IJAR, Vol. 4- Issues 23 - July-November 2010 Towards Total Integration in Design Studio

7/28/2019 IJAR, Vol. 4- Issues 23 - July-November 2010 Towards Total Integration in Design Studio

1/10

TOWARDS TOTAL INTEGRATION IN DESIGN STUDIO

S. A. Deshpande and Asif R. Khan

Archnet-IJ AR, International J ournal of Architectural Research

Copyright 2010 Archnet-IJAR, Volume 4 - Issues 2-3 - J uly and November 2010 - (252-261)

252

AbstractTransmission of knowledge has been defined as bringingthe right knowledge by the right route at the right timeto the right places. In this context there is need toanalyze the various pedagogical shifts assoc iated withthe decisive process of transmission and transaction ofknowledge in design studio. Critical understanding of theimportance of tangential knowledge and its integrationwithin the design studio, leading to a comprehensive

whole, is a significant aspect to be properly evolvedand nourished in the studio.

It can be argued that knowledge is not a substitute forarchitectural imagination but inadequate knowledgewould handicap the general level of design. Beingsatisfied to manipulate formal configurations doesnot provide insights into the human experience. If thedifferent types of knowledge that architecture requiresare ignored, the profession will lose its credibility in the

eyes of soc iety. With the body of knowledge expandingdiversely with the escalating wants of the user, and

to further sustain the built environment with furtherprogression, its quite certain to have an innovativedesign process that has a feel of antecedents yet is

nourished by rationalism.

Architectural Design is to an extent the yield of a c reative

process brought out through a refined approach, skill,and dexterity to suit the purpose. The assessors, the

jury, or the teacher has created an aura of mystique

around good design, without much explaining whatgood design is. Architectural education involves

application of a theory of knowledge what is knownand how it is to be known. Nothing is taught unless it is

learnt (Bono). Does the key to these issues lie in shiftingfrom conventional mode to Total Integration Mode ofEducation?

KeywordsDesign studio, architectural education, applied

knowledge, integration.

Special Volume:Design Edu c ation: Exp lorations and Prospe c ts for a Better Buil t Environm entAshraf M. Salam a a nd M icha el J. Crosbie (ed i tors)

Figure 1: Critica l Domains Body of Knowledge.

(Source: Authors).

ParadigmsandPositions


2/10

Archnet-IJ AR, International J ournal of Architectural Research - Volume 4 - Issues 2-3 - J uly and November 2010

Tow a rds Tot a l Inte g ration in Design Stud io

S.

A.

DESHPANDEAND

ASIFR.KHAN

253

Introduction: the Studio in Architecture

The Studio in Architecture has held its swayfor about a century now. The 20th Century iscommonly accepted as the most importantperiod in the development of the human intellec tthrough cultural, moral, and scientific as well assoc ial and religious transformation.

In the early stages, the studio as an analogicallearning environment borrowed and adoptedthe domain of the artists creative activity

space, which was personal in nature. Later, asin most art schools, a master artist imparted hisstyle and technique to the learners who werefew in number (Toy). Gradually, the studio wasinstitutionalized to allow more students andmore artists to impart mainly the skills of handlingthe subject of painting, the techniques of thebrushwork, and the chemistry of the medium. Toa large degree the studios in music and sculpture

bore similarities.

The culture of the architecture studio was linkedto learningpreparation of drawings from which

buildings could emerge. This approach graduallychanged during the movement of Modern

Architecture. It is well known how the new mastersfaced the challenges of the new materials ofconstruction and the emerging new forms. Thestudio was now transformed from the apprenticeto the atelier and then to institutionalizedenvironments for learning architecture design.Practice and the philosophy of the mastersinfiltrated the studio, as in Bauhaus in Germany(Droste), and to a large degree jeopardizedthe established means and methods. Studyof new building materials, techniques of theirapplication, and influence due to market forcesalong with the concern for rationalism seemedto dominate the designers mind more than theromanticized approach of the earlier days. Inrecent years globalization has brought about anumber of radical changes that are offering newpedagogical challenges and possibilities.

