Embedding Inclusive Design Knowledge into the Learning Process in Architectural Education

Abstract

Teaching Inclusive Design (ID) philosophy in architectural education is very important since architects have major roles in (re)shaping the physical environment towards a more inclusive one. Herein, how to teach the design process with the ID approach remains an important issue. Although ID is constantly emphasized in theory and codes, its rights-based approach is lacking in architectural practices. It is still not handled at the level and scope it deserves in architectural education. Increasing the level of knowledge and awareness of architecture students at the point of inclusivity by spatial design can turn into a process that leads to the creation of original ID solutions. In this framework, the study aims to evaluate the effectiveness of five learning methods- (1)film analysis, (2)critical discourse, (3)analysis of users’ experiences, (4)case study analysis, (5)spatial analysis by comparison- in terms of the increase of ID knowledge and awareness for architecture students. The students’ viewpoints about their efficiencies are analysed through qualitative and quantitative methods which are content analysis and questionnaires respectively. This analysis aims to address at which level the learning methods enhance the increase of knowledge, awareness, and thereby creativity of students in design thinking to create ‘real’ inclusive buildings and public spaces. In conclusion, strategies for embedding ID knowledge into the learning process in architectural education are proposed. The result of the study highlights that ID needs to be conceptualized based on a right-based and democratic approach and in this way, holistically integrated into the education curriculum in multiple and various ways.

Keywords

• Architectural education
• Inclusive Design
• Learning method
• Design thinking
• Awareness

References

1. [1] Heylighen, A. (2008). Sustainable and inclusive design: a matter of knowledge?, Local Environment, 13(6), 531-540.
2. [2] Clarkson, P. J., Coleman, R., Keates, S., & Lebbon, C. (2003). Inclusive design: Design for the whole population. UK: Springer.
3. [3] Ostroff, E. (1997). Mining Our Natural Resources: The User as Expert. Innovation, the Quarterly Journal of the Industrial Designers Society of America, 16(1).
4. [4] Coleman, R., Clarkson, J., Dong, H. & Cassim, J. (2007). Design for Inclusivity: A Practical Guide to Accessible, Innovative and User-Centred Design. UK: Gower Publishing.
5. [5] Dinç, Uyaroğlu, İ. (2023). “Mahallede Kapsayıcı Kamusal Yaşam İçin Erişilebilirlik Denetimi [Controlling Accessibility for an Inclusive Public Life in a Neighbourhood]”, Planlama, 33(1), 123-142.
6. [6] Dinç Uyaroğlu, İ. (2015). Performance evaluation and design guidelines for equitable access of students with disabilities in university campus outdoor environments. Unpublished PhD thesis, Middle East Technical University, Ankara.
7. [7] Helvacioglu, E. & Karamanoğlu N. N. (2012). Awareness of the Concept of Universal Design in Design Education. In Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 51, 99-103.
8. [8] Sungur Ergenoglu, A. (2013). Accessibility awareness among architecture students: Design thinking evaluations in Yıldız Technical University. In Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 89, 312-317.

9. [9] Heylighen, A., Van der Linden, V. & Van Steenwinkel, I. (2017). Ten questions concerning inclusive design of the built environment. Building and Environment, 114, 507-517.
10. [10] Barnes, C. and Mercer, G. (2003). Disability. UK: Polity.
11. [11] Dinç Uyaroğlu, İ. (2008). Architectural Implications of Community-Based/Inclusive Rehabilitation Centers in the Light of Universal Design. Unpublished Master Thesis, Middle East Technical University, Ankara.
12. [12] Tutal, O. (2018). Üniversite Yerleşkeleri ve Erişilebilirlik. Avrasya Uluslararası Araştırmalar Dergisi, 6(15), 753-775.
13. [13] Baş Bütüner, F. & Güneri Söğüt, G. D. (2022). Mimarlık ve Peyzaj: Eğitime Dair Kesitler, Vaatler. Mimarlık, 428, 36-40.
14. [14] Dong, H. (2010). Strategies for teaching inclusive design. Journal of Engineering Design, 21(2–3), 238-251.
15. [15] Demirkol, H. G. & Döşer, M. Ö. (2022). Stüdyo Kültürü Bileşenleri. In Ö. Kandemir (Ed.), Mimari Tasarıma Gir-İş-Ler: Mimarlık Birinci Sınıf Stüdyo Belleği. Ankara: İksad Publications.
16. [16] Olguntürk, N. & Demirkan, H. (2009). Ergonomics and Universal Design in Interior Architecture Education. METU Journal of Faculty of Architecture, 26(2), 123-138.
17. [17] Sungur Ergenoglu, A. (2015). Universal design teaching in architectural education. In Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 174, 1397-1403.
18. [18] Gheerawo, R.R. & Donahue, S.J. (2004). Introducing user-centred design methods into design education. In S. Keates, J. Clarkson, P. Langdon & P. Robinson (Eds.), Designing a More Inclusive World, 21–30. London: Springer.
19. [19] Mulligan, K., Calder, A. & Mulligan, H. (2018). Inclusive design in architectural practice: Experiential learning of disability in architectural education. Disability and Health Journal, 11(2), 237-242.
20. [20] Altay, B. (2017). Multisensory Inclusive Design Education: A 3D Experience. The Design Journal, 20(6), 821-846.
21. [21] Hitch, D., Dell, K. & Larkin, H. (2016). Does universal design education impact on the attitudes of architecture students towards people with a disability?. Journal of accessibility and design for all, 16(1), 26-48.
22. [22] Christophersen, J. (Ed.) (2002). Universal Design: 17 Ways of Thinking and Teaching. Norway: Husbanken.
23. [23] Rowe, P. G. [1987] (1998). Design Thinking. USA: MIT Press.
24. [24] De Cauwer, P., Clement, M., Buelens, H. & Heylighen, A. (2009). Four reasons not to teach inclusive design. In Proceedings of Include 2009. London: Royal College of Art, Helen Hamlyn Centre.
25. [25] Bilsel, C. (2010). Kent Tasarımı ve Çevre Estetiği. In J. Erzen (Ed.), Kent Estetiği, Dosya, 23, TMMOB Mimarlar Odası Ankara Şubesi Süreli Yayını, 6-14.