Inclusive, introspective, and meticulous research plays a crucial role in the types and qualities of insights and the rigor of the knowledge created by architecture’s design creations. Design research deliberations in multidisciplinary contexts (including architecture) have explored positive dispositions while likewise acknowledging both definition and methodology-related uncertainties coupled with an identified immaturity for design research in general. With regards to research expectations for design process, what might be understood in a rather straightforward or intuitive manner by an expert researcher or experienced designer can pose difficulties for a novice, while resulting in even more misunderstandings for a beginner-level learner in architecture school. Even at expert levels, such characterizations as research for, into, and through architectural design can be perceived inexplicable, and certainly more daunting for novice learners. For the latter, doubts on research constituents and processes can quickly escalate, clashing not only with prior misconceptions on the idea of research itself, but also on design process, raising issues as to what design itself is supposed to be and what a design process should look like. All such doubts are part of what learners carry with them into design processes early on upon entering any design studio. Intertwined with their pre-knowledge impacting their essential effective skills, such misunderstandings must be addressed in advance before they can get in the ways of learning. This article draws on and shares the process and outcomes of an action research project conducted during the 2020-2021 academic year supported by Drury University ITC’s “Action Research Fellowship” program. Focused on exploring the teaching of research skills in design-centered learning environments as its umbrella theme, the study-in-action examined how curriculum design and instructional activities might better assist novice architectural learners in making sense of nuanced complexities of design research expectations to make better use of applied research prospects in design. The need for conducting the study was identified during the author’s first year at the new institution, based on primary reflections on the different instructional needs. The scrutiny was comparative to schools with STEM-based or more technology-driven curricula, or those specifically cultivating more demanding research environments due to, for instance, housing doctoral programs. Two questions guided the study: What pedagogies can help tackle misunderstandings early on, and help demystify and streamline the process of design research? What effective teaching methods can enable and further enhance learners’ research aptitudes? The study began by pre-assessment probes to locate misunderstanding patterns and identify learner perception variations, for example, on what they see as act of design (as creative and open-ended, and meticulous?) or [pure] research (as rigorous, systematic, logical, or creative?).