Practice and Education in 21st century architecture: a sociologist's view (original) (raw)
Related papers
Architectural Practice and Academia: the Praxis and Theory continuum
Changing Trends in Architectural Education
This paper will problematise the contemporary fundamental distinction between architectural profession (practice) and architectural education (academia). The common understanding sees these two domains as separate, disconnected and even in opposition in the arena of architectural conduct. This common notion usually affiliates professional practice with the concept of praxis and academic education with the concept of theory. In this situation, one could suggest that professional practice and academia become the limits of a continuum; at one end, professionals disparaging academia seeing it as theoretical, abstract and removed from everyday practice, while academics disparage practice, thinking of it as a banal, anti-intellectual and base application of theoretical concepts. Returning to the origins of the concepts of praxis and theory, this paper attempts to re-address their problematic by finding threads of connection within the context of architecture. Aristotelian Ethical tradition situates three kinds of ethical activities (energeíai), in order of importance: theoria, poiésis and praxis. Aristotle, in privileging theory over practice, established the foundation of our current polemic. Through a greater understanding of the roles and relationships of each of these activities it becomes clear that none works in abstraction from the other. In these terms, if we accept theoria (theory) as the pursuit of truth and knowledge for its own sake through contemplation, and practice (praxis), as a pursuit for knowledge and creation through ‘making’, we can begin to understand more clearly how a shifted notion of theory relates to praxis. So, far from being in opposition to theory, practice has an inseparable relationship with it. Architectural practice is not merely the doing of something, but rather a considered, creative, dialectical act of creation fully engaged in the pursuit of truth and knowledge. This conflation of practice and theory is examined through an analysis of studio teaching and student projects at the first-year level at the Architecture School at the University of Edinburgh in 2005/06, where the authors are Course Organiser and Tutors. Using studio projects as key studies, we will test the teaching and learning procedures that reflect the notions of theory and practice that appear in design education. Ongoing ethnomethodological study of these projects through interviews; video and audio recordings from the tutorials and the reviews; photos of the drawings, sketches and models made during the design process; and the experience of participant observation as teachers - contrasted with our experience in professional architectural practice - illustrate a fresh interrelation between practice and theory. By moving along the continuum between architectural academia and practice, we will explore the space between the extremes of the Aristotelian theoria and praxis.
Binding architectural practice with education
Architectural education emerged a long time after humans began to construct their dwellings. The process of its formation began by passing down skills from generation to generation. Later, it was systematised in workshops. Even during antiquity, but especially in the Renaissance period, the education was further enriched with theoretical and practical rules of architecture. The current way of life implies specific changes in methodology of teaching the new generation of architects. The construction process is also changing with the use of new technologies and practices, such as 3D printing of entire building elements or the use of drones. Capitalising virtual reality, increasing emphasis on the introduction of practical skills, and the presence of practicing teachers are now part of the academic scene. Is institutional educational still necessary? Would it be possible to gain the requisite knowledge and skills solely through experience in the architectural office, as it was the case in the past? Will the architect’s position remain justifiable and tenable in the future? Can this role be taken over by the technologically advanced and ever more reliable automation, which could efficiently satisfy the most specific requirements and design details demanded by the investor? Compared to the automated process, what added value does the architect offer?
Practice of Teaching | Teaching of Practice: The Teacher’s Hunch, 2019
The reflections developed in this paper took place from a sentence that architect Botta pronounced during the conference ‘The Practice of Teaching’ held at the Biennale Architettura 2018 – 16th International Architecture Exhibition. In that context Botta stated “It is not possible to teach architecture, but it is possible to learn arc hitecture”1. This statement unveils the paradox inherent in architectural education on two different levels of reflection: first , reveals a truth about the different facets of architectural education that can be taught such as history, theory, technology etc., whereas the practice of architecture itself cannot be actually taught. The second stage of the reflection reveals an even more interesting feature of architectural education: design and the design practice are in fact taught but we do not have a clear understanding of how the process happens. Such anomaly suggests the existence of a nebulous space between teaching and learning in architecture an...
