A NEW APPROACH SODAP / WORKSHOP COURSES*

(SODAP- See, Observe, Design&Develop, Analyze, Produce)

Cigdem B. GOKHAN Assist. Prof. Dr. ankaya University

Theme:

Curriculum

Keywords: architectural education, design education; new method: sodap, practice - theory gap and education
Architectural education has always been in tension with architectural practice. That is how it should be; practice sometimes gets complacent and education is there as a kind of conscience, trying to correct what seems to be going wrong, So from time immemorial the architect has been subject to learning in two quite different ways, theory in classroom of some kind and practice, on the job or in the office.

G. BROADBENT The subject of this paper SODAP based mainly on the opinions briefly outlined in the course of this paper, which are the current problems and quest for solving the existing problems. Therefore, if the problem setting were not correct the result of that scientific study would not be correct either. Discussion of the problem may not be comprehensive within the scope of any conference paper, but in this part of the paper; the understanding of Existing Situation will be summarized, the observations and understanding is focused on the situation of Turkey. Then, a new proposal SODAP will be discussed briefly. A. EXISTING SITUATION - Problems Of Design Profession In General While preparing curricula, we attempt to cover as much subjects as the students should handle in their future professional life, however, the graduates usually are not fully equipped with the essence of these subjects that we forethought. Most of the time architectural graduates, or any design professional find themselves in a totally new environment completely different than academic environment. Clients have vague concepts on architecture; builders/workers have no idea on design, aesthetics, and philosophy of architecture. Meantime they find themselves to cope with the cost, materials availability; new techniques; a variety of professionals and technicians and even unprofessional people to work with, in addition complicated legal procedures and bureaucracy. In time, with practice, professional maturity obtained through culture and experience and concrete concepts will flourish, but how fast can this procedure be shortened? On the other hand students find themselves in a confusing situation, various job opportunities in branch fields in the profession without knowing which one to choose. Design as an optimization process of the various conceptual and technological elements such as; user needs, social, psychological and personal needs; aesthetics; environmental factors, structural factors; building physics, scientific laws, legislative rules and regulations; additionally, newly graduates have to deal with presentation techniques and communication skills to envelope this totally novice product. The elements of optimization can be categorized also in two complementary groups, as the tangible/ fact and figures (recognizable /measurable) and the intangible (vague or conceptual). Because of the unpredictable character of the intangible or conceptual side of design, such as: variation of needs from user to user and changing of needs or situations from one date to the other, with the impact of economy, design and teach how to design a real difficult task. From architects point of view, any design product or architecture is a final manifestation of the total design process. So how can education or training of architecture handle this difficult task? By teaching the students the tangibles? It is possible; but for intangibles, they may be taught as well but to

* This paper is published in the proceedings of conference held in Ankara, by EAAE (European Association for Architectural Education), Re-Integrating Theory and. Design in Architectural Education, May 2001

what extend? Can both be taught without a compromise? Since almost all the student works will stay on paper; how can a student have an idea of what her/his design would look like when it is realized, how far it can satisfy the user/customer and he or she him/herself? To what extent can it fit to the environment? To what extent the project get necessary approval from legal authorities? On the other hand how to start a design is another issue. Do all the architects start designing by taking these factors into consideration at the very beginning as step by step, or rather start to research and design parallel wise? Can we make a model, simulation of exact situation? 3D, even virtual reality programs, and simulation programs could help to solve the above matters satisfactorily? Talent and desire of student on the subject; his/her concentration, imagination of 3D spaces, proportions, feeling of space, feeling the soul of architecture of a building are also important items to be considered in design education. The Gap Between Professional Practice And Education / Theory Possible Job Opportunities Awaiting For Any Graduate Of Architecture Or Interior Architecture School Graduates of design schools aspire the model of a working environment in a design office or having his or hers own office. However, this narrow view and hope usually never happens and graduates find themselves in a surprising work environment, where usually they are not prepared for. No detailed research on this subject has been carried out In Turkey yet, professional organizations, such as Chamber of architects, have some data but not scientifically analyzed to address the issue. In Turkey, likewise other open market countries, investment in construction business is largely effected by countrys economical venue. So the affiliation of the graduates varies a lot and fluctuates with the change of the economical situation. In Turkey professional rights and privileges are acquired directly after graduation, so that the graduates must have the necessary knowledge and experience beforehand. A comprehensive architectural education program should cover all above problems and issues, as thorough as possible. This required for future professional to adapt himself to a professional life that wide range of interdisciplinary variations. The following list is the possibilities of working fields that await the graduates of architecture and interior architects. They can practice these fields in a private or governmental job places, including factories or their own private establishments.
Architectural design, Urban design Interior design Renovation Furniture design Product design or any other general designing Bathroom and kitchen designing and / or their marketing

