Basic Design Workshop Experiences from Thought to Object, from Abstract to Concrete: Texture

Year 2024, Volume: 10 Issue: 2, 98 - 113, 17.12.2024

Pınar Kısa Ovalı , Bilge Ataç Özsoy

Abstract

Abstract: This article aims to evaluate and investigate the student achievements as a result of different applications of the 'texture' element in the workshops conducted within the scope of the basic design course, which forms the basis of architectural education. Different applications made within the scope of the 'texture' element in the Basic Design I course of spread over a period of ten years (2013-2023) constitute the subject of the study. This study, in which the place and importance of 'texture' as one of the ways of enabling architecture students to gain a new understanding by developing their thought system and creativity, is investigated by comparing different method constructs; It is evaluated through the applications titled 'inductive and deductive texture', 'texture in the footsteps of famous painters' and 'texture in the creative process'. As a result of the study, it was determined that 'texture' in deduction, induction, recreation and creative processes, the limits imposed on the student at the design stage create a partial restriction on creativity, but do not limit creativity in texture products, rational knowledge together with the creativity of the student, Rational knowledge is combined with the student's creativity, intuition and experience, allowing an original approach to be developed for each new product in a continuous feedback process. It also demonstrates the need to question and re-evaluate the traditional teaching methods used in basic design courses and to broaden the student's perspective.

