Mimari Tasarımın Erken Evrelerinde Tecrübenin ve Eskiz Yapmanın Tasarım Üretkenliğine Etkisi

Öz

Mimari tasarımda önemli kararların alındığı erken tasarım evresinde problemin ele alınış biçimi, tasarım süreci ve sonuç ürünleri için belirleyici rol oynamaktadır. Bu noktada, mimari tasarım alanındaki tecrübenin tasarım problemlerinin nasıl ele alındığını etkilediği görülmektedir. Tecrübenin yanı sıra mimari tasarımın erken evrelerinde alınan kararları etkileyen ve kararların oluşumunu sağlayan bir diğer önemli faktör de kullanılan tasarım ortamı ve aracıdır. Tasarımcının görsel düşünmesini destekleyerek yaratıcılığa ve üretkenliğe zemin hazırlayan eskiz yapma eylemi, tasarımda bir “düşünme aracı” olarak, tasarımcının zihnindeki imgelerle, oluşturduğu fiziksel temsiller arasında ilişkiler kurmasını sağlamaktadır. Bu bağlamda araştırmanın amacı, mimari tasarımın erken evrelerinde tecrübenin ve eskiz yapmanın tasarım üretkenliğine etkisinin araştırılması olarak belirlenmiştir. Mimari tasarımın erken evrelerinde tecrübe etkisini gözlemlemek üzere iki farklı tecrübe grubu belirlenmiş ve bu tecrübe gruplarından ikişer katılımcıyla tasarım çalışmaları yürütülmüştür. Katılımcılardan eskiz yapmak suretiyle aynı mimari tasarım problemine çözüm üretmeleri istenmiştir. Katılımcıların verilen tasarım problemine sesli düşünme yoluyla çözüm ürettikleri protokol çalışmaları gerçekleştirilmiş ve tasarım süreçleri kamerayla kayıt altına alınmıştır. Tasarım süreçlerinin video kayıtlarından elde edilen sözel ifadelerin transkriptleri çıkartılarak tasarım hareketleri olarak ayrıştırılmış ve eskiz yapma durumuna göre kodlanmıştır. Tasarım hareketleri arasındaki bağlantıların tespit edilmesiyle linkograflar oluşturulmuştur. Linkograflar üzerinden tasarım süreci analizleri yapılarak tasarım üretkenlik değerleri tespit edilmiş ve tasarım üretkenliğine dair karşılaştırmalı analizlere yer verilmiştir. Yapılan protokol çalışmaları ve linkograf analizleri neticesinde erken tasarım evresinde tecrübenin ve eskiz yapmanın tasarım üretkenliğine etkisine dair önemli bulgulara ulaşılmıştır. Buna göre, katılımcıların sahip olduğu genel mimarlık deneyiminin yanı sıra verilen mimari problem alanına özgü deneyimlerinin de tasarım üretkenliğinin oluşmasında önemli olduğu görülmüş, iki tecrübe grubunda da problem alanına özgü deneyime sahip olmak tasarım üretkenliğini olumlu yönde etkilemiştir. Bir diğer önemli sonuç da tasarımcıların sahip oldukları tecrübe ile tasarım sürecindeki eskiz yapma oranlarının paralellik göstermesidir. Bu bağlamda, fazla tecrübeye sahip katılımcıların eskiz ortamını daha etkin kullanarak yüksek oranda eskiz yaptıkları, tasarım fikirlerinin büyük çoğunluğunu eskiz yaparak ürettikleri gözlenmiştir. Tecrübeyle bağlantılı yüksek eskiz yapma oranının, linkograf analizlerinde tasarım üretkenliğinin belirlenmesinde kullanılan bağlantı indeksi, kritik hareket ve örüntü oranlarını olumlu yönde etkilediği dolayısıyla üretken bir tasarım süreci oluşmasına katkı sağladığı gözlenmiştir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• tasarım bilişi
• tasarım uzmanlığı
• eskiz
• protokol analizi
• linkograf

Effect of Experience and Sketching On Design Productivity In The Early Phases of Architectural Design

