The emergence of architectural
literature can be pointed to as the starting point of architectural education.
This historically, would sets its emergence, somewhere around the late fifteenth
century. This, however, ignores the contributions and building traditions developed, protected,
and communicated orally, sometimes with particular secrecy to protect
craftsmanship and the profession. According to history, masons, like all other
craftsmen, were bound into a guild or ‘secret societies.’ The transmission of
ideas went on inside it and that was a society whose proceedings were therefore inevitably and
understandable; unrecorded. In later years, the invention of printing weakened
the hold of the secret oath on craftsmen and thus was born architectural
literature cum education. In general, the
knowledge that helped architects or builders to shape their buildings in the
periods prior to the spread of printing remains unknown; we have very little
information, and most of it is in the form ex post facto myth. (ERMA,
1997).However , can one argue that the
demystification of architectural literature, even in our jet-age, brought about
a better understanding of between instructors, students and potential client in
the molding of the built environment?
Even the basic issue of definition assails
architecture and thus its teaching. Unlike most scientists, engineers, medical
professionals or even artists or theologians, architects always express their discomfort with
the definition of what their profession is or needs to be. At almost all
meetings of architectural educators organized to exchange ideas and
experiences, there is always a particular attempt to define what architecture
is, and what its theory ought to provide. The usual tendency is a willingness
to redefine architecture in order to accommodate one specific aspect of
discourse in the theory or practice of the profession and thus its education.
This could be a reflection of current thought or even a padding to the current
technological issues. In short, it is architects themselves who indicate their
desire to expand the frontiers of their profession. The question that begs the
mind of the design tutors is that how do you teach concepts and principles
whose definition and parameters seem- by necessity- amoebic?
The development in science and technology, the construction industry
and the production processes of architecture on a global scale e.g,CAD, has
added to the need to produce high-quality human resources through training, with
high adaptive and anticipatory abilities, in order to face the various changes
caused by those external factors as well as normative internal ones. What strategy
will be necessary in preparing tough manpower to face the challenge of
development in the near future epitomized
by sudden change, competition, complexity and uncertainty?
However, the education of the architect-
it has also been argued- is not exclusively, or even primarily, a function of schools of
architecture. The process of professional initiation starts its course long
before its formal unveiling at schools of architecture. For it is believed that
environmental perception starts at the on-set of consciousness. (UDIN KHAN,
2004). Would it be appropriate that the teaching of architecture actually
starts before a student enters an architectural school? Would architecture
schools therefore build on the students’ basic knowledge of architecture and
design history, and how to find and apply the information in terms of technology
and form thus instigating a change in curriculum? Does this apotheosis concept of
a tabula rasa confers on
the student a license to ignore the necessity for an anthropological approach
to design?
Some theorists are at arms with this
theory on the ground of it’s over simplification that borders on the naïve. (KARTOHADIP, 2003).
On
the contrary, these theorists observed a separation of architects into five
roles; the egoist, the pragmatist, the facilitator, the technical assistant and
the advocate -expressed in order of diminishing heroics. (UJAM, 2001).Does
current architectural education reinforces this hierarchy through a
value system that
rewards imagination and radicalism and deems timidity in design to be symptomatic
of weak-mindedness and betrayal? More often, creativity is seen as a
nonconformist attitude, if not a destructive force.
The word, creativity, is not very well
understood, neither is its role in determining form. Function is supreme in the
mind of the client, who does not seem to care about intuition. Yet, though they might see themselves as
strict functionalists, decorative elements are often appreciated by clients. How
can we improve communication or understanding of the desires of the client or a
people so as to avoid ambiguities? Would an anthropologic study of this people by
students enable a contextual, and thus a more efficient architecture or would
architecture merely become the marriage with an acceptance of - or intolerance for - simplistic popular
prejudices?
Due to rapid development in the field
of informatics and their inevitable in-road into the tools of design, current
curriculum might have lost the plot in its attempt to provide a solid grounding
in basic scientific and professional courses. Would it be necessary to evaluate
them annually and revise them every few years? (ABEL,1997).
