Blucher Design Proceedings

Dezembro 2020, vol.8, num.4 - XXIV International Conference of the Iberoamerican Society of Digital Graphics
Conference full papers - Open Access Idioma principal | Segundo principal

The Forms of Representation in Architectural Design Teaching: The cases of AUIC-POLIMI and FAUP

The Forms of Representation in Architectural Design Teaching: The cases of AUIC-POLIMI and FAUP

Santos, Rafael Sousa; Vale, Clara Pimenta do; Bogoni, Barbara; Kirkegaard, Poul Henning

Conference full papers:

This paper presents the results of a research developed on the following problem: the relation between forms of representation and the architectural design teaching. The research had as its study object the Design Educational Model of two architecture schools: AUIC-POLIMI and FAUP. The objective of the research described in this paper was to characterize the didactic approach to design of both schools, focusing on the representative component and its role in design teaching.

This paper presents the results of a research developed on the following problem: the relation between forms of representation and the architectural design teaching. The research had as its study object the Design Educational Model of two architecture schools: AUIC-POLIMI and FAUP. The objective of the research described in this paper was to characterize the didactic approach to design of both schools, focusing on the representative component and its role in design teaching.

Download (PDF)

Palavras-chave:

DOI: 10.5151/sigradi2020-100

Referências bibliográficas
  • [1] Alves Costa, A. (1991). Páginas Brancas II. Porto: AEFAUP.
  • [2] Creswell, J. W. (1994). Research Design: Qualitative & Quantitative Approaches. Thousand Oaks, Calif.: Sage Publications.
  • [3] Dorta, T., Kinayoglu, G., & Boudhraa, S. (2016). A new representational ecosystem for design teaching in the studio. Design Studies, 47, 164-186.
  • [4] ESBAP. (1979). Regime de estudos : 79-80 : bases gerais / Escola Superior de Belas-Artes do Porto, Curso de Arquitectura. Porto: ESBAP.
  • [5] Gero, J. S., & Milovanovic, J. (2020). A framework for studying designthinking through measuringdesigners’ minds, bodies and brains. Design Society, 6, 1-40.
  • [6] Goldschmidt, G. (1989). Problem representation versus domain of solution in architectural design teaching. Journal of architectural and planning research, 204-215.
  • [7] Goldschmidt, G. (1991). The Dialectics of Sketching. Creativity Research Journal, 4, 123-143.
  • [8] Goldschmidt, G. (2014). Modeling the role of sketching in design idea generation. In A. Chakrabarti & L. T. M. Blessing (Eds.), An Anthology of Theories and Models of Design (pp. 433-450). London: Springer-Verlag.
  • [9] Goldschmidt, G. (2017). Manual sketching: Why is it still relevant? In S. Ammon & R. Capdevila-Werning (Eds.), The Active Image: Architecture and Engineering in the Age of Modeling. Cham: Springer.
  • [10] Hatch, J. A. (2002). Doing qualitative research in education settings. New York: State University of New York Press.
  • [11] Have, R., & Toorn, M. (2012). The role of hand drawing in basic design education in the digital age. Paper presented at the International Conference on Engineering and Mathemaatics, ENMA 2012.
  • [12] Herbert, D. (1988). Study Drawings in Architectural Design: Their Properties as a Graphic Medium. Journal of Architectural Education, 41, 26-38.
  • [13] Lyn, F., & Dulaney, R. (2009). A case for drawing. ARCC Journal, 6(1), 23-30.
  • [14] Manion, L., Cohen, L., & Morrison, K. (1980). Research Methods in Education. London: Routledge.
  • [15] Merriam, S. B. (1998). Qualitative Research and Case Study Applications in Education. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
  • [16] Milovanovic, J. (2019). Exploration of architectural design studio pedagogy: Effect of representational ecosystems on design critiques. (PhD thesis). Loire Bretagne University.
