Journals / A|Z ITU Mimarlık Fakültesi Dergisi / 2019 / Cilt: 16 - Sayı: 2

Validating a direction adopted in a basic design studio based on the principles of constructivism

Pages
105–125
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

The findings post that the direction adopted in the basic design to be an approach to incorporate principles of constructivism.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:With an intention to adopt principles of ‘constructivist pedagogy’ integrated with an objective to foster thinking skills, ‘process oriented outcomes’ were adopted in a basic design studio during the session June – November 2016 at the Department of Architecture, Sathyabama Institute of Science and Technology, India.
📊
Key Findings & Data:With an intention to gather diverse opinions from staff members, the processes and outcomes of the tasks were presented at a faculty development programme in November 2016.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The findings post that the direction adopted in the basic design to be an approach to incorporate principles of constructivism.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:2016 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Özet

With an intention to adopt principles of ‘constructivist pedagogy’ integrated with an objective to foster thinking skills, ‘process oriented outcomes’ were adopted in a basic design studio during the session June – November 2016 at the Department of Architecture, Sathyabama Institute of Science and Technology, India. It was about the framing of informal activities prior to design task was to encourage the novices to unravel the spirit of the design problem intangibly. The students documented the creative processes and outcomes associated with all the tasks. We discussed, gave inputs, monitored and examined both the processes and the outcomes regularly. At the end of the semester, outcomes along with the processes were evaluated by four experts. Even though the evaluation by us as well as the jury members displayed a strong correlation, the evaluation process was intuitive. With an intention to gather diverse opinions from staff members, the processes and outcomes of the tasks were presented at a faculty development programme in November 2016. At the training programme, pre and post tests were conducted to analyze the knowledge constructed by the participants. Open ended collective tasks based on cubism paintings were planned and conducted. The ideas, concepts, processes and outcomes evolved by the teachers were documented. The findings obtained through the qualitative and quantitative analysis adopting an exploratory confirmatory method. The findings post that the direction adopted in the basic design to be an approach to incorporate principles of constructivism.

🔖

Cite This Article

RAMARAJ, A., NAGAMMAL, J. (2019). Validating a direction adopted in a basic design studio based on the principles of constructivism. A|Z ITU Mimarlık Fakültesi Dergisi, Cilt: 16 - Sayı: 2, 105–125. https://ajindex.com/articles/354957

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (7)

  1. Alter,F. (2010). Using visual arts to harness creativity. Unesco Observatory, University of Melbourne Refereed journal, 1(5) Accessed on 21sty March 2017.
  2. Anoniades, C.A. (1992). Poetics of architecture: Theory of design. Van Nostrand Reinhold. Asasoglu,A.A., Gur,S.O. & Erol,Y. (2010). Basic design dilemmas in architectural education, Scientific research and essays, 3538-3549, www. academic journals.org/ SRE/article- /1380627687, Accessed on 29th June 2016.
  3. Bashier, F. (2014). Reflections on architectural design education: The return of rationalism in the studio. Frontiers of Architectural research, 3(4), 424-430.
  4. Boucharenc, C.G. (2006). Research on basic design education: An international survey. 16(1), 1-30, Doi:10.1007/s10798-005-2110-8, Accessed on 11th March 2017. Cameron,R. (2009),. A sequential mixed model research design: design, analytical and display issues, International journal of multiple research approaches. 3(2), 140-152. http://mra.e-content management. com/archives/vol/3/issue/2/, Accessed on 13th August 2017. Celik,P.Y. & Aydinli, S. (2007). Creativity in design education: From problem solving to puzzle solving, A/Z ITU Journal of Architecture, 4(2), 36- 21. http://www.az.itu.edu.tr/vol04-02, Accessed on 21st June 2016.
  5. Cubukcu, E. & Dundar, S.G. (2007). Can creativity be taught? An empirical studybenefits of visual analogy in basic design education. ITU A/Z Journal of Architecture, 4(2), 67-80, www. azitujournal.com Chistaens, H (2002). The images of sustainable architecture: A refurbishment case study, http:// b r i d g e n d f a r m h o u s e. o r g. u k /. / hannelore_christaens_dissertation.pdf Cikis,S. & Cil,E. (2009). Problematization of assessment in architectural design education: First year as a case study. Procedia social and behavioural sciences. World conference on educational sciences, 2103-2110, Accessed on 11th March 2017. Creswell,J.W. (2003). Research design: Qualitative, quamtitative and mixed methods approaches, Second edition, Sage publications, http:// ucalgar y.ca/paed/files/paed/2003_ creswell_a framework for design.pdf, Accessed on 18th February 2016.
  6. Cormu, R.L. & Peters,J.(2005). Towards constructivist classrooms: the role of the reflective teacher, 6(1), 50- 64. Dorst, K. & Cross, N. (2001). Creativity in the design process: co evolution of problem – solution, Design studies,22,425-437[PII:s 0142- 694X (01)00009-6]
  7. Farivarsadri, G. (2001). A critical review on pedagogical dimension of introductory desig