Two major forces at work in all cultures are those of universality and particularization- universality, being a
by-product of a new world order that ignores international boundaries in terms
of socio-cultural idiosyncrasies; while in contrast, particularization is more
inward looking and less altruistic. We are confronted with duality in
our life and in our environment. These polar forces exist in a dialectic within
which architects have to operate. It is impossible not to be influenced by
international developments and to base architecture strictly on a regional
tradition. We stand the risk of appearing myopic in our out-look. This duality
in architecture must therefore be tackled in terms of education.(UDIN KHAN,
2004). The growth of the international dimension in architectural practice is
increasing so much that it requires international collaboration. Architects
must be educated to have better understanding, not only of the culture where
the building will be set, but also of the different cultures of members of the
design team as more and more collaborative work is being done by geographically
distributed teams. With the development of geographically distributed computer
networks such as the Internet, the possibility now exists for hands-on
collaborative engagements. Here, participants do not all have to gather in the
same place. (El-KADI, 2001).
In the not very distant future, virtual
design organizations, will be supported by virtual design studios, networked
facilities that provide participants with access to the virtual organisation's
databases and computing resources, messaging and data exchange, and video
teleconferencing, in a highly integrated fashion. We have to prepare students
to be able to work not only within their own cultures but also to give them the
tools to understand other cultures, and therefore their manifestations of the
modes of production, aesthetic and symbolic values. The architect's training
must cater for both a wider basic learning and a narrowing specialisation. Students
who later find themselves in scenarios described above would not face
unfamiliar considerations elsewhere. They will be able to empathize with that
cultural base and to bridge a vast gap between it and the predominantly Western
idioms and technology, which have become the stock in trade of contemporary
architecture. (WARD, 1989).
Perhaps regionalism, in cultural and
technological terms, is stronger in the Third World
because the latter has not yet reached the "advanced" stages of the
West in terms of political stability, communications, or technology, all of
which permit greater universality. The advantage in the Third
World is that universality of technological levels has not yet
taken a complete hold and therefore regional variants are more appreciated,
needed, and can be handled better. This actually means that an architectural
education that deals with both regional and universal values, using technology,
form, and culture as a vehicle, may actually be easier to implement and
realized in the developing world than in the West. This evidently translates
into a plus for tutelage in our developing context.(UDIN KHAN, 2004)
From this dualistic approach, - universality and regionalism-
education should actually be able to benefit by looking at regionally varied
cultures and the possibilities of reciprocal exchange with development to their
mutual gain. Architecture can then finally assume its inherent meaning as a
fundamental discipline of human learning, and not only a profession.
A
very important aspect of globalization should be in the openness of
the universities to expose students to the rest of the world. A
student must see and experience as much as possible and therefore believe that change and
improvement can happen. We need
to give them the capacity
to dream and develop a vision of architecture as
something not about personal preferences but about the issues that
we are dealing with in our societies. These issues can then become the
framework and the boundaries of negotiations. We need to advocate skills in
negotiations and the acknowledgment of the others to ensure that our architects
are able to achieve their vision in the real world. It is not obedient
architects we need, but architects who are
realistically well informed and who have the confidence to share and
the skill to open up and engage in dialogue, breaking out of isolation to engage
with the larger teams professional or otherwise. We all exist in the team
called society. (ALARMDDIN, 2001).
There are unfortunately two main
reactions to the West's "leading edge” in the field of environmental
informatics: either the technological and formalistic solutions are embraced as
being "progressive" or "modern", and are seen as symbols of
dominant world culture. However, with rising nationalism and a search for a
definition of self-identity, these manifestations maybe completely rejected-
especially by beneficiaries in the developing Diaspora; and usually replaced
with a nostalgic look at the past that is no longer entirely appropriate to the
universal elements of life, even in a developing country. (UDIN KHAN, 2004).The
fear of technology is the beginning of retrogression. Hence, the education of
architects must embrace both the universal and the specific in order to come to
terms with these different tendencies. The cross-cultural nature of
understanding design in today's multifaceted world seems to be crucially
important everywhere. Le Corbusier's work in India and Hassan Fathy's
galvanising of Western sensibilities are cases in point. Therefore, should Architectural
education, say in the Developing world, be distinct from what it should be in
the Western world? The answer is both yes and no. It could contain similar
training in technology, which would allow choices to be made between, say
mud-brick and steel. Western solutions may be evaluated from a viewpoint based
on regional specificities; forms in relation to culture would be evaluated
through a similar filter.
TRAINING
VERSUS REALITY.
Admittedly, different universities have
different approaches to architectural education Teaching methodology in all the
schools is through studio and lecture courses. In studio, architectural
projects increase in size and complexity as the student progresses through the
years. In the French system, students are
given a project a month with a quick sketch design every six weeks
to develop "quick thinking.” In the American system, upper-year studios
tend to be thematic, and the number of projects per year varies between two and
four. In the American system, the students take some electives outside the
department, whereas in the French system they follow a set program that
isolates them further in their own world. In our developing context, an amalgam
of all of the above systems seems to exist. However, in most cases, the problem
is getting the art of communication in the studio environment- and by extension
in architectural practice- to work.
