Research Final Shit

Chapter 1

THE PROBLEM AND REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE

Introduction

Architectural education is concerned with providing the students with

comprehensive knowledge, skill and competence in architecture and their total

growth and development within the framework of democratic ideals and values; and

the preservation, conservation, and promotion of the Filipino Architecture heritage

within the global context, thus making the architecture curriculum relevant to the

present needs and latest international trends - CHED MEMORANDUM ORDER

(Series of 2006. NO. 61. Section 1).

According to some study taken in Australia, Understanding Architectural

Education in Australasia (2008) almost half of the architecture curriculum in a typical

school dedicated to design. It is not surprising that both staff and students tend to

identify design as the most important skill for an architect. However, almost all of the

research that has been undertaken into the profession and its operations points to a

misalignment between the focus on design in architectural education, and the focus

on construction and management in architectural practice. The response of

educational researchers is that design is a skill that has to be developed early in an

architect’s career (because it takes time to mature) and it is ideally taught in a

university environment. While there is evidence that this is true, the dominance of

design within schools can also cause problems.

1

As it was stated in one article from the National Commission in Culture and

arts entitled “In focus: Benchmarking Philippine architecture” (2015), both product

and profession faces the danger of deterioration of quality and depth wrought by lack

of intellectual discourse related to pedagogy and practice. Having this issue most

especially in the Philippines are quite challenging more especially in learning more

ideas in designing. Many students nowadays seem to have less idea of what are

they are studying. Graduates are not fully qualified to their course. Students training

must given emphasis before graduation. Learning all principles and be able to apply

these can really help the students in their chosen field.

This scenario enables the students to obtain a deeper understanding of

architectural theory and practice through the application of their architectural

knowledge in ‘real life projects’. By obtaining work in architectural offices, the

students experience the economic realities of a building project and through this

work experience the students are given the opportunity to work collaboratively; to

become effective communicators; and to be participants in the analytical and

creative analysis of a building project. Learners may engage in a variety of

metacognitive processes to monitor and control their learning—assessing the task at

hand, evaluating their own strengths and weaknesses, planning their approach,

applying and monitoring various strategies, and reflecting on the degree to which

their current approach is working. Unfortunately, students tend not to engage in

these processes naturally. When students develop the skills to engage these

2

processes, they gain intellectual habits that not only improve their performance but

also their effectiveness as learners.

Significance of the Study

With the related data gathered above, the researchers tends to identify the

importance of the two methods most especially in balancing Design Practice and

principles of Architecture in the University of Mindanao. This study may engage to

other alternative ways and solution to emphasize the learnings and strategic ways of

analyzing its concept to produce competitive students in the field of architecture and

academics.

Review of Related Literature

Presented in this section are the analysis of the research that support the

study “Comparative analysis between design practice and principles” to provide

ample information on the variables under the effectivity of the two. Included in this

chapter is the overview of a topic to be discussed and the studies conducted in the

University of Mindanao, Matina Campus Davao City.

Architecture Education

According to Aknesil (2001), the ancient Roman practices of architectural

education have parallels to both the Egyptian and Greek traditions. Vitruvius (1914),

the author of the most extensive architectural treatise surviving from that era, offers

a list of knowledge that an architect should possess, but he is less clear on how that

knowledge should be developed.

3

According to some analysis, as architects, the concept of balancing between

two masters; the search for beauty, and the reality of construction; is not a new one.

Vitruvius explained the importance of maintaining equal aspects of both in saying,

“Architects who have aimed at acquiring manual skill without scholarship have never

been able to reach a position of authority to correspond to their pains, while those

who relied only upon theories and scholarship were obviously hunting the shadow,

not the substance.” Too much practical knowledge and one could never hope to rise

above the status of a laborer; too much theory and nothing solid would be built.

‘Paper Architecture’ is a recent term for the latter case, in which buildings are

developed in drawings but are never built. This type of theoretical focus has been a

part of the profession since Etienne-Louis Boulee and Piranesi, and continues in

today’s architectural discourse in the work of Zaha Hadid or Daniel Libeskind who,

though building some projects, have a well-known body of drawn work. Regardless

of the influence of these theoretical works to the field, architecture is, a “bimodal

profession,” and it requires its practitioners to have a feel for both good design and

the infrastructure required to bring these to life.

Design Practice

Design practice is an introductory architectural design studio through which

students develop critical, analytical and speculative design abilities in architecture.

Students develop representational techniques for the analysis of social and cultural

constructs, and formulate propositions for situating built form in the arena of the

urban and suburban environment. The studio initiates innovation through a

4

sequence of projects, spatial models and rule sets that introduce each student to

rule-based design processes-- in which a reversal of expectations leads to the

creation of novel spaces and structures. It introduces computation, geometric

techniques, and digital fabrication. Projects explore the formation of space in relation

to the body, and the developments of small scale public programs.

