Archives

  • 2018-07
  • 2018-10
  • 2018-11
  • 2019-04
  • 2019-05
  • 2019-06
  • 2019-07
  • br Introduction Empirical studies on the cognitive

    2018-11-14


    Introduction Empirical studies on the cognitive activity of design in architectural design education are increasing slowly but steadily. Many researchers have investigated action analysis, working memory, imagery reinterpretation, and mental synthesis of designers (e.g., Suwa et al., 1998; Gero and Neill, 1998; Purcell and Gero, 1998; Goldschmidt, 1994; Casakin and Goldschmidt, 1999; Goldschmidt, 2013). In most of these studies, the transmission of knowledge is considered to be a cognitive process, and learning is regarded as one of the most active factors. Such studies are based on computational models and generally examine the coding of knowledge and the effect of coding on design solutions. In addition, these studies have been developed to analyse designer׳s formal behaviors during problem solving and to determine the cognitive features of the design process and the designer׳s thoughts. The studies commonly investigate several cognitive levels including physical, perceptual, functional, and conceptual. Design education is not a structure that is focused on a single-dimensional and uniform teaching/learning process. On the contrary, design education requires a structure that directs the student designer toward multi-dimensional and dynamic thought processes and “ways of knowing as a designer” (Cross, 2006). The Eosin Y studio, as the core Eosin Y of this educational system, is acknowledged as a cognitive and social system, including knowledge and formation of knowledge structures with social interactions, where creativity is the most important part. Creativity, the cognitive design process in the studio, has a direct relationship with students’ cognitive and cultural schemas. As Engeström (2001) explained, the source of creativity is not found inside a person׳s head but emerges from the interaction between a person׳s thoughts and his/her sociocultural context. Culture affects the way we think and act and how we classify people into social groups based on their cultural imprint (Gautam and Blessing, 2007). Many studies concern how personal characteristics, such as motivation, emotional stress, and regression (the behavior of escape when facing difficult problems), have an effect on the design process (Gautam and Blessing, 2007; Razzaghi, 2009; Ro¨se, 2004). However, fewer studies focus on the relationship between cultural components (which this study discusses under the concept of cultural schema) of designers and the design process. The social aspect of the design studio is another important asset of design learning. The American Institute of Architecture Students (AIAS) describes this feature as “the experiences, habits, and patterns found within the architecture design studio that make up what we have termed ‘studio culture.’” They declared, in the report of AIAS Studio Culture Task Force, that, to design a healthy studio culture, five essential values need to be considered: optimism, respect, sharing, engagement, and innovation. Every school has its own qualities and needs that will ultimately govern how bacteriophages creates a more successful studio culture (AIAS Studio Culture Task Force, 2016). According to Lueth (2008), architectural design studio culture is partially generated by a student culture that encompasses teaching pedagogy, as well as the actions of and interactions among students. From this perspective, the goal of the design studio can be defined as the acquisition of design knowledge through explaining cultural schemas, knowledge structures, and global strategies in design thinking. Through constructing representations of design thinking, as Cross (2006) stated, the students gradually improve their ability to think in “designerly” ways. As the second component, the architectural design process is evaluated as a form of creative problem solving. This process consists of the conceptual design process, in which conceptual ideas first emerge, and includes the generation of “preinventive” structure and “preinventive” exploration and interpretation (Smith et al., 1995). In addition, the conceptual design process consists of creativity, which is a cognitive and social process that involves the generation of new ideas or concepts and new associations between existing ideas or concepts.