achieved through field research and mock-up creation. This helps increase the opportunities for students to understand sustainable manufacturing, making their understanding more systematic and comprehensive. By comparison, quantitative analysis focuses more on details of the learning, showcasing direct factors that affect learning at a micro level. Those factors can reflect how the concept of sustainable manufacturing is applied in a practical way. In addition, those factors are relatively closely related to the “industry-resource” coordinated element which, in fact, plays a central role in the framework to promote sustainable manufacturing learning, and which intuitively affects the learning of sustainable manufacturing from a macro level. This mutual correspondence between “micro” and “macro” illustrates the rationality of the framework obtained from qualitative analysis to promote sustainable manufacturing learning.

6. Discussion

To summarize, we obtained new findings on sustainable manufacturing in architectural design teaching.

Our findings suggest that the introduction of architectural design competitions into architectural design teaching is a feasible method to promote students’ understanding of sustainable manufacturing. Architectural design competitions present a value chain, production chain, supply chain, and commodity chain related to sustainable manufacturing that are supported by different design elements, such as site, environment, ecology, and energy consumption, and naturally integrate those elements into the students’ architectural design process of thinking, drawing, modeling, and displaying. To obtain an inventive and reasonable architectural design scheme, students not only need to have an in-depth understanding of design elements, such as the site, environment, ecology, energy consumption, culture, industry, and local productivity levels, but also need to have a thorough understanding of the backgrounds of these design elements and how they interact with one another. Architectural design competitions will not only allow students to understand sustainability from a conceptual level, but also gain first-hand experiences of what sustainable manufacturing means, analyze local industrial landscapes, and think about the logic behind and method of achieving sustainable manufacturing. In this way, architectural design can truly embrace the concept of sustainable manufacturing and become an essential part of revitalizing local industries or a key factor in reactivating local industries. This finding agrees with what some researchers have described. Hill and Smith [51] believe that in the real world, the solutions to technical problems are interactive rather than completely linear or progressive as exploring the relationship between knowledge, skills, and different materials forms the basis for technical processes. Fantozzi et al. [52] infer that architectural design competitions can bring about effects that are difficult to obtain through traditional educational approaches. Even if the participants in the SD competition did not complete the actual construction of the building, they were still convinced that the competition would have a positive impact on their architectural design experience, in-person construction experience, and saving energy practices because the competition can effectively lead to increases in students’ knowledge, skills and awareness in architectural conceptual designs, construction, green building designs, energy conservation and emission reduction, and sustainable development by exposing those participants directly to concrete problems that occur in the processes of engineering construction, energy production, and social progress. Herrera-Limones et al. [32] argue that the competition provides an effective platform for the production and dissemination of sustainability knowledge. The platform is conducive to the future career development of architecture students because it helped students fully integrate energy-efficiency technologies, material ecology, construction economy, and other factors related to sustainable manufacturing into the architectural design process. Research from Baghi et al. [21] reflects that the SD competition is still key to deepening students’ understanding of sustainable manufacturing, especially across the three aspects of architectural design, resources (including equipment and materials), and ecology. He believes that in the SD competition, the most important innovations are concentrated within two aspects. One is the application of HVAC, architectural design, and construction equipment to different lifestyles and different climatic conditions, and the other is the the integration of building materials and various functional features into the main structure of the building. Additionally, some studies have shown that architectural design competitions provide an opportunity to verify the effectiveness of new technologies for solving problems, such as high energy consumption and carbon emissions [24,32,34,53]. It is unavoidable for teams participating in the competition to take sustainable manufacturing into consideration when they apply new technologies in the field [24,53]. If a new technology proves to be energy efficient, but its production and transportation process consume a large amount of energy and produce a significant amount of pollution, coupled with insufficient output and an immature market, it cannot be used in construction when emission reduction, product supply, and market acceptance of the full life cycle of the building are considered. Because competitive architectural design competition necessitates stringent requirements for quality projects, the participating teams rigorously and scientifically analyze the role of new technologies in energy conservation and emission reduction through simulation analysis of building performance and energy consumption simulation and continue to improve the quality of their work [24]. This process enables the participating student groups to gain a deeper understanding of sustainable manufacturing, achieving the teaching effect that cannot be achieved through traditional architectural teaching methods in this domain.