Öz

Within the scope of this paper, in order to observe the effect of experience and sketching on design productivity in architectural design, the early design phase is examined where architects generate ideas with creative visual thinking by sketching to make the main design decisions. In this context, two different experience groups were identified to observe the effect of experience in the early phases of architectural design, and design studies were carried out with two participants from each of these experience groups. The first group consists of senior architecture students who are considered as novice, while the second group consists of people with 8-10 years of professional architectural experience who are considered as experienced. Participants were asked to generate a design proposal to the same architectural design problem through sketching. After design problem and participants were determined, protocol studies were carried out with participants who are using think-aloud method while sketching to produce a design proposal to the given problem, and their design processes were recorded by camera. Firstly, the verbal expressions obtained from video recordings of each participant’s design process were transcribed and segmented as design moves, then coded according to sketching action. While parsing design moves, the designer’s verbal expressions and sketches are evaluated together and focused on design decisions that change the course of the design process by little thought changes. In this way, micro-level design decisions that lead to spatial, functional, and formal changes in the design process have been identified as design moves. Linkographs were constructed by detemining the links between design moves. The link between two design moves is determined by the content of the moves. All design moves are examined one by one by querying whether each design move is contextually linked to previous moves. Design productivity of each participant were determined through individual design process analysis by using linkographs. Finally, comparative analyses of design productivity, within each experience group and between groups, was included. As a result of protocol studies and linkograph analyses, important findings have been reached revealing the effect of experience and sketching on design productivity in the early design phase. Accordingly, it has been seen that besides the general architectural experience that participants have, the experience on the specific problem area (housing design) is significant for the emergence of design productivity. Having the problem-specific experience affects design productivity positively in both senior architecture students’ group and experienced architects’ group. Another important result is that the experience of the participants and their rate of sketching in the design processes are parallel. In this context, it has been observed that the participants having more experience have a higher rate of sketching by using sketch medium more efficiently, and they generate a great majority of their design ideas through sketching. It has been observed that the high rate of sketching associated with experience affects positively to link index, critical move rate and linking pattern rates which are used to determine design productivity in linkograph analyses, and consequently contributes to occur a productive design process.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• design cognition
• design expertise
• sketching
• protocol analysis
• linkography

Kaynakça

1. Ahmed, S., Wallace, K. M., & Blessing, L. T. (2003). Understanding the differences between how novice and experienced designers approach design tasks. Research in Engineering Design, 14(1), 1-11.
2. Akın, O. (1987). Expertise of the architect. Expert Systems for Engineering Design, 173-196.
3. Akın, O., Dave, B. & Pithavadian, S. (1987). Problem structuring in architectural design. Engineering Design Research Center.
4. Akin, O. (2001). "Simon Says": Design is representation. Unpublished manuscript, School of Architecture, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA. http://www. andrew. cmu. edu/user/oa04/Papers/AradSimon. pdf.
5. Alexander, C. (1964). Notes on the synthesis of form. Harvard University Press.
6. Athavankar, U. A. (1997). Mental imagery as a design tool. Cybernetics & Systems, 28(1), 25-42. https://doi.org/10.1080/019697297126236
7. Atman, C. J., Chimka, J. R., Bursic, K. M. & Nachtmann, H. L. (1999). A comparison of freshman and senior engineering design processes. Design Studies, 20(2), 131-152. Ayıran, N. (2007). The role of sketches in terms of creativity in design education and the effects of a scientific ideal. A|Z ITU Journal of the Faculty of Architecture, 4(2), 52-66.
8. Bernal, M. (2016). Meta-modelling design expertise. [Doctoral Dissertation, Georgia Institute of Technology, School of Architecture].

