Araştırma Makalesi
BibTex RIS Kaynak Göster

BİR ÖĞRENME ORTAMI OLARAK TASARIM STÜDYOSU: MALTEPE ÜNİVERSİTESİ TASARIM STÜDYOSU 1 DENEYİMİ

Yıl 2020, Cilt: 10 Sayı: 4, 389 - 407, 30.09.2020

Öz

Tasarım stüdyoları, diğer tasarım disiplinlerinde olduğu gibi, mimarlık eğitiminde de teorik ve pratik bilginin tasarım bilgisine dönüştürülerek tasarlama eyleminin öğrenildiği yegâne ortamlar olarak öne çıkmaktadır. Birinci yarıyıldan başlayarak son yarıyıla kadar, mimarlık eğitim programının merkezinde yer alan tasarım stüdyoları, öğrencilerin, her yarıyıl giderek kapsamı ve karmaşıklığı artan tasarım problemlerine deneme-yanılma yoluyla çözüm aradıkları, çözüm ararken stüdyo yürütücüsü ile karşılıklı iletişimde bulundukları, böylelikle tasarlama eylemini deneyimledikleri ortamlardır. Bütün tasarım stüdyoları içerisinde ise, birinci yarıyıl tasarım stüdyosu, öğrencilerin tasarlama eylemi ve tasarım sürecinin gerektirdiği eleştirel, yaratıcı ve çok boyutlu düşünme biçimiyle ilk kez karşılaştıkları yerdir. Bu dönemde öğrencilerin kazandığı beceriler ve geliştirdiği tutumlar sonraki eğitimlerinin temelini oluşturduğundan, ilk yarıyıl tasarım stüdyosu kritik bir öneme sahiptir. Bu nedenle, birinci yarıyıl stüdyosunda uygulanan öğretme-öğrenme yöntemlerinin sorgulanması ve nasıl daha verimli bir öğrenme ortamının sağlanabileceğinin tartışılması önem kazanmaktadır. Çalışmanın amacı, bu sorgulamadan yola çıkan ve birinci yarıyıl stüdyosu için geliştirilen bir stüdyo yaklaşımını ortaya koymak ve tartışmaya açmaktır. Bu amaçla çalışmada, öncelikle mimarlık eğitiminde bir öğrenme ortamı olarak tasarım stüdyosunun temel nitelikleri, bileşenleri ve yöntemlerine dair güncel yaklaşımlar, literatür araştırması yöntemi ile ortaya konmaktadır. Sonrasında ise, 2016-2018 yılları arasında Maltepe Üniversitesi, Mimarlık ve Tasarım Fakültesi, Mimarlık Bölümü’nde yürütülen Tasarım Stüdyosu 1’de izlenen yöntemler, yapılan üretimler ve stüdyodaki öğrenme deneyimi tartışmaya açılmaktadır. Tasarım stüdyosu deneyimlerinin paylaşılması ve tartışılmasının, tasarım stüdyosu eğitimi ile ilgi deneyim/bilgi birikimine önemli katkılar sağlayacağı düşünülmektedir.

