This paper will focus on applying to the early stages of architectural education the method* developed by Tucker Cross and Küller (2004) by promoting techniques that will help guide and influence architectural students to design environments better suited to the public. It will also compare students’ evaluations of six housing areas with a previous study that employed five experts evaluating the same housing areas in regards to certain design aspects. The paper will also key in on the practical design work accomplished by students. These students found existing areas needing renovation and utilized information obtained from their education and practical work to redesign these areas so as to meet design criteria sufficient to improve the area. Research has shown that the type of architectural education students receive during their training process will directly influence and affect the way they perform in the future (Hubbard 1997, Salama 1997, Symes and Seidel 1999, Whitfield and Wiltshire 1982). This leads us to the importance of design education and how it influences the way students will design in the future. Whitfield and Wiltshire in a study a little over 20 years ago report that when comparing individuals that were professionally trained in architecture to those who were not there were apparent differences in how they perceived and evaluated aspects of the rural and urban environment. This reinforces the importance of proper and elaborate methods in design education to assure that in the early stages of development, students are given the components needed to help create desirable environments. Preiser and Ostroff (2001) makes an important inference that “today’s currency and source of value is information, knowledge, and creativity.” We know from our past research that individuals prefer certain aspects within their outdoor environment. These results can help designers create better environments. Procedure The course began with a lecture, pertaining to the introduction to environmental psychology; this lecture focused on the history, methods and theories. Following there were lectures pertaining to the design of outdoor environments for the elderly, outdoor environment for children focusing on daycare centers, expert assessments methods and a lecture on the principle and design methods in developing the POE and expert checklist for evaluating outdoor living environments. The course also included a lecture on literature review of the various topics and explanation and procedure in filling in the forms and evaluating the six housing areas. Results Comparing the students’ results with results from the experts’ from our previous study showed a highly significant correlation between groups. As concerns the different environmental qualities, significant differences were shown in all six areas. As for the students, they responded in a very positive way in relation to the education and guidance they received during the educational process. Conclusion This study has clearly shown that through lectures and explanations of these researched and developed materials, this expert checklist can be used as a pedagogical tool for teaching architecture students. It has the ability to help guide them in creating better and clearer outdoor environments for future projects.Footnote* Researchers willing to replicate are welcome to obtain a copy of the expert form from the authors.