Negotiating with clients is an art in itself
and teaching environments make serious errors in this regard. In most teaching
setting, the teacher tends to play the role of the client. Whereas the teacher
knows more about architecture than the student does; in real life, the
situation is the reverse- the
client, in general, is less informed. This requires time and patience on the
part of the architect. In university, the student is the client in that he/she
is paying for the education. In real life, the client is paying the architect.
Whereas the teacher's main concern is with the architectural and spatial
qualities of design, the client is concerned with cost, image, time and
finance, maintenance and, if the architect is lucky, the architectural quality
of the design. (ALARMDDIN, 2001). Whereas
the teacher can see the potential of the most minimalist of drawings, clients
see lines on paper. Added to which, most clients will not admit that they do
not understand. They might just look dazed and nod silently. However, should
they see something they don't like post construction, even if it is already
"cast in stone", they will pull it down. Communication does not mean
just clear drawings that make sense, but listening to and understanding the
other.
Being open, is therefore vital, and yet
the formal mode of communication in schools of architecture is called a 'jury'.
Due to frigidness on part of students at jury, statements of observation made
by jurors often fail to sink-in. The student might even be to busy trying to
make an impression and defend himself as if issue raised relate to his
‘person’. Even now as we try to explain our works to our clients, we still take
some of their comments very personally.
(ALARMDDIN, 2001). ). It is this dichotomy between the ethos of
architectural education and the reality of an architect in practice, which is
one of the main issues of architectural education. The implication of this
educational ethos is the attitude that the architect develops towards others
which creates barriers, and the waste of opportunities for enrichment
Traditional architectural education is also
prone to compartmentalize the 'bits' that constitute building activities - structural, environmental,
historical and theoretical programmes, for example - as a series of disjunctive components which do
not merge into a holistic understanding of the potential of architecture. The
student is left to reconcile these often-conflicting packages. Even the core of
architectural education, theory, is serialized into historical and national
doctrines and reactionary ideals, leaving the student to develop a personal
design 'style' based on selection and rejection of rhetorical motifs. The
implications for the built environment are the breakdown of communication
between architecture, colleagues in allied professions; cultures and the
alienation of many people from their traditions and achievements.(Ali, 2004).
In real life, an architect never
works alone. The size and nature of a project determines the size of the team
and the members of it. Teamwork is about sharing control and negotiations.
Negotiations are about
mutual respect and understanding, acceptance of limitation, flexibility,
feasibility, as well as communication. We are trained; and we train architects
as individualistic creative people to develop their senses and design ability
to create a better world. However, as any practicing architect would argue, the
act of architecture in the real world is all about teamwork, starting with a
client, and working with other professionals, including officials, colleagues,
and builders. (ALARMDDIN, 2001).
Hence, we need to teach them another skill, the skill of teamwork. It is
important that we learn to ask questions, become less defensive about our work,
and have engineers working with us from the early stages, to capitalize on the
great potential of the new technologies. Good teamwork requires knowledge and
respect of the other. Other professionals such as engineers and landscape
architects come into the educational process of studio in the upper years of
study at school. Moreover, in real life, they tend to come in to the design
process at the middle stage when they are then asked to "solve" the
architect's technical problems.
The engineering faculty tends to tell
students of architecture that they can build anything, because they depend on architects
for projects and want to make sure they do not upset their 'future' clients.
Somehow, our students start thinking of themselves as 'gods' and the engineers
as just technicians. The good engineer, therefore, is the technician who does
his work with the least disruption to the architect's project. The bad ones are
therefore those who get uncomfortable when building elements as designed by the
architect, push the envelop of “safe design parameters.” (WARD, 1989).
Graduate students are asked to design the minimum-allowed development area on
the plot of land designated for assignments. Today, clients, are asking for
illegal extra areas to be designed in from the start. Unequipped with any
negotiating tools, our young architects feel overwhelmed with the reality of
the market, lose confidence, and dismiss their university education as too
idealistic.
Construction drawings still tend to
remain a mystery that scam most
students as their use is not clear or not properly taught. Increased intake
into schools of architecture places huge demand on tutors in terms of time and
energy. Lecturers tend to require student to produce less drawing-details, lest
the work become overwhelming.
