Türkiye'deki İç Mimarlık Programlarında Tasarım Stüdyosu Derslerinin Yapılandırılması: Tematik Bir Model Önerisi

Öz

İç mimarlık eğitimi, modern çağın değişen küresel ve sosyal gereksinimleri ile ekonomik, teknolojik ve sosyal gelişmelerin etkisiyle önemli bir dönüşüm sürecinden geçmektedir. Tasarım stüdyosu dersleri, öğrencilerin problem çözme becerilerini geliştirmelerini ve kapsayıcı bir yaklaşımla tasarım sürecine katkıda bulunmalarını sağlayan yenilikçi ve yaratıcı yaklaşımlar sunarak iç mimarlık eğitiminde önemli bir rol oynamaktadır. Bu çalışmanın amacı, tasarım stüdyosu derslerinin iç mimarlık eğitimindeki kritik rolünü ve işlevini vurgulamak ve mevcut gereksinimlerle uyumlu hale getirilebileceğini incelemektir. Bu amaçla, daha önce yapılan çalışmaların incelenmesinin yanı sıra, Türkiye'deki üniversitelerin iç mimarlık programlarında yer alan proje derslerinin içeriği kapsamlı bir şekilde incelenmiş, küçük, orta ve büyük ölçekli olarak tanımlanan proje konuları üzerinden bir analiz gerçekleştirilmiştir. Çalışmada ayrıca, çağdaş yaklaşımların ve tasarım temalarının projelere nasıl entegre edildiği de incelenmiştir. Bu kapsamda literatür taraması ve Türkiye üniversiteleri incelemelerinden elde edilen tüm veriler kategorize edilmiştir. Tasarım stüdyolarının yapısı, sayısı, konuları ve temaları çağın gereklilikleri doğrultusunda analiz edilmiştir. Çalışma sonucunda, iç mimarlık programlarındaki tasarım stüdyosu dersleri için bir model geliştirilmesi hedeflenmiştir. Tasarım temalarının projelere nasıl entegre edildiğine dair tartışmalara dayanan çalışma, eğitimin esnek ve dinamik bir yapıya sahip olması gerektiğini ortaya koymuştur. Geliştirilen model, eğitimde esneklik sunarak, öğrencilere güncel ve kapsamlı bir bakış açısı sağlayacak, iç mimarlık kariyerleri için daha sağlam bir temel oluşturacak ve mesleki yetkinliklerini artıracaktır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• İç mimarlık
• İç mimarlık eğitimi
• Tasarım stüdyosu
• Tematik yaklaşım
• Tasarım teması

Structuring Design Studio Courses in Interior Architecture Programs in Türkiye: A Thematic Model Suggestion

Abstract

The interior architecture education is undergoing a period of significant transformation, driven by the evolving global and social requirements of the modern era and the impact of economic, technological, and social developments. Design studio courses play an important role in interior architecture education, offering innovative and creative approaches that enable students to develop problem-solving skills and contribute to the design process with an inclusive approach. The objective of this study is to highlight the critical role and function of design studio courses in interior architecture education and to examine how they can be integrated with current requirements. For this purpose, the content of project courses in interior architecture at Turkish universities has been subjected to detailed examination, with an analysis conducted on the project subjects defined as small, medium, and large scale. Furthermore, the study focuses on how current approaches and design themes are integrated into the projects. The findings were used to develop a content model for design studio courses in interior architecture education. Based on the discussions on how design themes and current approaches are integrated into the projects, the study reveals that education should have a flexible and dynamic structure. The developed model offers flexibility in education, provides students with an up-to-date and comprehensive perspective, establishes a more solid foundation for their careers in interior architecture and enhances their professional competencies.