Textile design and/or its marketing Construction material marketing Furniture and decorative elements marketing Technical drawing CAD-CAM operator Computer programming related to design matters Rendering

Model making Photography Site supervisor Project supervising

Cost control and /or quantity surveying Consultant / advisor Contract document specialist Trading / import-export of design or construction products

The Preliminary Knowledge Needed For The Above Possible Jobs In General:
1.

Design techniques on every scale Rendering techniques, model making, photography, and other presentation methods Research techniques Computer knowledge Programming techniques Problem solving techniques Good knowledge of recent construction and detailing materials

8.

Good knowledge of legal responsibility Marketing knowledge marketing techniques and skills techniques surveying knowledge management

2.

9.

10. Self

3. 4. 5. 6. 7.

11. Detailing 12. Quantity

13. Construction

techniques
14. Verbal

and written communication techniques relations skills

15. Human

Learning And Teaching Theories There are numerous types of curricula as there are number of universities. It seems each one of them approaches differently to the problem of education of design. May be it is due to the fact that, difference of the culture and characteristics of the university and of the specific urban environment it takes place. Where one method is right for one community and its university while the other may be wrong. But still the teaching depends on the learning phenomena, where the mechanism is same for all human beings. In the field of psychology of learning, many theories and models of teaching developed. These theories and models are already in application in our design studios and other lecture classes. But some still may have an impact on our programs and these support to our approach. To SODAP workshop. As a summary these are: Social Cognition Learning Model- child learns through problem solving experiences shared with someone else. (Vyogotsky, 1962) Social Learning Theory (Observational Learning)- Learning by observation involves four separate processes: attention, retention, production (capable of producing the act), and motivation (reason to do so). (Bandura, 1986) Behaviorism- Positive and negative reinforcement techniques can be very effective on learning (Phillips and Soltis) Constructivism- Meaning requires wholes as well as its parts; Learning is just not memorizing right answers but to construct his or her own meaning. (Brooks & Brooks)

Multiple Intelligence Model- There are at least seven ways to learn. Verbal, logical, visual, kinesthetic, musical, communication with others, self reflection (Gardner) Brain Based Learning- Learning is best when facts imbedded in natural, spatial memory. (Caine) Learning Styles Theory Individuals perceive and process information in different ways. Concrete and abstract perceivers; Active and reflective perceivers. (Kolb) Right Brain Verses Left Bran: Emphasis should be given on activities by incorporating, more patterning, metaphors, analogies, role playing, visual and movement into their reading, calculations and analytical activities. (Mc Carthy) Communities And Practice Approach- Knowledge is inseparable from practice. By doing we learn. (Institute For Research And Learning) Aesthetic Realism Method Adjectives encourage interest and oppose cynicism. Students wanted desperately to respect themselves for how they used their minds. Writing with descriptions adds interest in spaces. ( Eli, 1967)

