Meaning-making in the architectural design studio: a reflexive thematic analysis of students’ research and inquiry practices

Purpose This study examines how students construct meaning around research and inquiry in an upper-level architectural design studio and how these processes support or hinder inquiry-oriented learning. Design/methodology/approach Focus-group interviews were conducted with 28 students who had completed Architectural Design 4. Data were interpreted through a three-layer meaning-making framework – contextual (studio ecology), cognitive (epistemic work of inquiry) and reflective (reflection-in/on-action) – and analyzed using reflexive thematic analysis. Findings The findings show that the studio can move students from imitative, product-driven work toward research-informed and self-directed inquiry. However, students often struggle to translate research, precedent analysis and theory into design decisions under time, assessment and representational pressures. Research limitations/implications The study is limited to one institutional context and one studio level; therefore, the findings are not statistically generalizable. However, the three-layer framework offers a transferable lens for examining inquiry-oriented studio learning in comparable settings. Practical implications Studio teaching should scaffold source reading, precedent analysis, research-question formation and research-to-design translation. Critique, tutor guidance, timelines, assessment and representational expectations should be aligned to sustain inquiry and student authorship. Social implications Making inquiry processes explicit may support more reflective, context-sensitive and socially responsible architectural decision-making. Originality/value The study links meaning-making theory with inquiry-oriented studio pedagogy and foregrounds students’ accounts to explain how research, theory, critique and reflection interact in architectural design education.