Keywords

• Interior architecture
• Interior architecture education
• Design studio
• Thematic approach
• Design themes

Kaynakça

1. Abdallah, K. (2022). A Strategy for Teaching Interior Design Through Reality-Based Project (An Experiential study). International Design Journal, 12(4), 93-104. DOI: 10.21608/idj.2022.245855
2. Adıgüzel Özbek, D., & Usta, G. (2018). Creativity focused design studies in interior architecture project studio. Turkish Online Journal of Design Art and Communication, 1, 123–132. https://doi.org/10.7456/10801100/012
3. Adıgüzel, D., & Ciravoğlu, A. (2013). Environmental Approach In Interior Design Education In Turkey. Iconarp International Journal of Architecture and Planning, 1(2), 164-188. https://iconarp.ktun.edu.tr/index.php/iconarp/article/view/25
4. Afacan, Y. (2011). Teaching Universal Design: An Empirical Research in Interior Architecture. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences 15(2011) 3185–3192. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2011.04.269
5. Afacan, Y. (2014). Introducing Sustainability to Interior Design Students Through Industry Collaboration. International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education,15(1), 84-97. DOI: 10.1108/IJSHE-01-2013-0002
6. Alamry, G. A. (2023). Pedagogical Innovations in Interior Design Education: Advanced Research on Online and Blended Learning Approaches for Effective Interior Design Curriculum Delivery. Kurdish Studies, 12(1), 4881-4888. DOI: https://doi.org/10.58262/ks.v12i1.353
7. Anderson, C. & Travis, S. (2018). Design Process: A Methodology for Integrating Studios and Supporting Courses. The International Journal of Design Education, 12. https://doi.org/10.18848/2325-128X/CGP/v12i03/1-11
8. Andiyan A., Rusmana, D., Hari, Y., Sitorus, M., Trinova, Z., & Surur, M. (2021). Disruption of IoT in Adapting Online Learning during the Covid-19 Pandemic. International Journal of Early Childhood Special Education (INT-JECSE), 13(2), 1331-1341. 10.9756/INT-JECSE/V13I2.211181