In Summer Preparatory Studio (2015), the studio establishes a fundamental

understanding of representation and abstraction to which more of your own thoughts

and ideas about spatial thinking can be added. This will involve, by means of the

architectural studio, a reiterative investigation into the relationship of technique,

form, and meaning through study, invention, testing, and evaluation. This expose

students to complexities of visual communication and the design act; to develop

skills of spatial manipulation; to give you the self-confidence in making valid

decisions within set time limits; to develop the skills of graphic presentation

necessary for interpreting and communicating your architectural intentions; and

above all, to instill the ability to combine insight with the rigorous analytical study in a

design process that is efficient, personally effective, and which becomes second

nature to you as a working process.

The American Institute of Architecture Students (2006) analyzed the design

studio problem and expressed doubts on the effectiveness of current studio

practices in providing adequate design-thinking education. The report indicates that

studio culture values project appearance instead of the actual design process. In

recent years, similar problems have been the topic of debates in Khartoum.

5

Principles

Academics are interested in developing, testing and propagating knowledge;

an approach that involves research and scholarship. Practitioners are concerned

with short-term or rapid responses to situations and, while working on conventional

projects, are unlikely to develop a substantial new knowledge base or share this

knowledge freely. This approach is about the strategic deployment of knowledge.

The profession has a longer-term perspective centered on refining and defining

knowledge. The limits of knowledge, and the determination of competences, are

important for this last category.

In addition to the above reasons for a division between the profession and

the academy, there is a difference of opinion about the purpose of architectural

education. In some countries (like Italy) an undergraduate education in architecture

is considered an excellent generalist degree for people who wish to work in a wide

range of fields. In other countries (including Australia) the curriculum is largely

constrained by the needs and expectations of the architectural profession. Many

researchers argue that it is in everyone’s interests to open architectural education to

as broad a range of students as possible; to educate people in the value of

architecture and of architects.

Cook and Hawley (2004) disagree with what they see as the “dumbing

down” of architectural education that has occurred because of the rise of

bureaucracy in universities; what Tom Heneghan describes as the university sector

“standardizing mediocrity.” Cook and Hawley strongly reject the new emphasis on

6

journal publications, rather than experience in design or professional practice, as a

criteria for academic appointment. Cook goes further when he condemns career

academics and calls for practicing architects to teach architecture once more. Cook

is especially critical of people earning PhDs who intend to practice architecture; he

sees the two as mutually exclusive.

A complicating factor in all of these points of view is that the schools are not

static; the education environment is evolving. Boyer and Mitgang (1996) noted that

architecture programs are typically expensive in terms of space and staffing levels

and that these programs provide little research revenue for universities. This is a

commercial reality of architectural education; it demands a substantial financial

investment. Boyer and Mitgang note that if more architectural research was

produced in the schools, which is exactly what is expected of academics, then

universities may be more willing to invest in them and in turn employ more

academics to support students.

According to Summer Preparatory Studio, Physics for Architects or History of

Architecture the first of three required courses is the history and theory of

architecture, this is a lecture course with discussion groups that meet weekly with

teaching assistants. The course explores fundamental ideas and models of

architecture that have emerged over the past three hundred years. The history and

theory of architecture is a lecture course that examines selected topics, figures,

projects, and theories from the history of architecture and related design fields

during the 20th century. The course also draws on related and parallel historical

7

material from other disciplines and arts, placing architecture into a broader socio-

cultural-political technological context. Seminars with teaching assistants

complement the lectures. In the system of architecture design, theory helps in

providing useful guidelines However, the broad principles employed in the final

outcome provide a general way of thinking about such large complex engineering

systems.

Elger and Russell (2006) suggest that history, geometry, mathematics,

construction, logistics and economics are all of equal importance to design in

architectural education. Yet, by emphasizing design, architecture schools mislead

students both about the reality of architectural practice and the wider values of

society. Nicol and Pilling (2000) argue that the focus on design is unhealthy in

schools because it venerates the product, not the process. Many different

knowledge domains are involved in design and play an equal role in this process,

but because the focus is on the final product, only design is valued. Aldrich (2005)

reinforces this view with his criticism of design teaching that it remains concerned

with the finished object, but not the impact of that design on the user or inhabitant.

Aldrich calls for architecture students to develop “self-awareness and empowerment”

from “a participatory approach” that encourages them to imagine the actual impact of

their designs.

Probably the greatest tension recorded in research on this topic is between

design and construction. Paul Segal argues that architects have lost their historic

position of primacy in the built environment because they have placed design ahead

8

of construction in their system of values. Boyer and Mitgang together with Unay and

Ozmen (2006) separately express their concern about the dominance of design over

construction and technology in the curriculum. Murray (2002) records that

architecture students themselves often call for more emphasis on construction and

architectural science in the curriculum. Crinson and Lubbock (1991) agree that the

focus on design often leads to the production of graduates with little or no

awareness of construction methods, or the trades that support the construction

process.