9. Chan, C. S. (2008). Design cognition: Cognitive science in design. China Architecture & Building Press
10. Chan, C. S. (2015). Introduction of design Cognition. Style and Creativity in Design, 9-78. Springer.
11. Christiaans, H., & Dorst, K. H. (1992). Cognitive models in industrial design engineering: a protocol study. Design Theory and Methodology, 42(1), 131-140.
12. Cross, N. (1999). Natural intelligence in design. Design Studies, 20(1), 25-39.
13. Cross, N. (2001). Design cognition: results from protocol and other empirical studies of design activity. Design Knowing and Learning: Cognition in Design Education. Elsevier, 79–103.
14. Cross, N. (2004). Expertise in design: An overview. Design Studies, 25(5), 427-441.
15. Dorst, K., ve Cross, N. (2001). Creativity in the design process: co-evolution of problem–solution. Design Studies, 22(5), 425-437.
16. Eastman, C. M. (1969, May). Cognitive processes and ill-defined problems: A case study from design. Proceedings of the International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence: IJCAI, 69, 669-690.
17. Ericsson, A. K., & Simon, H. A. (1984). Protocol analysis: Verbal reports as data. The MIT Press.
18. Expert versus novice knowledge. (n.d.). [Photograph]. https://www.queensu.ca/teachingandlearning/modules/students/12_organization_of_knowledge.html
19. Gero, J. S., & Milovanovic, J. (2020). A framework for studying design thinking through measuring designers’ minds, bodies and brains. Design Science, 6, https://doi.org/10.1017/dsj.2020.15
20. Gill, T. G. (2008). Structural complexity and effective ınforming. Informing Science, 11.
21. Goel, V. (1995). Sketches of thought. The MIT Press.
22. Goldschmidt, G. (1990). Linkography: Assessing design productivity, Cyberbetics and System ‘90, Proceedings of the Tenth European Meeting on Cybernetics and Systems Research. 291-298. World Scientific.
23. Goldschmidt, G. (1991). The dialectics of sketching. Creativity Research Journal, 4(2), 123-143.
24. Goldschmidt, G. (1995). The designer as a team of one. Design Issues, 16(2), 189-209.
25. Goldschmidt, G. (2014a). Modeling the role of sketching in design idea generation. An Anthology of Theories and Models of Design. 433-450. Springer.
26. Goldschmidt, G. (2014b). Linkography: Unfolding the design process. The MIT Press.
27. Goldschmidt, G. (2016). Linkographic evidence for concurrent divergent and convergent thinking in creative design. Creativity Research Journal, 28(2), 115-122.
28. Hay, L., Duffy, A. H., McTeague, C., Pidgeon, L. M., Vuletic, T., & Grealy, M. (2017). A systematic review of protocol studies on conceptual design cognition: Design as search and exploration. Design Science, 3.
29. Ho, C. H. (2001). Some phenomena of problem decomposition strategy for design thinking: Differences between novices and experts, Design Studies, 22, 27-45.
30. Hoffman, R. R. (1998). How can expertise be defined? Implications of research from cognitive psychology. Exploring Expertise. 81-100. Palgrave Macmillan.
31. Kan, J. W. T., & Gero, J. S. (2008). Acquiring information from linkography in protocol studies of designing, Design Studies, 29(4), 315-337.
32. Kan, J. W., & Gero, J. S. (2017). Quantitative methods for studying design protocols. Dordrecht: Springer.
33. Kavakli, M., Suwa, M., Gero, J. S., & Purcell, T. (1999). Sketching interpretation in novice and expert designers. Visual and Spatial Reasoning in Design, 99, 209-19. University of Sydney.
34. Kavakli, M., & Gero, J. (2002). The structure of concurrent cognitive actions: A case study on novice and expert designers, Design Studies, 23, 25-40.
35. Lawson, B., & Dorst, K. (2005). Acquiring design expertise. Computational and cognitive models of creative design VI. Key Centre of Design Computing and Cognition, University of Sydney, 213-229.
36. Lloyd, P., & Scott, P. (1995). Difference in similarity: Interpreting the architectural design process. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design, 22(4), 383-406.
37. Middleton, N. (2020, December). James Stirling. Rationalistarchitecture. https://rationalistarchitecture.tumblr.com/image/38296264616 (30.12.2020)
38. Miller, G. A. (1956). The magical number seven, plus or minus two: Some limits on our capacity for processing ınformation. Psychological Review 63(2), 81-97.
39. Newell, A., & Simon, H. A. (1972). Human problem solving, 104(9). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
40. Önal, G. (2014). Tasarım Aktivitelerini Araştırmak: Protokol Analizi Yöntemi, Gazi Üniversitesi Sanat ve Tasarım Dergisi, 65-80
41. Özbaki, Ç. (2016). Model yapma yoluyla tasarım düşünme süreci: Analog ve dijital model karşılaştırması. [Doctoral dissertation, Istanbul Technical University]
42. Özbaki, Ç., Çağdaş, G., & Kilimci, E. S. Y. (2016). Maket ve Dijital Ortamda Tasarım Üretkenliğinin Karşılaştırılması. Megaron, 11(3), 398-411.
43. Pourmohamadi, M., & Gero, J. S. (2011). LINKOgrapher: an analysis tool to study design protocols based on FBS coding scheme. DS 68-2: Proceedings of the 18th International Conference on Engineering Design (ICED 11), Impacting Society through Engineering Design, 2, Design Theory and Research Methodology, Lyngby/Copenhagen, Denmark, 15.-19.08. 2011.
44. Purcell, A., & Gero, J. S. (1998). Drawings and the design process: A review of protocol studies in design and other disciplines and related research in cognitive psychology. Design Studies, 19(4), 389-430.
45. Schön, D. A. (1983). The reflective practicioner: How professionals think in action. Basic Books.
46. Seitamaa-Hakkarainen, P., & Hakkarainen, K. (2001). Composition and construction in experts' and novices' weaving design. Design Studies, 22(1), 47-66.
47. Simon, H. A. (1969). The sciences of the artificial. The MIT press.
48. Song, T., & Becker, K. (2014). Expert vs. novice: Problem decomposition/recomposition in engineering design. 2014 International Conference on Interactive Collaborative Learning (ICL) 181-190. IEEE.
49. Suwa, M., & Tversky, B. (1997a). What do architects and students perceive in their design sketches? A protocol analysis. Design Studies, 18(4), 385-403.
50. Tversky, B. (2002). What do sketches say about thinking. 2002 AAAI Spring Symposium, Sketch Understanding Workshop, Stanford University, AAAI Technical Report SS-02-08, 148-151.
51. Tversky, B. ve Suwa, M. (2009). Thinking with sketches. In A. B. Markman & K. L. Wood (Eds.), Tools for innovation: The science behind the practical methods that drive new ideas, 75-84. Oxford University Press. Van der Lugt, R. (2000). Developing a graphic tool for creative problem solving in design groups. Design Studies, 21(5), 505-522.
52. Van Someren, M. W., Barnard, Y. F., & Sandberg, J. A. C. (1994). The think aloud method: a practical approach to modelling cognitive. Academic Press.
53. Verstijnen, I. M., van Leeuwen, C., Goldschmidt, G., Hamel, R., & Hennessey, J. M. (1998). Creative discovery in imagery and perception: Combining is relatively easy, restructuring takes a sketch. Acta Psychologica, 99(2), 177-200.
54. Woo, J. H., Clayton, M. J., Johnson, R. E., Flores, B. E., & Ellis, C. (2004). Dynamic knowledge map: Reusing experts' tacit knowledge in the AEC industry. Automation in Construction, 13(2), 203-207.