||The paper describes attempts by the authors to convey the importance of teamworkin architecture to students, be it in the process of architecture or the object itself.One of the main postulates of the work is that pedagogically, teamwork is bettertrained than taught. This is further compounded when the technological burden ofdistributed practice is introduced. Using Internet based communicationtechnologies, the authors have sought to create a design studio environment thatsimulates real world situations where major planning partners are located indifferent cities and even different countries. Using experience gained over fouryears of networked studios, the authors were able to enrol five other universities fora semester-long experimental design studio. In essence, the students undertook tosolve the design problem in teams spread over different universities. From 43students, 14 teams (each with 3 members and one with 4 members) were assembledwith no two students from the same university in the same team. Furthermore, eachteam was assigned a tutor from a fourth (or fifth) university. The differentuniversities were far enough separated so as to preclude easy face to face meetings.Instead, the Internet was used as a communication medium. The entire range ofavailable technologies was put to use. A central web site which logged userpresence served as a virtual "place" where the students and tutors could meet tocarry out informal discussions or arrange to transfer the discussions elsewhere(e.g. to a chat room or a videoconference). The web site platform also provided theentire group with supporting information such as personal diaries, commoncalendar functions, email lists and directories of student work. The students madetheir work available on the web throughout the semester in order to communicatewith their tutor as well as with one another. Essential to the successfulcommunication was an initial acquaintance session. This took the form of a 3-dayworkshop at the beginning of the semester. While this workshop ostensibly focussedon the design problem, it effectively served as a social engineering exercise inorder to shake out compatibility among potential team members. After theworkshop, the group met again 15 week later for a final review. Halfway throughthe semester, the individual teams travelled to their tutors for a mid-term review.Otherwise, all communication took place over the Internet (or throughconventional telecommunication methods). The theme itself was certainly selfreferential:to design a centre for a virtual university. This cross-pollination ofdesign method and design theme was an additional encumbrance for most students,but also provided a fertile bed for a wide range of design solutions. It is importantto note that all of the teams were able to complete the assignment and postsemesterquestionnaires show an overwhelming positive reaction to theexperimental studio, notwithstanding the high costs of travel and telephone. Thepaper discusses the feedback from the students and possible implications for futureiterations of the concept.