Teaching Aperture Design in Architecture: A Pedagogical Approach to Illumination, Structure, and Space

Year 2024, , 409 - 428, 20.12.2024

Rabbia Tanveer Alam

https://doi.org/10.46474/jds.1527343

Abstract

This study investigates the pedagogical approach focusing on the integration of iterative learning, interdisciplinary collaboration, and hands-on prototyping by a project of aperture design within a studio-based architecture course. Therefore, the purpose of this study is to identify the potential of these approaches in improving students’ comprehension of the interdependence between apertures and essential aspects of architecture like light and space. The researchers employ a qualitative case-study approach with feedback and collaboration within and across disciplines and four phases of conceptual designing and full-scale mock up construction. The primary objective was to assess how these teaching methods enhance students' comprehension and conception of the relationship between apertures and key architectural elements such as light, structure, and spatial experience.

Undergraduate students of 5th semester architecture at National College of Arts Rawalpindi initiated a systematic, four-stage, conceptual design of openings (doors, windows, skylights etc.) which underwent critique sessions and feedback from fellow students majoring in Fine Arts and Visual Communication subjects. The last step was the creation of life size mock-ups facilitating an understanding by students of how to design and actually build their solutions. The difference in this approach was to try and close the conceptual-practical divide where the students could apply theoretical knowledge to the practical works while getting feedback from their peers and instructors.

The results verify significant enhancement of the student learning in a number of areas, including light control and management, material application, and the balance between beauty and utility of a space. Integrating feedback from other disciplines was also central to broadening the students’ design views of a space and aperture design ideas. The repeated application of the design-bid-review-construct cycle encouraged abstract thinking and the assessment of designs depending on performance.

A major contribution of this study is the application of the experiential learning models in architecture and finding that, hands-on design tasks with support from interdisciplinary faculty can meaningfully boost the students’ technical lore and conception knowledge. In view of that, future studies could build on these findings and adopt the use of digital technology and assess the experience and impact of such pedagogy at a senior level during the undergraduate study of architecture and interior design.

Keywords

Architectural pedagogy, Prototypes, Explorative research, Light and architecture

Ethical Statement

Ethics Committee Approval: N/A.

Supporting Institution

National College of Arts, Rawalpindi

Thanks

Thanks

References

• Addington, D. M., & Schodek, D. L. (2012). Smart Materials and New Technologies: For the Architecture and Design Professions. Architectural Press.
• Akin, Ö. (2002). Case-based Instruction Strategies in Architecture. Journal of Architectural Education, 55(3), 221-229. https://doi.org/10.1162/104648802753657888
• Anthony, K. H. (1991). Design Juries on Trial: The Renaissance of the Design Studio. Van Nostrand Reinhold. Biggs, J., & Tang, C. (2011). Teaching for Quality Learning at University: What the Student Does (4th ed.). Open University Press.
• Brown, T. (2009). Change by Design: How Design Thinking Creates New Alternatives for Business and Society. Harper Collins.
• Bustán-Gaona, D., Ayala-Chauvin, M., Buele, J., Jara-Garzón, P., & Riba-Sanmartí, G. (2023). Natural Lighting Performance of Vernacular Architecture, Case Study Oldtown Pasa, Ecuador. Energy Conversion and Management: X, 20, 100494. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecmx.2022.100494
• Chickering, A. W., & Gamson, Z. F. (1987). Seven Principles for Good Practice in Undergraduate Education. American Association for Higher Education Bulletin, 39(7), 3-7.
• Ching, F. D. K. (2014). Building Construction Illustrated (5th ed.). Wiley.
• Cross, N. (2011). Design Thinking: Understanding How Designers Think and Work. Berg.
• Cuff, D. (1991). Architecture: The Story of Practice. MIT Press.
• Curtis, W. J. R. (1996). Modern Architecture since 1900. Phaidon Press.
• Dewey, J. (1938). Experience and Education. Kappa Delta Pi.
• Diaz-Guerra, B. B., Raposo Grau, J. F., & de la Rosa, M. A. S. (2024, March). Elements of Architecture: Between Pedagogy and Practice. In Congreso Internacional de Expresión Gráfica Arquitectónica (pp. 199-206). Springer Nature Switzerland.
• Fisher, R., & Scriven, M. (1997). Critical Thinking: Its Definition and Assessment. Edgepress.
• Frampton, K. (2020). Modern Architecture: A Critical History (5th ed.). Thames & Hudson.
• Givoni, B. (1998). Climate considerations in building and urban design. Wiley.
• Goldschmidt, G. (2014). Linkography: Unfolding the design process. MIT Press.
• Hawkes, D. (2019). The environmental imagination: Technics and poetics of the architectural environment. Taylor & Francis.
• Kahn, L. I. (1991). Writings, lectures, interviews. Rizzoli.
• Kolb, D. A. (1984). Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and development. Prentice-Hall.
• Lawson, B. (2006). How designers think: The design process demystified (4th ed.). Architectural Press.
• Lechner, N. (2014). Heating, cooling, lighting: Sustainable design methods for architects (4th ed.). Wiley.
• Masatlıoğlu, C. S. E., & Balaban, Ö. C. (2024). Reflective thinking and self-assessment: A model for the architectural design studio. Journal of Design for Resilience in Architecture and Planning, 5(1), 35-49. https://doi.org/10.3311/jdrap.2024.1
• Oxman, R. (2006). Theory and design in the first digital age. Design Studies, 27(3), 229-265. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2005.11.001
• Pallasmaa, J. (2024). The eyes of the skin: Architecture and the senses. John Wiley & Sons.
• Piaget, J. (1973). Psychology and epistemology. Grossman.
• Salama, A. M. (2016). Spatial design education: New directions for pedagogy in architecture and beyond. Routledge.
• Salama, A. M., & Wilkinson, N. (2007). Design studio pedagogy: Horizons for the future. Urban International Press.
• Schön, D. A. (2017). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. Routledge.
• Sennett, R. (2008). The craftsman. Yale University Press.
• Sholanke, A., Fadesere, O., & Elendu, D. (2021, March). The role of artificial lighting in architectural design: A literature review. In IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science, 665(1), 012008. https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/665/1/012008
• Unwin, S. (2009). Analysing architecture (3rd ed.). Routledge.
• Webster, H. (2008). Architectural education after Schön: Cracks, blurs, boundaries and beyond. Journal for Education in the Built Environment, 3(2), 63-74. https://doi.org/10.11120/jebe.2008.03020063