Kaynakça

  • Akın, Ö. ve Akın, C. (1996). “Frames of reference in architectural design: analysing the hyperacclamation (A-h-a-!)”, Design Studies, 17, s.341-361.
  • Anthony, Kathryn, (2012). “Studio Culture and Student Life: A World of Its Own”, Joan Ockman and Rebecca Williamson (der.), Architecture School: Three Centuries of Educating Architects in North America, Cambridge: MIT Press, s.396-401.
  • Aydınlı, Semra (2014). “Paralaks oda: ‘Öğrenmeyi öğrenme’ ortamı olarak stüdyo”, Semra Aydınlı ve Burçin Kürtüncü (der.), Paralaks Oda, İstanbul: Yapı Endüstri Merkezi, s.10-31.
  • Balamir, Aydan Keskin, (1985). “Mimarlık Söyleminin Değişimi ve Eğitim Programları”, Mimarlık, 85(8), s.9-15.
  • Broadfoot, O. ve Bennett, R., (2003). “Design Studios: Online? Comparing Traditional Face-to-face Design Studio Education with Modern Internet-based Design Studios”, Apple University Consortium Academic and Developers Conference Proceedings, Sydney, s. 9-21.
  • Cross, Nigel, (2006). Designerly Ways of Knowing, Londra: Springer-Verlag.
  • Cuff, Dana, (1992). Architecture: The Story of Practice, Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
  • Çıkış, Ş. ve Çil, E., (2009). “Problematization of assessment in the architectural design education: First year as a case study”, Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, 1 (2009), s.2103–2110.
  • Doidge, C., Sara, R., ve White, R. (2000). The Crit-An Architecure Student’s Handbook, Oxford: Architectural Press.
  • Dostoğlu, Neslihan, (2003). “Mimarlık Eğitiminde İlk Yıl Mimari Tasarım Stüdyosu: Uludağ Üniversitesi Örneği”, Ege Mimarlık, 47, s.15-19.
  • Friedman, Jonathan B., (1999). Creation in Space - Fundamentals of Architec¬ture: Architectronics, Iowa: Kendall/Hunt.
  • Goldschmidt, G., Hochman, G. ve Dafni, I., (2010). “The design studio “crit”: Teacher–student communication”, Artificial Intelligence for Engineering Design, Analysis and Manufacturing, 24, s.285-302.
  • Grassi, Giorgio, (1992). “An Opinion on Architectural Education and the Conditions Our Profession Has to Work”, A.C.S.A. Conference Proceedings, s.13-24.
  • Gross, M. D., & Do, E. Y. (1997). “The design studio approach: Learning design in architecture education”, J. Kolodner & M. Guzdial (der.), Design Education Workshop, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta.
  • Ledewitz, Stefani, (1985). Models of design in studio teaching, Journal of Architectural Education, 38(2), s.2-8.
  • Lueth, Patience Lamunu Opiyo, (2008). The architectural design studio as a learning environment: a qualitative exploration of architecture design student learning experiences in design studios from first- through fourth-yea, Yayımlanmamış Doktora Tezi, Iowa: Iowa State University.
  • NAAB (2019). 2019 Conditions for NAAP International Certification, Washington: The National Architectural Accrediting Board, Inc.
  • Paker Kahvecioğlu, Nurbin, (2007). “Architectural design studio organization and creativity”, A|Z ITU Journal of the Faculty of Architecture, 4(2), s.6–26.
  • Salama, Ashraf, (1995). New trends in architectural education: designing the design studio, Raleigh, NC: Tailored Text & Unlimited Potential Publishing.
  • Schön, Donald A., (1987). Educating the Reflective Practitioner: Towars a New Design for teaching and Learning in the Professions, San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
  • Schön, Donald A., (1985). The Design Studio, London: RIBA Publications Limited.
  • Sternberg, Robert J., (1985). Beyond IQ: A Triarchic Theory of Human Intelligence, New York: Cambridge University Press.
  • Uluoğlu, Belkıs, (2000). “Design knowledge communicated in studio critiques”, Design Studies, 21(1), s.33–58.
  • Webster, Helena, (2006). “Power, Freedom and Resistance: Excavating the Design Jury”, Journal of Art and Design Education, 25(3), s.286-296.
  • Webster, Helena, (2008). “Architectural Education after Schön: Cracks, Blurs, Boundaries and Beyond”, Journal for Education in the Built Environment, 3(2), s.63-74.
  • Yürekli, H. ve Yürekli, F., (2004a). Mimarlık Entelektüel Bir Enerji Alanı, İstanbul: YEM Yayınları.
  • Yurekli, İ. ve Yurekli, H., (2004b). “Informality in architectural design education”, Itüdergisi/a Architecture, Planning, Design, 3(1), s. 53–62.
  • Yürekli, Hülya, (2007). The Design Studio: A Black Hole, İstanbul: YEM Yayınları.
  • Yürekli, Ferhan, (2010). Mimarlık/Mimarlığımız, İstanbul: YEM Yayınları.