9. Assali, I. (2017). The Contribution of Interior Design Studio in Promoting Sustainable Design in Bahrain. International Journal of Mechanical Engineering and Technology, 8(10), 25-34. https://iaeme.com/MasterAdmin/Journal_uploads/IJMET/VOLUME_8_ISSUE_10/IJMET_08_10_004.pdf
10. Aşkın, G.D. (2019). Gamification of design process in interior architecture education: Who? with whom? where? how? SHS Web Conf. Volume 66. ERPA International Congresses on Education 2019 (ERPA 2019). https://doi.org/10.1051/shsconf/20196601040
11. Bindal, N. (2022). Experiential Learning in Design Education: Teaching Construction and Technology through Active Experimentation in Interior and Architectural Design. The International Journal of Design Education, 16(2), 91–102. https://doi.org/10.18848/2325-128x/cgp/v16i02/91-102
12. Burkut, E. B. (2023). Evaluation of interior architecture education research in the web of science database: Bibliometric and science mapping analysis. Journal of Architectural Sciences and Applications, 8(1), 385-405. DOI: 10.30785/mbud.1263207
13. Celadyn, M. & Celadyn, W. (2024). Conceptual and technical considerations in the interior architecture education framework. World Transactions on Engineering and Technology Education,22(4), 254-260. http://www.wiete.com.au/journals/WTE&TE/Pages/Vol.%2022,%20No.4%20(2024)/03-Celadyn-M-(2).pdf
14. Choi, H.H., & Kim, M.J. (2017). The effects of analogical and metaphorical reasoning on design thinking. Think. Ski. Creativity, 23, 29–41, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2016.11.004.
15. Çelik, C. & Arabacıoğlu, B. (2022). İç mimarlık ve ölçekler arası tasarım arakesitinde iç mimarlık tasarım stüdyolarının potansiyelleri üzerine bir çalışma. bab Journal of FSMVU Faculty of Architecture and Design, 3(2), 190-208. https://dergipark.org.tr/en/download/article-file/2552196
16. Disney, R., House, N. & Murialdo, F. (2024). The Augmented Studio Teaching and Learning in Digital Space. Teaching Architecture(s) in the Post-Covid Era (pp. 9-24). Routledge. DOI: 10.4324/9781003435396-2
17. Embaby, M. E. (2014). Heritage conservation and architectural education: “An educational methodology for design studios”. HBRC Journal, 10(3), 339-350. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hbrcj.2013.12.007.
18. Ertaş, Ş., & Taş, A. (2015). Studio Courses (Project-Design) of Interior Architecture Education: Analysis of Sustainable Culture Tourism; Sample of Sille. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 182, 289-294. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.04.768.
19. Eti Proto, M., & Koç Sağlam, C. (2021). Furniture Design Education with 3D Printing Technology. In: Scaradozzi, D., Guasti, L., Di Stasio, M., Miotti, B., Monteriù, A., & Blikstein, P. (eds) Makers at School, Educational Robotics and Innovative Learning Environments. Lecture Notes in Networks and Systems, vol 240. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-77040-2_13
20. Faiz Büyükçam, S., & Eyüboğlu, H. (2023). Traces of Sustainability in Interior Architecture Graduate Education. K. Günçe (Ed.), Interior Architectural Issues Design, History ve Education içinde (1. baskı, ss. 187–205). Livre de Lyon, France. https://www.academia.edu/102164583/Traces_of_Sustainability_in_Interior_Architecture_Graduate_Education
21. Heidari, P., & Polatoğlu, C. (2018). Current Discussions on Digital Sketching in the Early Stages of Architectural Design in Education. International Journal of Architectural Engineering and Urban Planning, 28(1), 25-35. Doi: 10.22068/ijaup.28.1.25
22. Heidari, P., & Polatoğlu, Ç. (2019). Pen-and-paper versus digital sketching in architectural design education. International Journal of Architectural Computing, 17(3), 284-302. https://doi.org/10.1177/1478077119834694
23. Izadpanah, S. (2021). Teaching Conceptual Approaches to Interior Architecture Students by Integrating Theory and Practice. idil, 83(2021 July), 1003–1016. DOI: 10.7816/idil-10-83-02
24. Kahraman, M. U., Şekerci, Y., Bal, H., & Bakır, K. E. (2024). Human-centered approach for furniture design studio course in interior design education: A case study. Mobilya Ve Ahşap Malzeme Araştırmaları Dergisi, 7(1), 121-135. https://doi.org/10.33725/mamad.1485323
25. Karadağ, D., & Ozar, B. (2025). A new frontier in design studio: AI and human collaboration in conceptual design. Frontiers of Architectural Research, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foar.2025.01.010
26. Kim, M.J. & Ju, S.R. & Lee, L. (2015). A Cross-Cultural and Interdisciplinary Collaboration in a Joint Design Studio. International Journal of Art & Design Education, 34. https://doi.org/10.1111/jade.12019
27. Lili, Y. & Dinna, C. F. (2025). Integrating Interdisciplinary Knowledge in Interior Design Studio Courses: A Comparative Analysis of Single-Teacher and Multi-Teacher Instructional Methods. Asian Journal of Research in Education and Social Sciences, 7(4), 171-178. https://doi.org/10.55057/ajress.2025.7.4.15
28. McPeek, K. T. & Morthland, L. M. (2013). The Collaborative Gap: A Case Study of Interdisciplinary Design Education. In P. Pumilia-Gnarini, E. Favaron, E. Pacetti, J. Bishop, & L. Guerra (Eds.), Handbook of Research on Didactic Strategies and Technologies for Education: Incorporating Advancements (pp. 605-619). IGI Global Scientific Publishing. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-4666-2122-0.ch052
