REDISCOVERING THE RENAISSANCE ARCHITECT: The Role of Cooperative Education in the Architectural Curriculum (original) (raw)
Related papers
Architect - a fateful mission or everyday work?
World Transactions on Engineering and Technology Education, 2022
The authors of this article discuss the ambiguous necessity of talent for the execution of architectural practice. It opens the question of its assessment and whether the attainment of knowledge, skills, competencies and artistic creativity within this professional realm can be achieved through training and the use of various guidelines.The authors highlight the importance of tacit knowledge and its transformation within the knowledge spiral based on socialisation, externalisation, combination and internalisation phases, and the related contexts. This can contribute to increasing the effectiveness of education and raising the level of a knowledge-based society. They describe the main characteristics of Generation Z (Gen Z) the first cohort of which has already entered the labour market. In light of this and considering the results of an alumni on-line survey carried out in the Faculty of Architecture and Design at the Slovak University of Technology in Bratislava (STU), Slovakia, on the most important skills for the enforcement for practice the authors argue for changes in architectural education.
The Architect and the Craftsman
From the time of the Renaissance to the present age, architecture has come to be seen as a profession increasingly removed from the act of building. Practical knowledge gained through making, under experienced tutelage, has gradually been replaced by theory as the arbiter of technique and form. This sharp distinction between builder and architect has left the role of the architect as something of a conductor of an orchestra. The architect is now charged with the task of creating representations, usually of descriptive geometry, as a means of conducting skilled labourers and craftsmen during construction. As architectural tasks in recent times have become more complex than ever before, the splintering of the design process into discrete specialisms has inevitably resulted in the further narrowing of the architect's role in and knowledge of the construction process. This essay is an exploration of the work of Madrid based architectural firm Ensamble Studio, whose role as architects spans the gap between initial conception and finished building, between drawing board and building site, between representation and artefact. My aim is to enquire into the architect's approach in using the craft of model-making as an instigator for the construction process. I will also seek to determine the appropriateness of this approach to architecture in interpreting and addressing the society which it embodies.
This paper applies the research and outcomes of my dissertation in terms of ‘beginning’ according to Edward Said within the conference theme to the issues of architectural education for professional practice. My goal in this paper is to show that what is necessary in architectural practice for projects is differentiated from architecture, which is original, as beginnings. In doing so, this paper will take steps to show that whatever coheres as beginning in architectural practice can be seen as subordinate and is not its superordinate programme. As the immeasurable or no–measure ‘original’, architecture is differentiated from technology. The engagement with discrimination of beginnings in architectural practice implies transvaluation of technology and the human condition is exteriorized in a complex reverberation. Practice that heeds this leads to the re–contextualization of technology in the profession of architecture and education, and a revival of finding out what is architecture. The need in beginning (an) architectural education is by nature essentially individual as is beginning any project in architecture. Beginning is a mark in time at a ‘place’ where the student connects with architecture. It is not a dimension in terms of length or any material, it is a mark of questioning at ‘origin’. This paper develops this ‘sudden’ mark that has no measure as locus that is necessary that architecture may presence via the measure (technology) that it gives. This paper can not address all the effects of transformation and transvaluation that follow such an initiation and an essential turning away from the object as architecture. Its purpose is to open that avenue for presencing what architecture revealed in obscuring systems that are corrosive to it, at a time of humanity that largely forgets its essential questioning aspiration, taking technology to be architecture. The questioning of origin and measure is at the vital heart of architectural practice.
The Metametaphor of Architectural Education
Twenty-first century education of architects is further challenged by new markets, users and contractual situations and whole countries and civilizations which here-to-fore had little or no need for professional architectural services as practiced in already industrialized and developed nations.
What Would Vitruvius Do? Re-thinking Architecture Education for the 21st Century University
Journal of Civil Engineering and Architecture, 2016
In the 1996 AIA (American Institute of Architecture) Convention in Minneapolis, the governing bodies in the education and professionalization of architects in the US (namely, the American Institute of Architecture, American Institute of Architecture Students, National Council of Architectural Registration Boards, National Architecture Accrediting Board and the Association of Collegiate Schools of Architecture) released the Boyer Report, subsequently published as Building Community: A New Future for Architecture Education and Practice. The report was named in honor of Ernest Boyer, an educational theorist who also participated in writing the text. Less comprehensive than the canonical texts by Marcus Vitruvius Pollio and his interlocutors, it is nonetheless a mirror of our current assumptions about the education of the architect. This paper looks at the epistemology inherited from Vitruvius as it shapes pedagogy up and through the Boyer Report and into the 21st century. Using a method of comparative analysis applied to past and current architecture programs, our argument is that historical divisions between professional or applied knowledge and liberal or theoretical knowledge inherited from the past limit our capacity within architecture education to integrate new strategies for knowledge creation and dissemination. It is concluded that any serious revision of architecture education means a systematic reconsideration of the basis of architecture knowledge. What of the (persistent) Vitruvian model is relevant in our post-modern condition? What do we learn from the image of our profession projected through the lens of the Boyer Report and it is like? In other words, what would Vitruvius do?
Architectural Knowledge The Idea of a Profession.pdf
All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reprinted or reproduced or utilized in any form or by any electronic, mechanical or other means, now known or hereafter invented, including photocopying and recording, or in any information storage or retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publishers.
Metametaphor of architectural education
Twenty-first century education of architects is further challenged by new markets, users and contractual situations and whole countries and civilizations which here-to-fore had little or no need for professional architectural services as practiced in already industrialized and developed nations.