Existing design models, it is generally acknowledged, are inadequate to deal with the complexity of contemporary situations, and an assessment of self-conscious design manifests a slow development in the power and scope of conceptualizing. The quality of knowledge and conceptual tools available to the designer largely determine his ability to conceive and accomplish, conversely, the limitations of method are reflected in design solutions. Some emerging social problem-solving paradigms, which seek to construct a cognitive psychology of problem solving, have a direct relevance to architectural design. Notwithstanding the traditional criticism and scepticism, problem solving is predicated by task environment and problem space as these have a significant impact on design synthesis. Despite a rigorous search for theoretical perspectives and methods, the concern for the quality of the physical environment persists unabated. Historically, architecture has depended on other disciplines for its theoretical insight, but the application of borrowed theories without a viable framework for translation has often resulted in misinterpretation. Aggravating the problem is the art-science controversy which has consequences for architectural practice and education. What is required is a unified approach encompassing the scientific and artistic modes of inquiry. But a unified perspective, involving vast and disparate areas of human knowledge, demands a conceptual framework for integrative learning. The proposed model of this study provides such a framework and calls for a re-examination of the conventional boundaries of design disciplines. It advocates an interdisciplinary approach and recognizes the design process as inherently a learning process, this shifts the emphasis from product to process and allows students to plan and assess their own design/learning experience. While the study focuses on substantive issues, it identifies a strategy for integrative learning applicable within the existing context of design education. Despite its untested nature, the proposed model can become a vehicle for stimulating coordination of all facets of human knowledge and experience toward creative design synthesis. It inculcates a sense of critical assessment of generative ideas by presenting a conceptually clearer picture of the design process to elicit a response to and a better understanding of the task environment of architecture.