The studio today in most architecture schoolshad successfully produced portfolios of drawings not necessarily design. It is more fragmentedthan amalgamated. Fragments have become

Figure 2: Desired yieldfrom transmission andtransac tion o f learning.(Source: Authors).


3/10

Archnet-IJ AR, International J ournal of Architectural Research - Volume 4 - Issues 2-3 - J uly and November 2010


S.

A.

DESHPANDEAND

ASIFR.KHAN

254

a domain for the studio teacher leading tothe loss of the comprehensiveness of the design

studio (Deshpande, D is for Design). The usualscenario of evaluation of Learning Process inthe design studio of a student is often limited tothe End Product/Portfolio appraisal and criticismby a panel of experts. What the student hasassimilated throughout the tedious years oftransmission and transaction of learning is oftennot properly understood.

As we all know, design is an iterative process,

involving research, , and the integration ofknowledge. It takes time, space, and carefulmentoring to acquire the practical andmental agility, the complex interaction of skills,knowledge, and creativity that is central to thepractice of architectural design. What of studioculture? How does one start to define such athing?

Total Integration

Disproportionate focus on design as a productrather than a process is a cause for academicconcern. This situation has arisen in the designstudios due to the lack of understanding ofthe critical linkage between the essentials ofdesign studio: the conception of architecturedesign, the design process, and the teaching

style (Wilkinson). It has been our practice to splitarchitecture study by subject that forms the

core--the technical and the humanities streams.Architectural design, per se, is not to be seen asa subject of study by itself, but an opportunityto bring together into a comprehensive wholethe subject matter and knowledge acquiredfrom peripheral area of study. If we acceptDesign as the soul of learning architecture it isomnipresent. It has no physical existence, but likethe human soul is present only as a spirit. Onecan dare say therefore, that Design is the resultof a process of integration of the real and thepalpable material that is provided by other areasof study that are essentially of an applied natureand the emotive response of the learner. Assuch, Design ought to be seen not as a subjectof learning but an application of what is learnedfrom support subjects to Design. The studio is likea crucible where all applied knowledge andthe essentials of design melt into each other to

obtain a unified whole. This is what we call as theTotal Integration.

This is what Mies attempted within the vast spaceof the Crown Hall. Although the idea is decadesold it can be acceptable in principle. If thestudio as a vechile has to deliver architecture,then it could be what Gropius called TotalArchitecture. Every teacher can be treated as a

Figure 3: Critical Domains Tota l Integration..(Source: Authors).


4/10Archnet-IJ AR, International J ournal of Architectural Research - Volume 4 - Issues 2-3 - J uly and November 2010


S.

A.

DES

HPANDEAND

ASIFR.KHAN

255

design teacher, contributing to the integrationof the cognitive domain of adjunct subject at

various levels of teaching. The concept of anintegrated studio for the realisation of TotalArchitecture is not necesseraliy new, but aninnovative approach is needed to be adoptedin its implementation (Deshpande, I Studio).

The rigid format that has been established andfollowed today in many schools must loosenup. But we can derive some solace from theuniversal English proverb Old order changethyielding place to the new.

Transition is a historical phenomenon. It isimportant because it links the previous withthe next. The present is always transitory. Wehave experienced such transition. It is withretrospection that we evaluate the present.

There is that uncanny feeling that our studiosdo not foster creativity. In fact, the studio mightactually be suffocating it (Badrinarayan). True as

it may be, our studios are fragmented, isolated,irrelevant, soulless, and whatever spirit thatmay have remained is gradually evaporating.

Transition as a process of change indeed can beexcruciating. Ignoring the winds of change willresult in our adopting the action of an ostrich!

This transition could be based on a unique andinnovative approach:

- Methodology should be a practical way offollowing a process, a movement from a knownbeginning to an unknown end.

- In design process one is always trying torestructure concepts one is continually havingto generate fresh approaches.

Integration of Students

Architecture pedagogy has been a complexprocess since initiation of formal educationmodes. Educators have focused heavily on

theories of design that determine these methods.Philosophical, theoretical, and practical issueshave played a pivotal role in determining theright process to be implemented in a particularcontext and the same updated with time bythe introduction of various new domains ofbodies of knowledge into the architecturalpretext. But the paradox of the issue is the lackof understanding of the levels of transition in

maturity levels of the learner during the stages/duration of the architectural study programand the psychological and emotional impactson the process of integration of knowledge(Educational_technology).

