Architectural design Students get knowledge abaut architectural design

Architectural design
Students get knowledge abaut architectural design.
In his article ‘Design Science and Design Education’, Ken Friedman argues that many design professions are now – that is anno 1997 – at the point where they (have to) move from a traditional approach to the use of scientific method. Scientific method articulates tacit understanding as (new) conscious knowledge, that can serve the design task. Science and scientific method, Friedman contends, should not be identified automatically with positivism, as there are many valid scientific approaches that may be useful to design and design research. Yet, if there are multiple approaches to science, does that not include the act of designing too? In other words, can the design activity itself be considered a research medium to develop new design knowledge? In this paper, an attempt is made to investigate this question in case of architectural design, yet the ideas described might be applicable to other design domains as well. The investigation starts by pointing out the specific and highly complex nature of architectural design (sections 1 and 2). If science is to develop new knowledge for this complex activity, we might do well to be aware of what knowledge it actually entails. Therefore, section 3 tries to identify the types of knowledge architects need, after which section 4 takes a quick look at several mechanisms that act as knowledge supplies during design. Section 5 focuses on one specific mechanism, the (re-)use of concrete design cases, and investigates whether this (re-)use may be viewed as a way to develop design knowledge. Finally, the paper summarises the outcome of our investigation and formulates conclusions.

It is also so evident that the ultimate aim of any architectural education must depend on the development of the creative personality where the knowledge and skills our primary focus on the expression of creativity and innovation in their design process. This aspect of design thinking should be fostered by encouraging the students during the learning process involved in brainstorming which can help one not only to get solutions for new challenges but also to decide which approach is the best suited to address the challenge. This can be further enhanced through discussions on individual concepts and interactions with peers which help them assessing the approach and refining it to suit the context. ...

... They often seek the insight termed as “inspiration” which is mostly derived from the work of other famous architects and then implementing the learning out of the project modifying their approach of design proposing the solution. In this regard, had proposed the concept of “cases” as the method of generation of concepts from the learning of previous projects. They have quoted their findings as “architects seems to draw a considerable amount of design knowledge from concrete design cases which are designed by others or by themselves”

Architectural Education, Creativity and Knowledge.

A method similar to general 20th century architectural education was implemented for the first time in the The Ecole des Beaux-Art Architectural School. The relationship between the student-lecturer (master-apprentice) started to gain importance at the Bauhaus. In the Bauhaus Teaching Theory, which was developed with Gestalt perception hypothesis, students had an education through stages covering all the necessary practical and scientific education for apprenticeship, journeyman and master. The Bauhaus Teaching Theory brought some innovations to architectural education, unlike the Ecole des Beaux-Art Architectural School Education style, as instead of the imitation of classical architecture to actively create a new project by students, the master was more passive, being a guide to the student in the design process. From the 19th century onwards in Western Europe, the architectural profession and education involved improvement and change with small difficulties. Architectural education in Turkey, and the continued relationship between master and apprentice started with the trial and error method in 1883 at “Sanayii Nefise Mektebi (Mimar Sinan Üniversitesi)”, then in 1942 at “İstanbul Teknik Okulu (İstanbul Teknik Üniversitesi)”, then in 1945 “Yıldız Teknik Üniversitesi” and in 1956 at “Orta Doğu Teknik Üniversitesi” (Dikmen, 2011). This has improved and changed day by day with the new architectural departments in Turkey. The concept of creativity is very important for the architectural profession, and architecture is also sometimes used instead of creativity as meaning. From the beginning with “De Stijl” in the 20th century, almost all of architectural understanding has tried to provide some solutions concentrating on necessity for a small group people. “De Stijl”, “Bauhaus”, “Purism”, which emerged in the 20th century, and functionalism are the common bases for this architectural understanding (Erkman, 1982), and are still used in many educational institutions. This situation is often not good enough, with creativity the most relevant factor in terms of psychological and social needs (Ayıran, 1985). Functionalism in the 21st century, despite the effectiveness of other current architectural understandings is still used because functionalism is a necessity but not sufficient. Nowadays, the concept of creativity has to find a new architectural solution for the wider society. In general, the meaning of creativity is emerging as a feature most looked for especially in the world marketing sector (Craft, 2003). People are now spending money by tending towards different, innovative products. According to the National Advisory Committee for Creative and Cultural Education (NACCCE), the definition of creativity is “imaginative activity fashioned so as to produce outcomes both original and of value” (NACCCE, 1999; Craft 2003). MacKinnon describes creativity as a combination of arts, sciences, technology, and psychological testing .