  • [17] Milovanovic, J., & Gero, J. S. (2020). Modeling Design Studio Pedagogy: A Mentored Reflective Practice. Paper presented at the International Design Conference - Design 2020.
  • [18] Nelson, G., & Stolterman, E. (2012). The design way: Intentional change in an unpredictable world. London: MIT Press.
  • [19] Oh, Y., Ishizaki, S., Gross, M. D., & Yi-Luen Do, E. (2013). A theoretical framework of design critiquing in architecture studios. Design Studies, 34, 302-325.
  • [20] Ortega y Gasset, J. (1983). Sobre el estudiar y el estudiante. In Obras Completas (pp. 545-554). Madrid: Alianza Editora.
  • [21] POLIMI. (2019a). Regolamento Didattico del Corso di Studio in: Architectural Design and History - Progettazione Architettonica e Storia, Laurea Magistrale. In: Politecnico di Milano.
  • [22] POLIMI. (2019b). Regolamento Didattico del Corso di Studio in: Progettazione dell'Architettura, Laurea Di Primo Livello. In: Politecnico di Milano.
  • [23] Portas, N. (1986). Páginas Brancas. Porto: FAUP.
  • [24] Purcell, A. T., & Gero, J. S. (1998). Drawings and the design process. Design Studies, 19, 389-430.
  • [25] Salkind, N. J. (2010). Encyclopedia of Research Design. London: SAGE Publications.
  • [26] Schön, D. A. (1983). The reflective practioner: How professionals think in action. New York: Basic Books.
  • [27] Schön, D. A. (1987). Educating the reflective Practitioner: Toward a new design for teaching and learning in the professions. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
  • [28] Schön, D. A. (1992). Designing as reflective conversation with the materials of a design situation. Knowledge-Based Systems, 5(1), 3-14.
  • [29] Self, J., & Goldschmidt, G. (2018). Sketch Representation and Design as Generative Transformation. In P. Vermaas & S. Vial (Eds.), Advancements in the Philosophy od Design. Cham: Springer.
  • [30] Siza Vieira, Á. (2000). Imaginar a evidência. Lisbon: Edições 70. Siza Vieira, Á. (2009). 01 textos. Porto: Civilização.
  • [31] Stake, R. E. (1995). The art of case study research. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.
  • [32] Távora, F. (1982). Da organização do espaço. Porto: ESBAP.
  • [33] Távora, F. (1991). Intorno alla scuola di Porto. Casabella 579, 57.
  • [34] Toorn, M. (2012). Notebooks as didactic tools in design education. Paper presented at the International Conference on Engineering and Mathematics, ENMA.
  • [35] Toorn, M., & Guney, A. (2011). Precedent analysis in landscape architecture: In search of an analytical framework. Paper presented at the IASDR2011: The 4th Conference on Design Research, Delft.
  • [36] Tversky, B., & Suwa, M. (2009). Thinking with sketches. In A. Markman & K. Wood (Eds.), Tools for Innovation. Oxford: Oxford Scholarship Online.
  • [37] Visser, W. (2006). The cognitive artifacts of designing. New York: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
  • [38] Williams, D.-O., & Sanchez-Del-Valle, C. (2008). Overlaps, Boundaries and Continuities: Transforming Sketch. Paper presented at the Seeking the City: Visionaries on the Margins- Proceedings from the 96th ACSA.
  • [39] Yin, R. K. (1984). Case Study Research. London: Sage Publications.
  • [40] Yin, R. K. (2011). Qualitative Research from Start to Finish. London: The Guilford Press.Williams, J. H. (2008). Employee engagement: Improving anticipation in safety. Professional Safety, 53(12), 40-45.
Como citar:

Santos, Rafael Sousa; Vale, Clara Pimenta do; Bogoni, Barbara; Kirkegaard, Poul Henning; "The Forms of Representation in Architectural Design Teaching: The cases of AUIC-POLIMI and FAUP", p-726-733. In: Congreso SIGraDi 2020. São Paulo: Blucher, 2020.
ISSN 23186968, DOI 10.5151/sigradi2020-100

últimos 30 dias

112
downloads

296
visualizações

782
indexações