2015
Although the relation of theory praxis is deemed as a very complex, problematic and contentious philosophical issue similar to the chicken and the egg polemic, the operational model of “ordinary sciences” is insistent on the chicken getting out of the egg. As natural sciences are assumed to be the supreme and exemplary type of activity and due to theory’s instrumental role in leading to successful achievements in this realm, theory also gains prominence in other fields. Consequently, the basic concern of a great number of instructors and numerous scholarly papers in many applied disciplines including architecture is “integrating,” “connecting,” “linking” or “bridging a gap” between theory and practice. Despite all attempts from past to present, there is not much progress for a sufficient solution of the relationship between the theory and practice “problem” in architectural design and its education. This has given rise to the thought that it is probably a pseudo- problem in the cont...
The hinge between practice and academia
2008
The issues of practice and academia are inextricably connected yet demarcated by the deepest of divisions. Often, the concerns of (either) one seem of little consequence to the other. Practice, with its inherent demand to respond to its economic imperative, expects academia to provide an inexhaustible supply of freshly trained ‘talent’, prepared to competently produce an endless volume of construction details. Academia, with limited time to share only the narrowest bit of knowledge in pursuit of educating the next generation of stewards of the built environment, have little time for the hard pragmatics of the practice environment. This suggests a certain binary relationship that surely does not exist, by and large, in this most extreme form. To invoke the metaphor of a continuum, with design/theory on one extreme and service-oriented practice at the opposite extreme, we can situate each architectural education institution and each architectural practice along that continuum appropri...
The design studio educational process is a unique, intensive, laboratory-based learning environment with a full range of media for exploration of diverse concepts that strategically merge the art of design with sciences and technology in a decision making endeavor. As for the intended learning outcomes proposed by the literature, most importantly was the recognition of the role of the architect as a player in a larger team, and architecture as a social service, dedicated to those who will benefit from it. The studio, then, should promote for the human cultures, and critical thinking and self learning. Including the different sources and domains of knowledge, the studio practices are expected to interactively integrate knowledge unity and/or connectivity. . Hence, the design studio IS truly a "melting pot" in which all the knowledge and experiences and skills are blended. Consequently, the design instructor has a crucial and complicated and intertwined role, as all approaches for devising design studios depend primarily on this persona. It is believed that the design instructor's role towards his students is the same role of the designer towards his society; a "facilitator". Someone who directs the process rather than runs it, as literature puts it.
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.
Journal for Education in the Built Environment, 2010
Planning education does not exist as an independent professional education in Finland. The educational background of the majority of practising urban planners (approximately 50-60%) is architectural education. Because of this national particularity, this paper concentrates on architect-planners as a professional group, and presents findings from a national survey the authors conducted in Finland in January 2009. The key question in this paper is how Finnish architectural education prepares urban planning professionals for their work, and how architect-planners perceive the strengths and weaknesses of architectural education with respect to the competence demands they face. The conclusions of the study point to certain inner contradictions inside the architectural profession. Architectural education passes on a somewhat narrow conception of art which translates into an emphasis on individual creativity, questioning and problem solving skills. Striving for excellence in the art of architecture, perceived in this way, seems to work against developing the students' skills in negotiation, conflict management, interdisciplinary teamwork and leadership, all of which are indispensable for practising architects. Resolution to the contradiction is sought from the work of Dana Cuff (1991) and Kristina Nilsson , who associate artistry with the social ability to manage complex problems creatively and reflexively, in cooperation with other professionals and actors from other fields. Such a redefinition of art and artistry in architectural education might help settle the tensions the authors have identified in the survey analysis. the public sector, who concentrated mainly on land use planning, either drawing plans, or acting in the role of purchaser of plans from private consultants where the function had been outsourced in the municipality.