Keywords

Basic Design, Texture, deduction, induction, architecture education

References

• Dufrenne, M. (1973). Phenomenology of Aesthetic Experience. Evanston: Northwestern University Press.
• Merleau-Ponty, M. (1995). Signs, Evanston: Northwestern University Press.
• Vitrivius, (2021). Mimarlık Üzerine On Kitap, çev. Çiğdem Dürüşken, İstanbul:Alfa.
• Boucharenc, C.G. (2006). Research on Basic Design Education: An International Survey, International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 16:1-30.
• Salama, A. M. (1995). New Trends in Architectural Education: Designing the Design Studio, Tailored Text and Unlimited Potential Publishers. https://www.archnet.org/publications/4475z, last accessed on 15 May 2024.
• Arıdağ, L., Aslan, A. E. (2012). Tasarım Çalışmları-1 Stüdyosunda Uygulanan Yaratıcı Drama Etkinliklerinin Mimarlık Öğrencilerinin Yaratıcı Düşünce Becerilerinin Gelişimine Etkisi, Megaron, 7, 1, s.49-66.
• Dewey, J. (1991). How we think. New York: Prometheus Books.
• Hodgkin, R., A. (1985). Playing and Exploring: Education through the Discovery of Order, Methuen, London, p. 146.
• Ledewitz, S. (1985). Models of Design in Studio Teaching. Journal of Architectural Education (1984), 38(2), 2-8. doi:https://doi.org/10.2307/1424811
• Yürekli, H., Yürekli, F. (2004). Mimarlık: Bir Entelektüel Enerji Alanı, İstanbul: Yapı Yayın.
• Onur, D., Zorlu, T. (2017). Tasarım Stüdyolarında Uygulanan Eğitim Metotları ve Yaratıcılık İlişkisi, The Turkish Online Journal of Design, Art and Communication – TOJDAC, October, Volume 7 Issue 4, pp. 542-555
• Arıdağ, L. (2005). Mimari Tasarım Stüdyo Eğitiminde İletişim, Yayımlanmamış Doktora Tezi, İstanbul Teknik Üniversitesi, Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü, İstanbul: İTÜ
• Öymen Gür, Ş. (2000). ‘Mimarlıkta Temel Eğitim Dersi Uygulaması’, Mimarlık Dergisi, sayı 293, Ankara: Mimarlar Odası, pp. 25-34
• Lang, J. (1998). Öğrenciler İçin Mimarlığa Giriş: Temel Tasarım Dersini Yeniden Düşünmek, Derleyen: N. Teymur., Aytaç Dural (Eds.), Temel Tasarım/Temel Eğitim Sempozyumu Kitabı, Ankara: ODTÜ Mimarlık Fakültesi.
• Yıldırım, Ş. (2021). Mimari Temel Tasarım Eğitiminde Tasarım İlkelerinin Algılanması Üzerine Bir İnceleme, Yayımlanmamış YL Tezi, Alanya Hamdullah Emin Paşa Üniversitesi Lisansüstü Eğitim Enstitüsü: Alanya
• Buchanan, R. (2001). Design Research and the New Learning, Design Issues Autumn 2001, Vol. 17, No. 4, 3-23.
• Ciravoğlu, A. (2003). Mimari Tasarım Eğitiminde Formel ve Enformel Çalışmalar Üzerine, Yapı 257, https://www.yapi.com.tr/haberler/mimari-tasarim-egitiminde-formel-ve-enformel-calismalaruzerine_ 61061.html, last accessed on 15 january 2024.
• Uluoğlu, B. (1990). Mimari Tasarım Eğitimi:Tasarım Bilgisi Bağlamında Stüdyo Eleştirileri, Yayımlanmamış Doktora Tezi, İTÜ Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü, İstanbul: İTÜ.
• Schön, D.A. (1985). The Design Studio: An Exploration of Its Traditions and Potentials. RIBA Publications.
• Balamir, A. K. (1985). Mimarlık söyleminin değişimi ve eğitim programları. Mimarlık, 85(8), 9-15.
• Drexler, A., Chafee, R., Levine, N., Zanten, D.V., (1977). The Architecture of the Ecole Des Beaux- Arts. New York: Museum of Modern Art Publications.
• Gropius, W. (1965). The new architecture and the Bauhaus (Vol. 21). MIT press.
• Pasin, B. (2007). Mimarlık okullarındaki temel tasarım eğitiminde müzikal kompozisyonun kullanımı üzerine bir alan çalışması, Yayınlanmamış Yüseklisans Tezi Dokuz Eylul Universitesi, İzmir
• Artun, A., Aliçavuşoğlu, E. (2009). Bauhaus: modernleşmenin tasarımı. İstanbul: İletişim Yayınları.
• Akış, T. (2009). Türkiye Mimarlık Akademisinde Mekan Algısı ve Bilimselleşme: 1970’lere Yeniden Bakış. Dosya 17: Mimarlık ve Mekan Algısı, Mimarlar Ankara Odası Şubesi, Ankara, 17-23.
• Akansel, S., Varlı, E. (2022). Trakya Araştırmaları Trakya Üniversitesi’nin 40. Kuruluş Yıl Dönümü Armağan Kitabı, [Eds]: E. Benian & T.Canıtez, Edirne: Trakya Üniversitesi.
• San, İ. (2003). Sanat Eğitimi Kuramları, Gözden geçirilmiş 2. Baskı, Ankara: Ütopya, p: 25
• Vasseleu, C. (2005). Textures of light: Vison and touch in Irigaray, Levinas and Merleau-Ponty. New York: Routledge.
• Nalini B., Ravishankar R., A. (1997). The Texture Lexicon: Understanding the Categorization of Visual Texture Terms and Their Relationship to Texture Images, Cognitive Science, Vol.21, No.2, pp.219- 246.
• Oei, L. (2002). The Elements of Design / Rediscovering Colours, Textures, Forms and Shapes, Thames & Hudson Ltd: New York.
• Güngör, İ., H. (2005). Görsel Sanatlar ve Mimarlık İçin Temel Tasar -Basic Design, Bilgisayar Destekli Baskı ve Reklam Hizmetleri Sanayi ve Ticaret LTD.ŞTİ., İstanbul.
• Opstad, K. D. (1990). Teksturer i vev [Textures in tissues], Master thesis in Design, Arts and Craft. Statens lærerhøgskole i forming Oslo, Norway.
• Opstad, K. D. (2011). Tekstur – et estetisk virkemiddel [Texture – an aesthetic tool], Paper presented at the conference FoU i praksis, 26-27 April 2011, Trondheim, Norway.
• Desmet, P., Hekkert, P. (2007). Framework of Product Experience, International Journal of Design, 1(1) 57-66.
• Zuo, H. (2010). The selection of materials to match human sensory Adaptation and aesthetic expectation in industrial design Hengfeng, METU JFA 2010/2 (27; 2), 301-319, doi:10.4305.
• Opstad, K. D., Alerby, E. (2017). Textur, tystnad och kroppslighet. [Texture, silence and embodiment]. Paper presented at the e17 conference: ‘Tacit knowing or just plain silence?’,31 October–2 November 2017, Umeå, Sweden.
• Zuo, H., Jones, M. (2024). Exploration into Formal Aesthetics in Design: (Material) Texture (online). https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Hengfeng- Zuo/publication/265872626_Exploration_into_formal_aesthetics_in_design_material_texture/links/54acf c090cf2479c2ee86563/Exploration-into-formal-aesthetics-in-design-material-texture.pdf, last accessed on 15 May 2024.
• Bayazıt, N. (1994). Endüstri Ürünlerinde ve Mimarlıkta Tasarlama Metodlarına Giriş, İstanbul: Literatür.
• Ünügür S.M. (1989). Bina Tasarımının Temel İlkeleri, İstanbul: İTU Mimarlık Fakültesi.
• Prince, M. J., Felder, R. M. (2006). Inductive Teaching and Learning Methods: Definitions, Comparisons and Research Bases. Journal of Engineering Education, 95(2), 123-138.