Pedagogy is derived from the Greek word paidmeaning child, plus agogos, meaningleading, therefore defined as the art of leadingand teaching children. The pedagogical

Figure 4: Split Structure --Architec tural Educ ation (Source:Authors).




S.

A.

DES

HPANDEAND

ASIFR.KHAN

256

model is a content model concerned with thetransmission of information and skills, where the

teacher decides in advance what knowledgeor skill needs to be transmitted and arranges abody of content into logical units, selects themost efficient means for transmitting this content(lectures, studio work, readings, laboratoryexercises, films, tapes, for example), thendevelops a plan for the evaluation of learningby the learners. Pedagogy is a teaching theory,rather than a learning theory, and is usuallybased on transmission.

Andragogy is derived from the Greek wordsanere, meaning man, and agogos,meaning leading, and is used by adult theoristsand educators to describe the theory of adultlearning. Learning theory is usually based ontransmission. Theories of transmission work onthe basis offilling deficits in student knowledgeand comprehension of their environment, while

theories of transaction work on the basis ofaddressing the immediate, practical needs ofcontext-dependent learners (Alexander_Kapp).

Offering an alternative to pedagogy, theandragogical model considers the followingissues to be addressed in the learning process:allowing the learner to know why something isimportant to learn; showing the learner how todirect themselves through information; relatingthe topic to the learners experiences individualswill not learn until ready and motivated to learn;and finally, a need to have a life-centered, task-centered, or problem-centered orientation.

The andragogical model was conceived byKnowles (1984) and is predicated on five basicassumptions about learners, all of which havesome relationship to our notions about a learnersability, need and desire to take responsibility for

their learning (Malcolm_Knowles):

Self-c on c ep t: As a p erson m a tures his or

her sel f-c onc ep t mo ves from one of be ing a

de pe ndent p ersona l it y towa rd one of be ing a

sel f-d irec ted huma n b eing.

Expe rienc e: A s a p erson ma tures he or she

ac c umulates a g row ing reservoir of exper ienc e

that b ec om es an inc rea sing resource for

learning.

Rea d iness to lea rn. As a p erson ma tures his

or her rea d iness to lea rn b ec om es oriente d

inc rea sing ly to the d eve lop menta l tasks of hissoc ial ro les.

Orienta t ion to lea rning. As a p erson m a tures

his or her t im e p ersp ec tive c ha ng es from one

of po stponed ap p l ic a t ion o f knowled ge to

imm ed iac y o f ap p l ica t ion , and a cc ord ing ly

his orien ta tion tow a rd lea rning shifts from on e

of subjec t -c enteredne ss to o ne of p rob lem

centeredness.

Mo tiva t ion to lea rn: As a p erson m a tures them otiva tion to lea rn is inte rna l (Know les 1984:12).

This is in sharp contrast with pedagogicalteaching, where the concern is with transmittingthe content; in andragogy, the concern iswith facilitating the acquisition of the content.Andragogy requires adult learners to be involvedin the identification of their learning needs andthe planning of how those needs are satisfied,

and learning should be an active rather than apassive process.

Andragogy is based on a transactional processof design where the teacher manages aprocess for facilitating the acquisition of contentby the learners and serves as a contentresource (who can) provide leads for othercontent resources (Knowles, 1980).




S.

A.

DES

HPANDEAND

ASIFR.KHAN

257

A proper rea lization would help in modulatingthe change as per present/ future requirement.What is needed is a unique process to bring

about integration of students during variousstages of learning, a process catering to andunderstanding the overall development ofthe learner as he/she progress in age with thestages/duration of the program. This holisticapproach would lead to the rea lization of thisdomain related to students, as part of TotalIntegration in all its glory.

Integration of Faculty

Design is the core subject, accounting for40% or more of the teaching time (MinimumStandards 1983). It is the main stream ofarchitecture studies into which other subjectstreams are said to converge. In terms of theweight of marks it, too, is the heaviest. Eventhe philosophy of a school is seen through its

attitude to design teac hing. It may even have

the honor of being the most widely discussed.Its syllabus is also written in a way that makesimpressive reading, but gives the least

direction to a new teacher on how to teachit. In fact, the position at some top schools isthat design cannot be taught.