LEARNING DESIGN: EXPERIENCE OF MALTEPE UNVERSITY DESIGN STUDIO 1

Yıl 2020, Cilt: 10 Sayı: 4, 389 - 407, 30.09.2020

Öz

In architecture education, as in other disciplines of design, design studios stand out as unique environments where architectural design is learned by transforming theoretical and practical knowledge into design knowledge. Design studios, which constitute the core of the architectural education program starting from the first semester to the last semester, are the environments where students seek solutions to design problems - that gradually increase in scope and complexity each semester-, by trial and error, and interact with the studio tutor while seeking solutions, and thus experience the design action. Among all the design studios, first term design studio is the first place, where students encounter the critical, creative and multidimensional way of thinking required by the design action and design process for the first time. The first term design studio has a critical importance as the skills gained and attitudes developed by the students during this period form the basis of their subsequent education. Therefore, it is crucial to question the teaching-learning methods applied in the first term studios and discuss how to provide a more efficient learning environment. On the basis of these questions, the aim of the study is to present and discuss a studio approach that is developed for the first term design studio. For this purpose, firstly, current approaches to the basic qualities, components and methods of the design studio, as a learning environment in architectural education, are introduced with the literature research method. Afterwards, the methods, productions and learning experience of the Design Studio 1, which was conducted at the Maltepe University, Faculty of Architecture and Design, Department of Architecture between 2016-2018, are discussed and evaluated. Sharing and discussing the design studio experiences will contribute significantly to the experience/knowledge of the design studio education.

