As someone who is considered a newcomer in the architectural academic field, I found the typical teaching process to take place inside closed studios without engaging the community in whatever we are teaching.
Upon searching for the meaning of open education systems, most of the readings talk about the structure and the role of administration in the educational process. Yet, there seems to be limited writings on the quality of education itself, i.e. the production and delivering of knowledge inside the studios. Teaching manner, which takes the place of the learning manner, is a one-way direction from the teacher to the students.
Where is the community? Doesn't including the people ensure a more democratic design process? Do you think the teaching process should take place in a more open environment rather than the traditional studio rooms?
Hi Taher Abdel'Ghani,
I believe that the study of architecture at university, in addition to having the special needs with respect to learning for the future profession, has the needs in common with all other school grades - for me it is a matter of constructing the didactics (at all levels, not only in the study of architecture) considering the psychological space of each person and the space for interactions between students and teachers. These are the well-dated issues that have never been fully realised. Take courage and enjoy your work! P.S. I leave a reference link in Italian. Book Lo Spazio Psicologico e la Strutturazione del Aula
:"The physical environment greatly influences the attitude and behaviour of individuals. For each person, the environment is an extension of their body and the body is an extension of the environment. Thus, the space in which the person lives is 'his or her living space', in which he or she assimilates and projects his or her life. Every pupil, as well as every person, has their own psychological space, characterised by their personality and their way of relating to the physical and social environment. By capturing the psychological space of each pupil, one can therefore identify and understand his or her personality style and psycho-social relationship skills. The detection and definition of each pupil's 'psychological space' is determined by the analysis of the type: - of pupils' behavioural graphs, - of psycho-social relationships in the school (marked by relational arrows), - of relationships and directions of physical distance in the various environmental situations, - of spatial positions they assume in the classroom. The formation of the school role of each pupil is determined by the interaction between the psychological spaces of the pupils and the teacher, together with their ability to adapt to and direct the rhythms and activities that take place in the educational environment, which can be identified with the behavioural graphs and relational arrows of the pupils in the classroom".
Greetings. In my opinion lectures are highly effective for sharing content and they are really interesting when experts are called. Classes might focus on problem solving based on such lectures and/or some bibliographical research. Additional spaces for discussion would be useful. For instance, some years ago some professors started a project where both students and professors where invited to share a drink in a local café. Some selected passages were selected for launching the discussion, eventually a film or some pictures might play the role. I remember it really enjoyed the activity and we could share views with some senior architects.
H mr.Taher
in my opinion there is too leval in the formation process, one with the class (closed system) with an autocratic methode to get the basic knowlege, the with a more dimocratic methode outside the class for the practical training (open system)
- Badges
- Science topic