The design issues to be dealt with in thestudios is often generated in an unsystematicmanner. By and large, design problems areset in an off-the-c uff manner. The visitingstudio master attempts to incorporate c urrentprojects that she or he is involved in as the

design focus without taking into account theactivities carried out in the previous designstudio, while the full-time critic evolves designissues in a pragmatic manner, resulting ina puzzled transition state of mind when astudent moves ahea d in his or her studio ranks.

This tedious process of initiation of the designissue is backed by evaluations of works of thestudents by the jury panel. Thus the design

issue slowly transforms into design ultimately,

Figure 5: Integration of Students Critica l Components. (Source: Authors).

T d T t l I t t i i D i St d i




S.

A.

DES

HPANDEAND

ASIFR.KHAN

258

duly assessed, and returned. The facultyassumes that transmission and transactionhave successfully taken place. If a few of uscan say that this is not how we teach design,it only shows how true it is.

Molding a learning process requires adedicated group of faculties working withinthe framework of a carefully developedpedagogy that teaches a body of knowledge.Students would benefit from a stronglydeveloped sense of increasing competenceand the ability to learn, from being productivein design and problem solving, and fromunderstanding their work within a framework

of a larger body of knowledge.Students and faculty alike would benefitfrom an agreed-upon and explicit body ofknowledge and pedagogy that providesthe basis for constant improvement. Such aprocess would initiate an series of activitiesthat unites the faculty members and thetransmission/transaction process to delivera whole rather than broken up fragments.

Leading to the realization is Integration of

fac ulty as part of Total Integration.

Integration of Applied Knowledge Bodyof Knowledge

The most critica l domain; Integration of AppliedKnowledge Body of Knowledge is vital forestablishing the pillars of education process Curriculum, Pedagogy, and Assessment.

Framing, adopting, and implementing aUniversal Comparative Approach with a focuson regionalism could become the area ofrevitalization and thought at various schools of

architecture. The main thrust of such an approachshould be towards international proficiency andachieving minimal competence, rather thanproducing a few genius architects. Architecturaleducation is a sub-domain of educationtechnology and associated with the entirespectrum of human activities. The awareness ofinputs of educational technology and biologicalresponse of the learners would elevate studios

to greater heights of practicability.

Figure 6: Integration o f Fac ulty C ritical Components.. (Source: Authors).





S.

A.

DES

HPANDEAND

ASIFR.

KHAN

259

A noble venture towards realization ofIntegration of Applied Knowledge has beeninitiated at SMM College of Architecture, NagpurUniversity, India, in the form of a Post-GraduateProgram open to practicing architects as wellas to teaching fraternity, dedicated towardsrevitalization and improvement of architectural

education (Smt. MM College of Architecture,Nagpur).

Architectural education involves applicationof a theory of knowledge what is known andhow it is to be known. Nothing is taught unless itis learnt.

Figure 7: Domains ofApp lied Knowledge.(Source: Authors).





S.

A.

DES

HPANDEAND

ASIFR.

KHAN

260

Concluding Remarks

The realization of the need for remarkable

paradigm Shift from the established conventionalmodes of transmission and transaction toa refined mode necessitates rethinking thearchitectural education process. The properunderstanding of the various domains ofintegration and modes of approach could actas the pathway towards evolving new models ofteaching architectural design. The architecturalteaching fraternity must start on a new journey

toward self realization and to mold buddingminds in the most appropriate manner. Theparadigm shift is towards focusing more on theindividuals understanding and assertion withthe design realm and the built environment.

References

Alexander Kapp. Retrieved February 15, 2010, fromWiipedia The Free Encyclopedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexander_Kapp

Badrinarayan, A. S. (2008). Three Holy Myths ofArchitectural Education In India. Abacus, Spring Issue- Architectural Education: Vol.3, No.1 .

Bono, E. D. (2008). The Free Mind. Delhi: JaicoPublishing House.