Kaynakça

  • Akın, Ö. ve Akın, C. (1996). “Frames of reference in architectural design: analysing the hyperacclamation (A-h-a-!)”, Design Studies, 17, s.341-361.
  • Anthony, Kathryn, (2012). “Studio Culture and Student Life: A World of Its Own”, Joan Ockman and Rebecca Williamson (der.), Architecture School: Three Centuries of Educating Architects in North America, Cambridge: MIT Press, s.396-401.
  • Aydınlı, Semra (2014). “Paralaks oda: ‘Öğrenmeyi öğrenme’ ortamı olarak stüdyo”, Semra Aydınlı ve Burçin Kürtüncü (der.), Paralaks Oda, İstanbul: Yapı Endüstri Merkezi, s.10-31.
  • Balamir, Aydan Keskin, (1985). “Mimarlık Söyleminin Değişimi ve Eğitim Programları”, Mimarlık, 85(8), s.9-15.
  • Broadfoot, O. ve Bennett, R., (2003). “Design Studios: Online? Comparing Traditional Face-to-face Design Studio Education with Modern Internet-based Design Studios”, Apple University Consortium Academic and Developers Conference Proceedings, Sydney, s. 9-21.
  • Cross, Nigel, (2006). Designerly Ways of Knowing, Londra: Springer-Verlag.
  • Cuff, Dana, (1992). Architecture: The Story of Practice, Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
  • Çıkış, Ş. ve Çil, E., (2009). “Problematization of assessment in the architectural design education: First year as a case study”, Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, 1 (2009), s.2103–2110.
  • Doidge, C., Sara, R., ve White, R. (2000). The Crit-An Architecure Student’s Handbook, Oxford: Architectural Press.
  • Dostoğlu, Neslihan, (2003). “Mimarlık Eğitiminde İlk Yıl Mimari Tasarım Stüdyosu: Uludağ Üniversitesi Örneği”, Ege Mimarlık, 47, s.15-19.
  • Friedman, Jonathan B., (1999). Creation in Space - Fundamentals of Architec¬ture: Architectronics, Iowa: Kendall/Hunt.
  • Goldschmidt, G., Hochman, G. ve Dafni, I., (2010). “The design studio “crit”: Teacher–student communication”, Artificial Intelligence for Engineering Design, Analysis and Manufacturing, 24, s.285-302.
  • Grassi, Giorgio, (1992). “An Opinion on Architectural Education and the Conditions Our Profession Has to Work”, A.C.S.A. Conference Proceedings, s.13-24.
  • Gross, M. D., & Do, E. Y. (1997). “The design studio approach: Learning design in architecture education”, J. Kolodner & M. Guzdial (der.), Design Education Workshop, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta.
  • Ledewitz, Stefani, (1985). Models of design in studio teaching, Journal of Architectural Education, 38(2), s.2-8.
  • Lueth, Patience Lamunu Opiyo, (2008). The architectural design studio as a learning environment: a qualitative exploration of architecture design student learning experiences in design studios from first- through fourth-yea, Yayımlanmamış Doktora Tezi, Iowa: Iowa State University.
  • NAAB (2019). 2019 Conditions for NAAP International Certification, Washington: The National Architectural Accrediting Board, Inc.
  • Paker Kahvecioğlu, Nurbin, (2007). “Architectural design studio organization and creativity”, A|Z ITU Journal of the Faculty of Architecture, 4(2), s.6–26.
  • Salama, Ashraf, (1995). New trends in architectural education: designing the design studio, Raleigh, NC: Tailored Text & Unlimited Potential Publishing.
  • Schön, Donald A., (1987). Educating the Reflective Practitioner: Towars a New Design for teaching and Learning in the Professions, San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
  • Schön, Donald A., (1985). The Design Studio, London: RIBA Publications Limited.
  • Sternberg, Robert J., (1985). Beyond IQ: A Triarchic Theory of Human Intelligence, New York: Cambridge University Press.
  • Uluoğlu, Belkıs, (2000). “Design knowledge communicated in studio critiques”, Design Studies, 21(1), s.33–58.
  • Webster, Helena, (2006). “Power, Freedom and Resistance: Excavating the Design Jury”, Journal of Art and Design Education, 25(3), s.286-296.
  • Webster, Helena, (2008). “Architectural Education after Schön: Cracks, Blurs, Boundaries and Beyond”, Journal for Education in the Built Environment, 3(2), s.63-74.
  • Yürekli, H. ve Yürekli, F., (2004a). Mimarlık Entelektüel Bir Enerji Alanı, İstanbul: YEM Yayınları.
  • Yurekli, İ. ve Yurekli, H., (2004b). “Informality in architectural design education”, Itüdergisi/a Architecture, Planning, Design, 3(1), s. 53–62.
  • Yürekli, Hülya, (2007). The Design Studio: A Black Hole, İstanbul: YEM Yayınları.
  • Yürekli, Ferhan, (2010). Mimarlık/Mimarlığımız, İstanbul: YEM Yayınları.
Toplam 29 adet kaynakça vardır.

Ayrıntılar

Birincil Dil Türkçe
Bölüm Makaleler
Yazarlar

Emel Cantürk Akyıldız 0000-0002-5230-1994

Yayımlanma Tarihi 30 Eylül 2020
Gönderilme Tarihi 6 Ağustos 2020
Kabul Tarihi 18 Eylül 2020
Yayımlandığı Sayı Yıl 2020 Cilt: 10 Sayı: 4

Kaynak Göster

APA Cantürk Akyıldız, E. (2020). BİR ÖĞRENME ORTAMI OLARAK TASARIM STÜDYOSU: MALTEPE ÜNİVERSİTESİ TASARIM STÜDYOSU 1 DENEYİMİ. Turkish Online Journal of Design Art and Communication, 10(4), 389-407.


All site content, except where otherwise noted, is licensed under a Creative Common Attribution Licence. (CC-BY-NC 4.0)

by-nc.png