Good management is essential for the
survival of any office in practice. In these offices, the architect once again finds
him herself part of a team of designers. However, during their stay in school,
students rarely have themselves working on one design team. Design is regarded as personal property. The important
thing in education is to remove fear through knowledge of the subject matter
and acceptance of our limitations and prepare our student Architects for these
challenges. No matter how long you practice, you might never know as much about
construction as the builder. That is what he does all his life. As an
architect, you need to know what you want to achieve, consider it logically and
communicate it well, and then listen. After all, it is a partnership between
the architect and the builder with one common goal- the quality of the project
that will produce the best work.
(ALARMDDIN, 2001).
The nature of studies in the field of
architecture is a creative one (strongly related to all branches of the visual
arts) and that is why Departments of Architecture all over the world usually
attempts to adopt a unique format for enrolling students quite different from
that of other departments.(ALI, 2004).
The Architecture Departments have always been caught between the liberalism
necessary for architectural education and systemic rigidity demanded by the
administrative authorities of the university. These architectural teachers
often find themselves in opposition to decisions by the Academic Council.
Despite all the opposition and protest; the so-called unified system off
admission requirements are often imposed. The suggestions atimes championed by
architects regarding creative aptitude tests, to determine the suitability of
the students are often not acceptable to non-architects. They insisted on
taking into account the overall academic achievements of the incoming students
rather than the creative abilities of the students.
This
whole confrontation has brought to light the conflicts between engineers and architects, the university
administration and teachers of architecture. It also brought out the critical
question as to whether teachers of architecture should officially be given a
free hand in teaching and training architects, or whether they should follow
'majority' opinion in determining their course of action. In schools of
architecture, mediocrity is gaining prominence over excellence and that is a
dangerous phenomenon. (ALI, 2004). The problems
is partly due to a
lack of awareness by colleagues
in general about the practice, teaching and performance of architecture. Mass education regarding understanding of
architecture is necessary for the proper practice of architecture.
CAD
Architecture
The
Internet has transformed communication, knitting together smaller networks and
connecting people in different parts of the world who would otherwise have no
contact. It is already reshaping
human interaction. A new
vision for a worldview that unites scientists, architects and artists is being
created. The implications of a new vision and shared networks for architectural
practice are no less profound. (El-KADI,
2001).
Architectural
practices are ahead
of the education curriculum of many architectural schools. Despite a few
scattered attempts to implement the bases of globalisation and information
technology in architectural education, many architectural departments have not
yet fully recognised the urgency and the speed of these developments in
Architectural practices. Difficulties related to the understanding of the
nature of globalisation in architectural schools needs serious analyses.
Existing methods to implement information technology and its use in architectural
education are questionable. (GELENTRER,
1989). The application of multimedia is limited, and we maintained the
stagnant classic hierarchy levels of drafting, 2D and 3D modeling. The need for integration of multimedia
capabilities in the key subjects of the main architectural curricula is yet to
be understood. The use of
multimedia for communication in architectural schools, on the other hand,
should therefore be seriously looked into. The virtual studio has become a known
technique for linking different schools, providing critiques of architectural
project from distant locations (usually from well-known architectural
practices) or for linking professionals from various disciplines of the built
environment. (LINDSAY, 1996).
The danger, however, of the
ever-increasing reliance on CAD in the schools of Architecture is the reduction of the
student's ability to sketch. In any meetings with clients and others, if one
cannot explain himself on the spot by drawing, you will not be able to convince
the client and may lose control of the project. At the end of the day, with all
the impressive abilities of computer technology, there is no substitute for the
sketch drawing as a preliminary tool in the dialogue between the architect and
the other? “….,
for the hand is the cutting edge of the mind. (ALARMDDIN, 2001).
The second issue Is that information
technology does not lend itself well to
a teaching environment were the students’ population is bloated, as obtained in
most of our architectural schools. Tutelage in CAD often requires close interaction in a control
environment, a luxury we might not be able to obtain.
Anthropology in Architecture
To understand the rich and pluralistic
cultures of a people, the students should take compulsory courses on the
history of people and their architecture. Selective fieldwork course should be
designed for students who are interested in experiencing the traditional
architecture in its original environment. These courses should not be designed
according to the strict chronological 'Western" history of architecture
that begins with classical Greece ,
and continues through the Renaissance, until it reaches Modem architecture.