From Students And Graduates Point Of View The graduates usually work as apprentices in the sector, especially at the beginning. And if they have the opportunity to design, the final design / building will usually have problems, and the new graduate usually learns through experience on the clients account. Another issue is societys understanding of architect, and interior architect. In Turkey the architectural profession is usually misunderstood and confused with structural engineering and even with builder, or worker. Interior architects are confused with decorators or even wall painters. (Aslantamer, 2000) Legislatively civil engineers and some other technical professionals have right to sign small architectural projects, especially in small settlements, and there are no regulations for interior works, therefore graduates have difficulty of introducing themselves. On the other hand, the profession is quite new to the society; the first interior architectural school was established 70 years ago. So the graduates should be equipped with marketing strategies as well. B. TRIAL OF SOLVING THEORY PRACTICE GAP: SODAP WORKSHOP To find a solution to all above stated problems, which are valid for most of the other professions, an applied education method is introduced through out the ankaya University. Before going into the detail of the situation in our Department and new course SODAP course, brief explanation of the Turkish University System; Our University and Department will be given to picture the background. Every year almost 1.5 million high school graduates apply to University entrance examinations (OSS). Higher level, 90 to 95th percentile of students, accepted to engineering, medical, architectural departments of government universities, the preferences of students are primarily based on the fashionable schools, high earning and easy job finding disciplines, such as, computer sciences, electronics, management, industrial engineering, The admission is done through a computer evaluation of a knowledge based aptitude test. However Interior architecture schools have 2nd level exams among the students who could not enter these departments. During their high school education these students usually had no background education to continue in architectural schools, thus almost all of them have no basic knowledge of drawing, understanding of arts or similar. Also all university programs apart from medical schools, last for four years. Coming to the situation of our University, which has started education four years ago, as a private foundation, has only single department related
4

to architectural discipline, which is interior architecture. Which has only two years background. To establish a sound place among other universities ankaya University accepts the principle applied education or unity of theory and practice in education. Therefore from the beginning of curricula structuring, our department, Interior Architecture accepts this principle as goal, and tries to achieve this goal in every course. In the meantime most of our students, which may belong to 80th to 90th percentile group of the entrees, unfortunately have no idea of the profession, they may not have any talent, knowledge or understanding of art or architecture at all. So the challenge of curriculum preparation lies on, how to educate these students, and prepare them to professional life in four years, give them to love of creation, and yet, make them superior to interior architecture graduates of other universities. That is why the whole curriculum is arranged and prepared on the basis of the unity of theory and practice in education. Therefore SODAP Courses are developed and put directly into action. Basing on a theoretical study, development of SODAP is possible, depending on the facultys experiences in various fields of the profession such as academic, private and governmental experiences in design and construction.

Main Goals And Objectives Of SODAP Workshops As it is mentioned above nowadays, with globalization, developments in telecom and IT, students study modes have changed. Students can make their researches through World Wide Web, and get information from all over the world by Internet. All these developments make the education a lot easier and quite helpful with the tools and means provided. How will the future shape the education? And how does a curriculum be adaptive to cover future developments with traditional education methods seem a real enigma. Should we change the whole traditional education system? With the development of new generation of intelligent computers will the architects role diminish? How curricula of architectural schools follow up these fast changes? In ankaya University, while preparing the curricula with the aim of solving the separation of theory/education and practice problem, and its forthcoming issues, a series of courses named Workshops have been introduced. The goal was to equip the school with many workshops, such as photography, architectural modeling, multimedia, carpentry, painting etc. and to make students to design and produce, do as more practice as possible during their education. So the workshop courses were programmed for 8 contact hours per week for each semester and continue all semesters during four years. But this traditional approach of workshops would not cover all the problems stated above. How would a new approach be developed to solve the issue of theory and practice, and possible problems related to students and the new technologies of 21st century? How can it be adaptive and flexible? For a new University the investments of these workshops are costly, which one of the workshop is given the priority? What if some of them become obsolete in the near future? So a new approach is developed: SODAP , the whole city is taken as a total workshop area. . This is an experimental approach and reaching a scientific conclusion is quite difficult unless couples of graduate groups are studied, the program is being developed, and will be developed by research, findings and feedbacks. It seems that, this approach can be applied in all sorts of design schools and even by other applied science schools, or even by law schools, which would need theory practice unification, with small variations and adaptation. The SODAP courses continue for each semester for four years, and course syllabi is the same for all, as follows: Workshop exercises to correlate skills gained at theoretical courses into practice.