Council of Architecture,New Delhi, India. RetrievedFebruary 10, 2010, from www.coa.gov.in: http://www.coa.gov.in/school/admission.htm.

Droste, M. (2002). Bauhaus: 1919-1933. Berlin:Taschen.

Educational Technology. Retrieved March 28, 2010,from en.wikipedia.org: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Educational_technology.

Malcolm Knowles. Retrieved February 25, 2010,from en.wikipedia.org: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/

Malcolm_Knowles.

Martin Pearce, M. T. (1995). EDUCATING ARCHITECTS.Ac ademy Editions.

S.A.Deshpande, P. (2006). D is for Design.Architecture - Time, Space & People .

Salama, A. M. and Wilkinson, N. (2007). Design StudioPedagogy: Horizons for the Future, Gateshead,United Kingdom: The Urban International Press.

Smt. M.M C ollege of Architecture, Nagpur. RetrievedFebruary 8, 2010, from www.ladarch.com: http://

www.ladarch.com/ .

----------------------------Shireesh A DeshpandeShireesh A De shp a nd e is c urrently Em e ritus Profe sso r in

the Post Grad ua te c ourse in Archi tec ture Edu c a t ion.

He has been teach ing Arch i tec tu re Des ign and

Histo ry for ove r 40 yea rs in the N a g p ur Unive rsity. He

ha s guide d 4 sc holars in the ir Ph D p rog ra m s an d

sev era l stud en ts in Ma sters c ou rse in Urb a n Pla nning .

He w orked in C ha nd iga rh d ur ing in i tia l stag es of its

c on struction . La ter he w a s Assoc ia te Pla nne r in Delhi

Deve lop m ent A uthor ity (1961-63) a nd C hief Archi tec t

Pla nne r for Gujarat Refine ry Projec t in Ba rod a

(1963-65). He wa s a pp ointed Professor and Hea d

Dep a rtme nt of Archi tec ture Na gp ur University whe re

he d eve lope d Design Me thod o logy . In h is prac t ic e

he d esig ne d Ca m p uses for Ag ric ulture Universit ies.

Prof De shp a nd e w a s resp on sib le in sta rt ing the M a ster

o f A rch i tec tu re in A rch i tec tu re Educ a t ion in Nagp ur

Unive rsity in 2005. He ha s d ev elop ed innova tive

me thod s in Design Ped ag og y b y in t rod uc ing C rea t ive

Exercises in t he Stud ios. Desig n Proc ess Doc um en t fo rB Arc h c ou rses is fol low ed in othe r sc ho ols a s we ll.

Born 22nd Sep tem be r 1934, he is a c t ive ly enga ge d

in resea rc h and wro te ove r 70 pa pe rs ma ny of wh ich

a re p ub lished .

--------------------------------------------------

Asif R KhanAsif R Kha n is c urrently w o rking a s Se nior Fa c ulty

m em be r wi th Tam il Nad u Sc hoo l of Archi tec ture,

Co imbato re . He has been ac t i ve ly invo lved w i th

Arch itec tu re Prac t ice and Ac ad em ic Ac t iv it ies fo r

Tow a rds Tot a l Inte g ration in Design Stud io261




S.

A.

DES

HPANDEAND

ASIFR.

KHAN

261

ov er 8 yea rs. He is a ssoc iate d w ith Sm t. M .M Co lleg e

of Arc hitec ture, Nag pu r a s a Resea rch Sc holar . He has

wo rked wi th va rious Sc hoo ls of A rc hitec ture in India a s

a visit ing Fac ulty m em be r. He ha s be en instrum enta l ininit iat ing the Inte rior Design Co urses for Ca d d C en tre,

Che nna i. He has also w orked in Midd le Ea st and wi th

va rious Archi tecture Co nsultan c ies in India on va rious

sign ific a nt p rojec ts. Op erate s a Design Studio ww w.

susta inab leho r izonstud io.c om Born 30th Nove m be r

1979, wishes to p ropa ga te a rc hi tec ture w ith soc ia l

co nsc ience . He ca n be c onta c te d a t ar .asif .k a t

gma i l . c om .

Documents

IJAR, Vol. 4- Issues 23 - July-November 2010 Towards Total Integration in Design Studio