Our findings also suggest that the concept of sustainable manufacturing needs to be imparted earlier on in architecture majors. This does not mean that all content should be taught during this period, but a portion of it is enough because content, such as the production chain, supply chain, industrial structure, and industrial conditions, can be seen as a supplement to lower-level architecture design courses, which focus on the environment, materials, and techniques. In the competition, students’ indifference to the idea of sustainable manufacturing, as we observed, may cause their designs not only to be divorced from local natural conditions, the human environment, and economic conditions to a certain extent, but also make it challenging to adapt them to higher standards, such as material, energy, and water savings, eco-friendly and low-carbon requirements. A better solution for this is not for teachers to emphasize or explain to students the necessity and importance of sustainable manufacturing in architectural design, but that from the very beginning of the competition, students can become accustomed to regarding the idea as an integral aspect of design. In fact, sustainable manufacturing should not be a stopgap between an ideal architectural design and a realistic one, but a bridge connecting each. Given that, students may have a clearer understanding of the approaches to solving industrial and social problems through architectural designs to better integrate designs into the environment and culture alike. This finding has been advocated by some researchers and teaching staff. Altomonte et al. [40] argue that sustainability, such as sustainable manufacturing, should be integrated into architectural education as early as possible, and it can be introduced earlier on to undergraduates, which will help raise student awareness of sustainable development from the early stage of architectural education, motivate them to cope with the challenges of sustainable development that the construction industry faces, and stimulate their creativity to solve problems hindering sustainable development, such as environmental pollution and resource overuse. Domenica Iulo et al. [54] believe that it is necessary to impart concepts and knowledge related to sustainable manufacturing in the early stages of architectural education. Earlier exposure to these concepts and knowledge enables students to have a deeper understanding in their junior or senior year, and they will be less likely to consider those ideas as constraints. Xiang et al. [55] purport that we need to set the initial starting point to integrate sustainable development concepts and knowledge into the early years of architectural design undergraduate classes to help students establish a systematic understanding of sustainable development earlier and consider architectural design issues more comprehensively. The process should be continued throughout their studies. In addition, some studies have shown that a close link exists between the concept of sustainable manufacturing, including sustainable manufacturing and the content taught in the lower grades of architecture majors [56,57,58]. Toprak’s [56] perspective considers sustainable architecture to not only be related to energy and ecology, but to also have broader meanings. It can even be considered a philosophical way of thinking, which requires designers to focus on the design details of the environment, site, and materials; to try to think about architectural designs from the aspects of architectural scale, terrain environment, energy consumption, lighting, ventilation, the industrial chain, culture, and recycling; and learn to cooperate with users, customers, engineering professionals, building materials companies, and building material manufacturers.

Our findings also suggest that the introduction of architectural design competitions into architectural design teaching can provide students with an environment (condition or learning atmosphere) where they can authentically learn about sustainable manufacturing. Compared to traditional architectural design courses, architectural design competitions not only have higher requirements for architectural design quality, achievements, and innovation, but also provide a simulated real architectural design environment and more authentic practice for students. For those participants, materials, processes, and energy consumption in sustainable manufacturing are longer technical knowledge, but a part of social-cultural factors. Based on their own knowledge and experience, students can spontaneously understand the relationship between sustainable manufacturing and architectural design, the complexity and contradictions of architectural design practices, the social responsibility of architects, and knowledge that is not presented by teachers and that is indescribable. Equipped with this knowledge, they can actively explore ways to achieve and promote sustainable manufacturing through architectural designs, forming their own unique insights into the concept. For example, when it comes to eco-friendly architectural designs, students in an immersive design environment will more clearly perceive the real economic constraints of the site, supply chain restrictions, and energy-saving needs, such as shading, heat preservation, sunlight, and ventilation. They also need to be aware of the importance and necessity of designing low-carbon buildings through technologies adapted to the local landscape features. As a matter of fact, traditional local materials and buildings have proven to be effective in promoting the low-carbon and energy-saving construction of buildings [59,60]. When students regard local traditional building materials as an important medium for energy conservation, they will not only focus on how to display local cultural characteristics using local traditional building materials, but also pay attention to how to make energy-saving designs, such as thermal insulation and heat preservation by taking advantage of traditional building materials and innovating the use of those materials. The above process, spanning from constant reflection on actions and acquisition of new knowledge to problem solving, has the characteristics of constructivism. This finding is backed up by several studies. Hill [61] argues that, regardless of the future career, a practical way of learning through in-person experience proves to be more enlightening than that through traditional lecturing in the classroom. In Hwang et al.’s [62] opinion, learning by applying can stimulate the learner’s imagination and creativity to facilitate their cognitive development and keep them motivated. In addition, it can drive the learner to consciously do more learning tasks in different practical scenarios, thereby piquing their interest in doing so in real conditions. Wallin et al. [63], based on the case of engineering education, expounded on the situation where students cooperate with teachers in research and experiential learning in small groups. They believe that authentic learning will have a positive impact on students learning knowledge and skills. These effects include the following: higher levels of engagement; real experience of what work is like; a strong motivation to learn; active participation in all stages of research; and a deeper understanding of the nature of scientific research. Lee [64] argues that contextual learning may ultimately lead to transformative learning in which students encounter difficulties triggered by authentic learning and become willing to engage in critical reflection and rational dialogue, ultimately becoming a more authentic self both in the learning environment and in the real world at large.