Having a cross sectional character in SODAP courses every subject find its place in the course. The field of SODAP covers Urban Life Interactions Field and Schoolwork and study field. (fig.2). One foot of SODAP is always in real life so that it provides a connection of theory and practice. And, transfer of learning emerges through accumulation obtained in design courses and the knowledge accumulated in theoretical courses and with the practice in SODAP courses, students, depending on their capacity of personal creativity, can apply these accumulated knowledge in real life, in practice. Personal creativity here, is not confined with design creativity, but rather creativity in every sense, creativity in presentation, finding jobs, solving details, etc. (fig.2) For design courses, for example, one of the most difficult task is to decide upon the scale, human dimension and factors, basic design elements and principles, environmental control systems. For example, certain heat level can be appropriate for certain environment of certain task theoretically, But the effect of size, proportion of the space, the material, the color, the texture, the pattern is difficult to calculate from users point

Fig. 1 Field Of Sodap Courses Usually, in standard workshop or construction course, students are asked to develop a construction or detail projects, and at most, they are expected to make these details in workshops. The boundary of SODAP is not confined with construction and detailing subjects but rather embraces almost all of the courses and their relation in real life situation. Therefore the courses need prior basic knowledge. Almost all of the courses are separate and specialized in certain field and we expect students to apply all information in a mixed way in their designs and especially in their professional life So SODAP course is designed to fill this gap as well as a binding agent. It is not specialized in the sense of knowledge. It is rather cross sectional. (fig.1) The objectives are simple Students should be prepared for the professional life as far as possible These courses should exemplify or simulate the after graduation life. So that, practice should cover almost all theoretical subjects. Same subjects can be given each year but, from simple to more complex

Detailed course syllabi should be flexible to provide relation with other courses, especially to design studios, Courses should be adaptive to changes of the recent technological development, as well as the changes of social and cultural factors, Courses should be adaptive to the student groups and their capacity and capability, Students should be given the opportunity to develop their own understanding of the profession and their interest areas, Students also should set free to develop their professional skills, Students should rather feel themselves in the market, not broke apart from real life, Basic learning rules should be applied, Faculty must be chosen among the ones who have professional practice in various categories, Relation with other courses should be conducted by regular faculty meetings of that specific curriculum year,
Any project, designed within the scope of this course can be implemented by the student or a group of professional technicians that mimicking real life situation. (Designers almost all of the times do not apply their designs by themselves, so, similar to that, students can be given the permission to ask someone to do it for themselves, so the designs prepared in this course preferably will be produced by the student, or can be produced by someone else, under the supervision of the student.)

1.2. Learning Principles Applied The program of the courses based on the goals and objectives and learning theories mentioned above to achieve these goals and objectives. The following concepts of cognition are the basis of SODAP. Looking is not necessarily seeing, forced looking will end by seeing, therefore learning, Observing is learning, Feeling with 6 senses is learning, Mimicking is learning Drawing is learning. Writing is learning Discussion is learning Researching is learning Making analysis is learning Criticizing is learning. Expressing ones idea is learning Teaching is learning. Experiencing the real life situation is learning, Doing is learning, Experiencing is learning, Sharing is learning Evaluating is learning Repetition enhances learning

Fig. 2 Transfer of Learning Process

Fig. 3 Representation of Real Life Situation

Having a cross sectional character in SODAP workshops, every subject find its place in the course. The field of SODAP covers Urban Life Interactions Field and Schoolwork and study field. (fig.2). One foot of SODAP is always in real life so that it provides a connection of theory and practice. And, transfer of learning emerges through accumulation obtained in design courses and the knowledge accumulated in theoretical courses and with the practice in SODAP courses, students, depending on their capacity of personal creativity, can apply these accumulated knowledge in real life, in practice. Personal creativity here, is not confined with design creativity, but rather creativity in every sense, creativity in presentation, finding jobs, solving details, etc. (fig.2) For design courses, for example, one of the most difficult task is to decide upon the scale, human dimension and factors, basic design elements and principles, environmental control systems. For example, certain heat level can be appropriate for certain environment of certain task theoretically, But the effect of size, proportion of the space, the material, the color, the texture, the pattern is difficult to calculate from users point of view. Even if the necessary information is given in theoretical courses students will understand the situation if they experience it. So in SODAP courses through measuring the body, various elements, experiences different spaces, furniture, they attain the knowledge rather then understand it. Similar to that one can understand the functional appropriateness better, if they will experience it, in real life condition. Application of basic design rules, is always difficult to understand, by experiencing it, namely seeing in three dimension, discussing it, drawing it make students to have the knowledge. Almost all theoretical courses find its reflections in SODAP courses. (Fig. 4) Basically the following activities are held during SODAP courses:

SEE: The students, as a class, are taken to visit existing, buildings, buildings under construction, real workshops, nature, etc. to SEE; During visit the site is evaluated in every aspect, discussion is held, and the students are asked to write a report for each visit, according to site evaluation criterion. OBSERVE: The class with the instruction of the faculty, observe the processes involved, observe functional relations, factors affecting the existing situation of a building or artifact or a piece of furniture and try to find out and understand tangibles and intangibles aspects of architecture.

DRAW- DESIGN- DISCUSS: During visits students are expected to make interviews, DISCUSS with the interviewee, DRAW at the site to make a visual correlation of what they have seen/learn; so that they spend longer time to look deeply as well. And they are expected to DESIGN an object or something that they can apply their knowledge. ANALYSIS: Sometimes related to a building type, but mostly on an independent subject assigned by the faculty, students are asked to make researches, analyze the subject of design or problems, write reports, learn how to learn by themselves. This study usually done as a group work to practice team work and overcome its problems. PRODUCE- PRACTICE-PARTICIPATE: They are expected to design an object or something that they can apply their attained knowledge in all design and theoretical courses. They are expected to make or have them made in real workshops, if necessary in several workshops, present them, therefore PRACTICE the production process have an experience of multidisciplinary work. In this projects students projects are expected to be used either by themselves, by family members or real client, they represent the real designer role, client role sometimes can be undertaken by either the faculty, or other students, and sometimes family members or real client. (Fig.3)

Thus, it is expected that the students are and will be always conscious and knowledgeable about the real life situation, feeling the problems mentioned above, in A.2. Part of this abstract. SODAP, workshop courses also make students conscious about the difference of school projects and real life projects, so that the students feel free to be more creative and theoretical in their design courses.

Fig.4 . Theoretical courses and SODAP relation

Fig.5. First year courses and SODAP relation

The courses are conducted by a single or group of faculty, but whenever necessary, for certain period of time, theoretical support is given, either by the real professional or a specialized faculty. Thus each theoretical course finds its reflection in SODAP. Program is adaptive and flexible according to need; and always surprising for the students, and is very active too. This character of the course makes students attentive to the course willingly: The program is arranged so that every theoretical course find its reflection in SODAP. (Fig 4) Thus economy of time also achieved: For example with only one site visit; basic design principles, construction materials, ergonomics, legal approval mechanism, standards, and user requirements can be discussed and, each year the content of the course become more complex. For the first year the theoretical courses platforms and SODAP course relation is seen. (Fig 5) In the following table few examples of course program can be analyzed. By the analysis of daily course program applied in 2000-2001-fall semester, one can understand the nature of SODAP and its potential flexibility and future.

Table 1 Few Examples Of Some course programs and semester projects Applied in Fall of 2000
SUBJECT Plastic tea cup AIM To see functional appropriateness To draw / Visual Communication To see-ergonomics To draw- visual communication and body proportions To see-basic design elements and principles on building, what is architecture, interior architecture To observe- space organization and function To draw-V.C. To see- structural and finishing materials To observe construction work WHAT IS DONE? Discussion of the form, quality of material, Drawing Dimension of human body Drawing to see Discussion on basic design elements and principles; materials of construction; some details Drawing Writing a report about the building Discussion on, materials, their usage, building systems, and their vocabulary, different type of building trades, understanding of finishes Discussion on historical site, materials, details, building systems, basic design principals, functional change, user needs, understanding of interior works ASSESMENT Drawings are graded

Human figure

Drawings graded

Visit to a building (METU Fac. Of Arch.