Rather they should be a combination of an anthropological and historical approach
with the people’s context in mind. These courses should be aimed at giving the students an understanding of the
relationship between the morphology, anthropology and of vernacular architecture
(orientation, layout, building anatomy, structure, symbols, etc) and factors
which influence it (culture, cosmology, climate, geography, material, etc). Some
fieldwork could be organised between students from different departments to
work together in a small, real project, usually in the rural area, to help the
community in designing and constructing facilities for their villages through
appropriate technology. (KARTOHADIP,
2003). Existing vernacular and colonial buildings are often considered
old and candidates for destruction; therefore the need to develop the
appreciation of the students towards the cultural heritage in their environment
becomes paramount.
Architects trying to be regional in
their creation often suffer from an identity crisis. Historically, language,
and socio-political situations often fails to translate into a distinct dentity.
In some regions of the world, architectural expression often changes with
change of the political party in power. Teaching of architecture becomes a
challenge in this environment of constantly shifting goal-post. (ALI, 2004).
Creative designers and instructors are
therefore in a bind and, at times, have difficulty being accepted.
In
most developing countries, with a range of ethnic cultures and religions, with
uneven development between urban and rural areas, issues on Housing and
Settlements aiming to give the
students an understanding of the process of the growth and development of settlements
should be analyzed. It focus maybe on influencing factors, the current and
future problems and challenges, alternatives approaches, and the role and
contribution of the architect in solving the housing problem. By and large, the
architectural awareness of the populace is poor and even university-educated
people have very little creative art
orientation. The onus is therefore on the architect to bridge this intellectual gap.
RECOMMENDATION
-Students
must learn to establish design criteria, which are authentic to, and enhance
every place and its culture, as opposed to applying architectural formulae
derived from remote geographical and cultural situations.
-A
dynamic atmosphere of mutual enquiry should be encouraged rather than the
traditional becoming the raison-d’etre.
Sharing and testing philosophical interpretations among colleagues and tutors,
fostering a communal, self-sustaining and evolving educational model compatible
with the holistic paradigm (UJAM, 2001).
- An interactive ways of teaching design in an
unconventional way by using computers creatively.
-Authenticity
of design should be encouraged above all other considerations and students
should be encouraged to view architecture as an essential phenomenon within and for cultural
development.
-Invite
feedback from students, tutors and Ph.D. students in architecture, landscape
architecture, conservation, urban design, history, environmental design,
engineering psychology and philosophy; to induce a holistic attitude to design
nourished by a wide acceptance of other fields.
-Avoid
notions that site for project can be understood as an abstract, non-real
concept, a purely physical matrix of design limitations that posses neither its
own past, its own future nor intrinsic cultural worth.
-Avoid fragmented teaching methodology that is exclusive
of other disciplines.
- Familiarization of students
with the implementation of the Internet, CAAD and other programmes and
devices that assist thought process and thus design.
- Create an enabling atmosphere for the exchange of ideas and
establish a creative dialogue on architecture with other students across
international borders.
- Improve
individual student confidence through the international nature of the
project and competition, which, beyond just allotting an e-mail address, gives
the students a recognised footing on the Internet
- A natural approach, which put natural character as the main
factors to be considered in the admission of students, design, construction and
management of space and the control of resources in construction as construction
administrators. This is to develop and prepare human resources as educators and
researchers.
CONCLUSION
A new vision of the world and
its social and cultural structure is emerging. While the role of architects-as
scientist cum artist- in shaping this vision is sacrosanct, the understanding
and active use of the capabilities of the tools that are used for its creation
are vital. Architecture should therefore represent a prevailing worldview, and
be able to improve this new vision through more cultural understanding. This will
only happen when architects are educated to make use of the valuable
information that distances us from those who are either zealots of the machine aesthetic or sticklers to mere
medievalism.(El-KADI, 2001).
Architect as servant and interpreter needs to be more widely defined. We need
to educate individuals to use the vast spectrum of sources from which they can
and should draw inspiration and train them to be aware of the impact their work will have on
the future and their environment. The same architect who is a poet with verses
in steel, timber and concrete, or a composer whose music is frozen, may become
a 'social engineer' or 'advocate' under the pressure of social demands. (OZKAN, 2002).
The positivism, which dominated the age of scientific discovery in
the field of informatics, needs a one-to-one relationship to be established
between theory and practice. In this relationship, the body of knowledge,
determining what would be the guide in practice, establishes theory. Due to influence
of technological development, schools of architecture have to prepare graduates
to more complicated architectural programme. For on one hand, they might be
required to design modern buildings in urban areas, but, on the other hand, they might face a design problem
in a traditional context. They might design houses in a large, real estate
development, but they might also face the challenge, as development consultants,
of providing services for the poor.
