A comparative analysis of methods for triggering “creative thinking†in design studios
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
“Design Studio†is acknowledged as the core course for “spatial design†in both architecture and interior architecture education. The main idea of the design studio is based on uniting all the gathered information from other classes in a context of an architectural project. The key expectation from the studio is to teach ‘how to think creatively’. This paper, particularly concentrates on interior architecture education. Design studios in Turkey, mostly use what is referred as the “contextual model†which starts with a given problem/ situation and proceeds from that given context. During the process of this approach, the instructor guides the student, discusses space generation and corrects technical mistakes. Taking “creative thinking†into consideration, it is important to constitute another model, which is referred as the “conceptual modelâ€. This process starts with student’s thoughts triggered by chosen materials, and the instructor communicates through abstract and intellectual thinking, discusses idea generation and, corrects technical mistakes. In this paper, the method of comparative analysis is used to examine the advantages and disadvantages of each above mentioned design studio model. The comparison of models is done by criteria derived from Salama’s (1995) survey about the current situation in design studios. As a result of the study it is observed that, both models have some advantages and disadvantages regarding seven excogitated design studio criteria.
Keywords: design education, design studio, creative thinking, ınterior architecture.
Downloads
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).
References
Akın, O. (1983). Role models in architectural education. In P. G. Burgess, The role of the architect in society (pp. 9 - 14). Pittsburg: Carnegie-Mellon University, Dept. of Architecture,.
Andreasen, N. (2011). Yaratıcı Beyin Dehanın Norobilimi. (K. Güney, Trans.) Ankara: Arkadas Yayınevi.Carlhian, J. (1979). The Ecole Des Beaux-Arts: Modes and Manners. Journal of Architectural Education, 33(2), 7 - 17.
Ibrahim, N. L. N., & Utaberta, N. (2012). Learning in Architecture Design Studio. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 60, 30-35.
Rawlinson, G. (1995). Yaratıcı Düsünme ve Beyin Fırtınası. İstanbul: Rota Yayın Tanıtım.
Uluoglu, B. (1990). Mimari Tasarım Egitimi: Tasarım Bilgisi Baglamında Stüdyo Elestrileri. İstanbul: İstanbul Teknik Üniversitesi, Yayınlanmamıs Doktora Tezi.
Whithford, F. (1984). Bauhaus. London: Thames & Hudson.