Drawings and reports are graded

Visit to Ceylan -prime ministry construction site

Quiz graded

Visit to Ankara Citadel

To see- appreciation of historical site, basic design principles, materials and details To observe functional change To draw V.C. to see and observe

Drawings graded

10

Project Change that

Study on a specific building type and evaluation of an example

To analyze- different materials, function, user needs To see: different materials and how to handle, detailing To produce- From an old object creation of new one To draw-technical drawing To see: Evaluation of a building, Problems of team work To analyze: Certain building type, by literature and live research To produce: A comprehensive report To observe: Userfunction relation

Real life production Discussion on functional change, basic design principles, detailing, ergonomics, user needs, Presentation of the project User evaluation, Analysis in terms of function, bubble diagrams, activity diagrams, materials, building finishes, furniture, color scheme, building physics, building systems, Report writing, analysis drawings, analysis photographs Of the certain building and its type from books, and comparison

The object, drawings, verbal presentation, and all graded in open jury

Reports, drawings, verbal presentation with knowledge of the analyzed building type and how to analyze a building is evaluated, and graded

The Possible Difficulties Confronted During The Application Of SODAP

So far the main difficulties seem: Programming the course schedule of the faculty; especially the co-timing of the program of SODAP to the other theoretical courses. For visiting of the buildings the size of the student group; maximum 20 students seem to be fine for concentration, for bigger groups two or more sessions should be undertaken, Since close communication among faculty is a necessity lack of time for meetings seem to be a problem for the time being, probably in time with adaptive programming this problem can be altered,

Application of the course was a different experience for both the faculty and the students. Its dynamic capability makes the course adaptive to difficulties of finding places. Visiting places should not necessarily be the ideal one, since any building has positive and negative values. The final four-year program has not yet settled, with each years experience the course is reevaluated and finalized for the coming semester. To see and evaluate the advantage of the course cannot be achieved before seeing couple of graduate groups. Only after the degree of success can be measured.

BIBLIOGRAPHY ALLPORT, F.H.; Theores Of Percepton And And The Concept Of Structure; New york,1955 ASLANTAMER. O.; The Congruent And Distinct Points And Defective Parts Of Architecture And Interior Architecture, 2000 (Unpublished Study)

11

BANDURA, A. Social Foundations of Thought and Action: A Social Cognitive Theory. Engle wood Cliffs, Prentice Hall: NJ, 1986 CAIRNS, George; WORTHINGTON, John (ed); Perspectives On Archtectural Educaton; Insttute Of Advanced Architectural Studies, The University of YORK, U.K., 1997 EDELMAN, Gerald. Bright Air, Brilliant Fire; On the Matter of the Mind. Basic Books, 1992 ELLS, Henry; Fundamentals Of Human Learnng And Cognton; Wm. C. Brown Company Publishers, USA, 1972 (LB 1051, E 496) LANG, John; Creatng Archtectural Theory; Van Nostrand Reinhold ; New York,1987 Mimari Tasarm Sorunlar Ana Bilim Dal; Mimari Tasarm Sorunlar Ders Notlar: 1997-1998; Mimar Sinan niversitesi, Mimarlk Fakltesi ONEL,HAKKI Prof.Dr.; Mimarlk Eitiminde Kalite Ve Yeni Yaklamlar; Mimarlk, Ekim, 2000, No: 295,pp.58-60 PEARCE, M., TOY, M. (ed.) ; Educating Architects, Academy Editions, UK, 1995 PHILLIPS, D.C. & SOLTIS, Jonas F. Perspectives on Learning, Chapter 3. Teachers College Press. Practce; Allyn and Baco Inc., USA,1987 RITTEL, H.; For the Distinction Between deliberated and Off Hand Judgements; Prncples For The Desgn Of An Educatonal System For Desgn; In: Education For Architectural Technology, Berkeley,1966 UNDERWOOD, Geoffrey; Implct Cognton; Oxford Science Publications; Gr.Br. ,1996 VYGOTSKY, L.S. Thought and Language. MIT Press, Cambridge MA, 1962. VYGOTSKY, L.S. Mind in Society. Harvard University Press Cambridge MA, 1978.

12