In order to establish a new
architectural phenomenon that is fully authentic and not a simple regurgitation
of historically admirable but obsolete components, the architect’s training
needs to apply the understanding of locus classicus into the present day. (UJAM,
2001). This would lead into the formulation of a creed or testament as guide to
educators. For instance, cultural needs are in constant flux and a built
environment that does not fulfill current needs, alienates people from their
future and confines them to their past. To satisfy these needs, the architect
must be instructed on components of what
constitutes cultural ecology and learn to have a comprehensive awareness of the
framework of symbols and values that lie deep within the subconscious of every
individual. Because cultural needs are deeply embedded, they are neither
self-evident nor directly revealed by questionnaires. Inductive and deductive
analyses of responses, through training, that apparently consist of common
sense, practical advice and uncomplicated prejudices would reveal a rich source
of deeper yearnings and cultural requirements. Therefore the aims and
objectives of a focused Architectural training would be to enlighten each
student with a holistic appreciation of mankind as it is revealed through the
micro-phenomena of particular loci,
and to guide them towards translating these existing form into
authentic architecture using modern tools. It is hoped that the graduates will
have a basic knowledge of professional design, but with a high ability to adapt
to and anticipate a variety of situations in the fast-changing world. (UDIN KHAN,
2004).
BIBLIOGRAPHY
ABEL, C. (1997). Architecture & Identity. Architectural Press,
Oxford
Academy
Editions, London
ALARMDDIN,
H. (2001). "I Want a Colonial House" The
Architect
versus
The Other. Aga Khan Award
for
Architecture. Geneva.Switzerland. Vol. 6. pp.
13-
15.
Ali, M.
(2004). “Architectural
Awareness and Education.”
Vol. 9. pp 20- 23.
AYE, A. (1992) Collaborative Learning Through Computer
Conferencing, Architectural Press, London
El-KADI, L.
(2001). “Need for Advocacy Architecture”
Aga Khan Award
for Architecture. Geneva.Switzerland.
Vol. 6. pp. 26
40.
EIISON, I.
(1995). “Introduction: Computers Architectural
Practice and
Education.” Munich , Germany
ENCKS, C. (1997) ‘The
Architecture of The Jumping Universe’,
The journal of
Architectural Planning Research,
6:3 (Autumn), pp. 227-239.
ENCKS, C. (1985). Modem Movement in Architecture, Penguin
Books, London
ERMA, N. (1997). “Design Theory Education: How Useful is Previous
Design Experience”. Design Studies, Vol 18, No I,
January
1997, pp. 89-99
UJAM, F(2001). “Locus Architecture.” Aga Khan Award for
Architecture. Geneva.Switzerland. Vol. 6. pp.
70
78.
GELENTRER, M. (1989). “Education: Veering from Practice.”
Progresn've
Architecture, 349, p. 61.
INDSAY, M. (1996). “Research into the Performance of High Quality
Video Conference Technology using Optical
Networks and its Application to the Teaching
of
Architecture.”
ECAADE. Conference, Edinburgh
KARTOHADIP, R.
(2003). Architectural Education In a
Culturally
Diverse Country. (Unpublished
PhD Dissertation) Institute of
Technology,Badung Indonesia
MCLUHAN, M. (1967). The Medium Is The Message.
The Penguin Press, London
OZKAN, S. (2002). “The Dilemma of History: Theory and Education in
Architecture.” Aga Khan Award for
Architecture.
Geneva.Switzerland. Vol. 6. pp.
23-26.
RONCHI, K. (1992).
”Education in Computing,
Computing in
Education,” E.W.E International Conference
On Education, Practice and Research
in
WARD, A. (1989). “Phenomenological
Analysis In The Design
Process.”
Design Studies, Vol 10, No. 1, January
1989,
pp. 53-66.
UDIN KHAN, H. (2004). “Architectural
Education: Learning From
Developing
Countries.” Aga Khan Award for
Architecture.
Geneva.Switzerland. Vol. 6. pp. 45
54.
ZAMIR, Y. (1989) “An
Ethical Perspective On Knowledge In
Architectural Education,”
The journal of
Architectural Planning Research, 6:3
(Autumn), pp. 227-239.
No comments:
Post a Comment