SavedAdd your journal

Journals / ICONARP International Journal Of Architecture And Planning / 2019 / Cilt: 7 - Sayı: 1

On The Nature of The Conceptual Schemata Development of Architecture Students

Hakan ANAY
Ülkü ÖZTEN
Pages
78–98
Publication Date
2022-10-18
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)

This study, on the other hand, reports a comparative analysisand evaluation of two particular stages: 1st year, before their formaleducation starts, and 3rd year, as it was assumed by the study, as thestage when their disciplinary schemata is already roughly “formed.”Findings showed that students not only developed their conceptualschemata and their existing schemata is transformed into a morespecialized and field-specific one, but also they have developed a set ofskills which might be called “designerly seeing,” and “designerlythinking.”

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Embedded within the theoretical and conceptual frameworks implied bythe schemata theory and studies on architectural precedent knowledge,the present study is based on a research that investigates and evaluatestwo major issues within the context of architectural education.
📊
Key Findings & Data:First isthe level and characteristics of the conceptual schema of the students ofarchitecture have had just before their education in architecture starts,and second, the nature, and the characteristic of that precise conceptualschema’s development and transformation throughout their formaleducation.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:This study, on the other hand, reports a comparative analysisand evaluation of two particular stages: 1st year, before their formaleducation starts, and 3rd year, as it was assumed by the study, as thestage when their disciplinary schemata is already roughly “formed.”Findings showed that students not only developed their conceptualschemata and their existing schemata is transformed into a morespecialized and field-specific one, but also they have developed a set ofskills which might be called “designerly seeing,” and “designerlythinking.”
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

Embedded within the theoretical and conceptual frameworks implied bythe schemata theory and studies on architectural precedent knowledge,the present study is based on a research that investigates and evaluatestwo major issues within the context of architectural education. First isthe level and characteristics of the conceptual schema of the students ofarchitecture have had just before their education in architecture starts,and second, the nature, and the characteristic of that precise conceptualschema’s development and transformation throughout their formaleducation. This study, on the other hand, reports a comparative analysisand evaluation of two particular stages: 1st year, before their formaleducation starts, and 3rd year, as it was assumed by the study, as thestage when their disciplinary schemata is already roughly “formed.”Findings showed that students not only developed their conceptualschemata and their existing schemata is transformed into a morespecialized and field-specific one, but also they have developed a set ofskills which might be called “designerly seeing,” and “designerlythinking.”

🔖

Cite This Article

ANAY, H., ÖZTEN, Ü. (2022). On The Nature of The Conceptual Schemata Development of Architecture Students. ICONARP International Journal Of Architecture And Planning, Cilt: 7 - Sayı: 1, 78–98. https://ajindex.com/articles/538311

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (16)

  1. Akin, O. (2001). Variants in Design Cognition. In Design Knowing and Learning: Cognition in Design Education, edited by Charles M. Eastman, Mike McCracken and Wendy Newstetter. Elsevier. Akin, O., & Akin C. (1996). Frames of reference in architectural design: Analysing the hyperacclamation (A-h-a-!). Design Studies no. 17:341-361.
  2. Aydınlı, S.,(2015). Tasarım Eğitiminde Yapılandırıcı Paradigma: ‘Öğrenmeyi Öğrenme’ Tasarım ve Kuram Dergisi, Aralık, 20, 1-18.
  3. Bala, H.A., Arat, Y. (2013), Digital Pedagogy Using Social Network Tools in Architectural Education, AWER Procedia Information Technology and Computer Science 3 160-166
  4. Bartlett, F. C. (1995). Remembering: A Study in Experimental and Social Psychology. Cambridge, New York, Melbourne: Cambridge University Press.
  5. Berelson, B. (1952). Content Analysis in Communication Research Hafner Press.
  6. Caragonne, A. (1995). The Texas Rangers: Notes from the Architectural Underground, The MIT Press.
  7. Ciravoğlu, A. (2003). "Mimari Tasarım Eğitiminde Formel ve Enformel Çalışmalar Üzerine", Yapı Dergisi, 257, 43-47.
  8. Colquhoun, A. (1969). Typology and Design Method. Perspecta no. 12:71-74.
  9. Craig, D. L. (2001). Stalking Homo Faber: A Comparison of Research Strategies for Studying Design Behavior. In Design Knowing and Learning: Cognition in Design Education, edited by Charles M. Eastman, Mike McCracken and Wendy Newstetter. Elsevier. Cross, N. (1982) Designerly Ways of Knowing. Design Studies vol 3 no 4:221-227
  10. Danilson, W. (1977). Content Analysis in Communications Research. In Introduction to Mass Communications Research, edited by Ralph O. Nafziger and David Manning White. Lousiana State University Press.
  11. Devlin, K. (1990). An Examination of Architectural Interpretation: Architects Versus Non-Architects. Journal of Architectural and Planning Research no. 7 (3):235-244.
  12. DiMaggio, P. (1997). Culture and Cognition. Annual Review of Sociology no. 23:263-287.
  13. Fang, N. (1993). A Knowledge-Based Computational Approach to Architectural Precedent Analysis. DKS Research Group. Delft: TU Delft, Publicatieburo Bouwkunde. Gero, J. (1990). Design prototypes: a knowledge representation schema for design. AI Magazine (Winter): 27-36.
  14. Gür, B., Yüncü, O. (2010) An Integrated Pedagogy for 1/1 Learning, METU JFA, 27:2, 83-94.
  15. Hancock, J.E. (1986). Between History and Tradition: Notes toward a Theory of Precedent. The Harvard Architecture Review (Precedent and Invention).Vol. 5, p.p. 65-77.
  16. Jacob, F. (1993). The Logic of Life, a History of H