7. Conclusions

Based on architectural design competitions held in China over the years, this research discusses a flexible method for integrating sustainable manufacturing into architectural design teaching. This research shows that architectural design competitions can link sustainable manufacturing to multiple aspects of architectural design teaching, which will serve as a platform for acquiring knowledge about green building and energy, analysis tools of energy consumption, and innovative applications of energy-saving technologies. The research aims to pursue a flexible method to teach sustainable manufacturing through architectural design competitions, which act as a form of architectural education carrying sustainable manufacturing to promote students’ understanding of the concept, and to strengthen the role of architectural design in achieving sustainable manufacturing. Compared with traditional design teaching in classrooms, architectural design competitions create an atmosphere closer to real-life designing and construction, which do not pay lip service to the idea of conserving resources and energy, but place sustainability at the core of sustainable design. This enables students to take various factors involved in architectural design into consideration and expand architectural design teaching to cultural, economic, and other fields in a more comprehensive way, bolstering the presence of sustainability across more aspects. Thus, sustainable manufacturing can be truly integrated into architectural design teaching.

This research suggests that the key nodes of integrating sustainable manufacturing into architectural design teaching can be divided into three aspects: locality, materiality, and physicality. By integrating these key nodes in different stages of architectural design, this research develops a flexible method to promote sustainable manufacturing in architectural design teaching through architectural design competitions where the basic elements of sustainable manufacturing development and the supporting factors of architectural design teaching intersect and promote one another, constituting a complex system for learning sustainable manufacturing in that way. The success of teaching practice shows that it is a feasible way to improve students’ understanding of sustainable manufacturing. Competitions modeled on real conditions establish elements related to sustainable manufacturing as prerequisites for architectural design that requires analysis and understanding of those factors. The interaction between those elements and those of traditional designs helps students not only understand sustainability conceptually, but also reflect on the application logic of sustainable manufacturing in the site design, in which they directly confront specific problems in engineering construction, energy production, and social development. As a result, it improves students’ awareness, knowledge, and ability to put sustainable manufacturing into practice while designing, a teaching result that is difficult to achieve with traditional architectural teaching methods.

The teaching methods involved in this research can be used in various teaching modes used in architectural design based on practical teaching. They share the same basic principles to transform the teaching of architectural design from theoretical to practical. Exposed to real problems arising in designing, students translate their abstract theoretical designs into concrete ones by exploring the connections between knowledge, skills, and materials to improve their awareness and professional skills. At the same time, they can reflect on the problems of actual design conditions and receive precious feedback for their designs, especially from those outside of the campus, whether it is competition judges, house owners, civil servants, or constructors giving different opinions and suggestions in their view, which is a huge supplement to the theories learned on campus and to teachers’ obstructed views and helps them understand sustainable manufacturing from a broader perspective. To summarize, this research is helpful to the penetration of sustainable manufacturing in architectural design teaching and provides a reference for introducing interactive teaching of architectural design and sustainable manufacturing elements into sustainable architectural teaching at the undergraduate level.

A major limitation of this research is that it fails to cover the impact of differences in students’ mastery of sustainable manufacturing on teaching. In ZUST’s teaching through architectural design competitions, participants range from sophomores to seniors, among whom some junior students have no concept of sustainable manufacturing at all. However, some seniors have repeatedly participated in competitions and gained considerable experience of sustainable manufacturing theoretically and practically, compared with those who have studied relevant theoretical courses or self-studied the concept of sustainable manufacturing. Students’ different foundations have given rise to divergent learning outcomes in terms of the sustainable elements in architectural design as evidenced by their different learning speeds and levels of mastery, the details of which are not captured in this research. In our subsequent research, we will conduct interviews to understand the learning process of students with different mastery levels of sustainable manufacturing, including their gains in learning process, learning challenges, and their performances in subsequent regular architectural design courses. By analyzing the interview data according to grounded theory, we will put forward an individualized hierarchical teaching method for students with different mastery levels of sustainable manufacturing as a part of the teaching method of “interaction between architectural design and elements of sustainable manufacturing”. We will also study the continuing impact of this teaching method on architectural design teaching.