Phenomenology in Basic Design Education: Studio and Its Phenomena

Abstract

Based on the necessity of rethinking the traditional and stereotyped approaches, methods and tools in architecture and design education; the basic design education, in which the student transforms from a passive listener role to an active learner role; contrary to the widespread studies in this field, it is aimed to discuss the potential of being evaluated by focusing on the student, not the instructor. Basic design education, as a multi-layered and directional learning area where many methods and tools are applied, including traditional, thematic and experimental, includes many phenomena and their relations. This study aims to examine the phenomena of the studio in this context, while discussing that phenomenology can be a research method in the examination and evaluation of the basic design studio. Studio phenomena that have the potential to become the object of study in phenomenology; are the studio components including the actor, the action, the tool and/or the method, and the studio output. Studio components are determined by considering the perception, point of view, thought, emotion, and how the phenomenon is described, experienced and interpreted, as suggested by phenomenology. This essay explores the potentials of phenomenology in design education and serves as a reference for future works.

Keywords

• Architectural design education
• Basic design studio
• Phenomenology
• Phenomenon

References

1. [1] Lyotard, J. F. (1954/2021). Fenomenoloji (Çev. Birkan, İ.) Ankara: Dost.
2. [2] Moran, D. (2000). Introduction to Phenomenology. ABD: Routledge.
3. [3] Tilley, C.A., (1994). Phenomenology of Landscape: Places, Paths and Monuments. ABD: Berg.
4. [4] Sokolowski, R. (1964). The Formation of Husserl's Concept of Constitution. The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff.
5. [5] Seamon, D. (2000). A Way of Seeing People and Place: Phenomenology in Environment-Behavior. Research. Theoretical Perspectives in Environment-Behavior Research içinde (Ed. Wapner, S., Demick, J., Yamamoto, J., Minami, H.). ABD: Plenum.
6. [6] Tepe, H. (2017). Giriş. Fenomenoloji Üzerine Beş Ders içinde. Ankara: Bilgesu.
7. [7] Husserl, E. (1962/2017). Fenomenoloji Üzerine Beş Ders (Çev. Tepe, H.). Ankara: Bilgesu.
8. [8] Rockmore, T. (2009/2020). Hegel, Husserl ve Epistemolojik Fenomenoloji Üzerine. Varoluşçuluk, Fenomenoloji, Ontoloji içinde (Der. Ateşoğlu, G., Çev. Yazıcı, S., Atay, H., Evren, C., Özmakas, U., Balanuye, Ç., Bal, M., Kurtar, S., Sonyürek, E. T., Gülenç, K., Duru, A. İ., Gelmez, A., Soysal, D., Soysal, S.) İstanbul: Ayrıntı.

9. [9] Tekindal, M., Uğuz Arsu, Ş. (2020). Nitel Araştırma Yöntemi Olarak Fenomenolojik Yaklaşımın Kapsamı ve Sürecine Yönelik Bir Derleme. Ufkun Ötesi Bilim Dergisi, 20 (1), 153-182.
10. [10] Creswell, J. W. (2009). Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
11. [11] Kırlı Özer, G. (2020). Katmanlı Kentlerin Fenomenolojik Bakış Açısıyla Analizi için Bir Model Önerisi: İznik Örneği. Bursa Uludağ University, Graduate School of Natural Applied School, Doctoral Thesis.
12. [12] Miller, G. A. (2003). The cognitive revolution: A historical perspective. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 7(3), 141–144.