29. Olguntürk, N., & Demirkan, H. (2009). Ergonomics and Universal Design in Interior Architecture Education. METU JFA, 2009/2 (26:2), 123-138. https://doi.org/10.4305/metu.jfa.2009.2.7
30. Onay, S. N. (2017). A Contemporary Approach to Interior Architecture Education by the ITU Interior Architecture Department, American Journal of Educational Research, 5(7), 732-738. http://pubs.sciepub.com/education/5/7/6
31. Örmecioğlu, H.T., & Uçar, A. (2012). First Design Studio Experience in Education of Interior Architecture: an Example of Akdeniz University. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 51, 1107-1111, ISSN 1877-0428, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.08.295. Available at: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1877042812034337
32. Özker, S., & Makakli, E. S. (2016). In the context of interior architecture departments in turkey; design studio (project) education. SHS Web of Conferences, 26, 1-8. doi:10.1051/shsconf/20162601023
33. Paker Kahvecioğlu, N. (2007). Architectural design studio organization and creativity. A|Z ITU Journal of the Faculty of Architecture, 4(2), 6–26. https://www.az.itu.edu.tr/jfa/article/view/568
34. Pakravan, S., Keynoush, S., & Daneshyar, E. (2022). Proposing a Pedagogical Framework for Integrating Urban Agriculture as a Tool to Achieve Social Sustainability within the Interior Design Studio. Sustainability, 14(12), 7392. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14127392
35. Sipahi, S., & Torun, A. (2019). İç Mimarlık Lisans Eğitimi, Dersler ve Sürdürülebilirlik. Nevşehir Bilim ve Teknoloji Dergisi, 8, 31-44. https://doi.org/10.17100/nevbiltek.572331
36. Smith, K. (2011). Curiositas and Studiositas: Investigating Student Curiosity and the Design Studio. International Journal of Art & Design Education, 30, 161–175. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1476-8070.2011.01691.x
37. Şekerci, C., & Oral, M. (2023). İç Mimarlık Eğitim Müfredatının Oluşturulmasında Güncel Yaklaşımlar. Sanat Yazıları Dergisi, (48), 215-226. https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/sanatyazilari/issue/77790/1307984
38. Tarakçı Eren, E., & Yılmaz, S. (2022). The student attitudes towards digital and conventional drawing methods in environmental design studios and the impact of these techniques on academic achievement in the course. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 32. 10.1007/s10798-020-09605-x.
39. Thamrin, D., Wardani, L. K., Sitindjak, R. H. I., & Natadjaja, L. (2019). Experiential learning through community co-design in interior design pedagogy. International Journal of Art & Design Education, 38(2), 461–477. https://doi.org/10.1111/jade.12208
40. Torun, A., & Sipahi, S. (2021). İç Mekân Tasarımı Lisans Eğitiminde Öğrenim Çıktıları ve Akreditasyon. Atlas International Refereed Journal On Socıal Scıences,7(38), 1454-1472. DOI: 10.31568/atlas.636
41. Travis, S. (2014). Sketching as a Tool for Seeing: A Method for Teaching Drawing to Architecture and Interior Design Students. The International Journal of Design Education, 7(3), 63-74. DOI: https://doi.org/10.18848/2325-128X/CGP/v07i03/38452
42. URL-1: https://www.vosviewer.com/ (Son erişim: Temmuz 2025)
43. URL-2: https://yokatlas.yok.gov.tr/lisans-bolum.php?b=10097 (Son erişim: Ocak 2024)
44. URL-3: https://yokatlas.yok.gov.tr/lisans-bolum.php?b=10096 (Son erişim: Ocak 2024)
45. Usal, S. S. Y., & Evcil, A. N. (2019). Universal Design in Interior Architecture Education: The Case of Store Design. ICONARP International Journal of Architecture and Planning, 7(2), 410–427. https://doi.org/10.15320/ICONARP.2019.92
46. Usta, G., Melikoğlu Eke, A. S. & Ilık Saltık, Ö. (2022). Between Education and Profession: An Evaluation of Graduation Projects in the Field of Interior Architecture in Turkey. Journal of Design Studio, 4(spi 2), 5-20. https://doi.org/10.46474/jds.1154794
47. Ünsal Gülmez, N., Yağan, D. A. & Şahin, M. (2020). Staging Poe: A Narrative Approach to Atmosphere in a First–Year Design Studio. Journal of Interior Design, 45(4), 1-65. https://doi.org/10.1111/joid.12180
48. Üst, S., Sezginalp Özçetin, P. & Karabulut, H. (2024). Graduation projects within interior architecture education in Turkey: Limits, possibilities, prospects. A|Z ITU Journal of The Faculty of Architecture, 21(2), 391–410. https://doi.org/10.58278/0.2024.47
49. Yazıcıoğlu, D. A. (2011). The Integration of Interior Architecture Education With Digital Design Approaches. Journal of US-China Education Review, 8(5), 637-658. https://doi.org/10.18039/ajesi.71632
50. Yıldırım, İ. I., & Zengel, R. (2023). Student Perceptions Regarding the Blackboard Learning System Applied in Interior Architecture Project Courses During Covid-19. TEM Journal, 12(1),175-183. https://doi.org/10.18421/TEM121-23
51. Yurttaş, N. B., & Terece, T. (2023). Re-functioning within the scope of conservation awareness in interior architecture education: The case of Paşalimanı Flour Factory. IDA: International Design and Art Journal, 5(2), 245-260. https://www.idajournal.com/index.php/ida/article/view/241
52. Zamberlan, L., & Wilson, S. (2017). Reconceiving Creativity in Design Studio Education. The International Journal of Design Education, 11, 1–16. http://dx.doi.org/10.18848/2325-128X/CGP/v11i03/1-16