In addition, after graduation, architecture students typically express a low

level of satisfaction with their educational experience. Cuff (1991) argues that

graduates become frustrated when they first enter architectural practice because of

the uncertainty this step entails. Duffy and Hutton (1998) claim that the problem isn’t

uncertainty, but lack of preparedness. They argue that architecture schools’ fixation

with the “Star system” and design “is the root cause of so many” graduates’

“unrealistic expectations” and this results in “widespread disappointment.” Nicol and

Pilling are less specific in defining the problem, but they are clear that it results from

the gap between the student experience in the academy and the graduate

experience in commercial practice. The former is largely unable to replicate a

practice environment and the latter is unable to simulate an educational

environment.

An additional explanation for graduates’ unhappiness with their educational

experience relates to workload. Architecture students complain of exhaustion,

9

isolation and stress. Bachman and Bachman (2006) analysis of students’ workload

identified that excessive loss of sleep, poor diet, lack of exercise and marginal family

and social activity are all common characteristics of the life of architecture students.

However, Bachman and Bachman also found that only one activity, design,

accounted for the majority of workload pressures. The design process also caused a

range of anxieties that lead directly to students’ feelings of dissatisfaction and

depression.

In connection with these there are also study that it is a curiosity, which is

noted in some historical research, that the atelier model, which was once seen as a

radical approach to teaching and learning, is now ubiquitous in architecture. Indeed,

such is the importance of the design studio, that schools, which do not possess

anything resembling a studio space or system, still label their curriculum structures

to clearly identify a studio component.

Vesely (2004) argues that, in architecture, the “key place for all educational

activities is the studio.” Furthermore, any “exploration, investigation or research into

the program and content of a project should be based on a visual hypothesis of the

project” that is developed in the studio. Wigley (2004) also offers an educational

model for architecture wherein “Everything is organized around the design studio as

it should be.” Potts (2000) similarly accepts that “Studio teaching is central to the

pedagogy of architectural education.” Cuff agrees that the design studio is “the heart

of architectural education” but she also adds that the studio is potentially its greatest

flaw.

10

While the studio ostensibly provides a social context for practice, in reality it

can generate an unhealthy “clannishness” between students. Clarke (1994)

proposes that the problem of the design studio is precisely that it encourages

professional isolation; it separates architecture students from other disciplines. Nicol

and Pilling support this point of view when they observe that the design studio is so

internally focused that it separates the student from the world in which architecture is

produced and inhabited. Stevens is also critical of the way the design studio

promotes a singular form of enculturation often at the expense of education. On a

more pragmatic level, university administrators and academics see the studio as “the

most expensive and least understood component of architectural education.” They

ask: “what does it achieve that cannot be achieved in other ways” and do “we fully

understand it, can we explain it and can we quantify its benefits?”

The primary characteristics of the Beaux-Arts atelier were that it promoted

long working hours, deliberately isolated architecture students from other disciplines,

encouraged them to bond with each other and develop appropriate cultural values,

and it promoted design as the pre-eminent skill of the architect. Fundamentally, the

strengths of the design studio are also its flaws.

On the side of a proper theoretical education, there is the belief that preparing

students with the ability to think in a critical fashion allows for graduates to apply

their minds towards a variety of careers, offices and roles. There is an

acknowledgment that “there is a big difference between training and education,” and

that architecture schools are located in universities for a reason; students are

11

expected to learn to explore a variety of solutions, not simply how to do something

right instead of wrong.

Statement of the Problem

1.) How important is the Design in architecture?

2.) How important are the principles of architecture?

3.) How principles of architecture does affects the students in analyzing the

Designs?

4.) Can design practice affect the learning of architecture principles?

5.) How confident are the student with their architectural knowledge to become a

good architect?

12

CHAPTER 2

METHODOLOGY

This chapter presents the descriptive research use in the procedure study.

The research design and the respondents of the study as well as the data gathering

procedure, the research instrument and the statistical of data will be discussed.

Research Design

The research design used the qualitative method which is used to describe

the contemporary events. Which aims to know the importance of the two individual

techniques in dealing of their profession using the two alternative ways of learning:

design practice and learning principles.

Thus, the researcher aims to know the difference and the effectivity

between two alternative ways of learning and to determine which method of learning

must be given emphasis and to prioritize according to the needs of the students

especially the Architecture students of the University of Mindanao.

Research Subjects

The respondents of this study were the students of the University of

Mindanao from College of Architecture and Fine Arts Education specially the

Architecture students who were enrolled for School Year 2015-2016. The

13

researchers randomly selected 30 students. The study were conducted inside the

University of Mindanao, Matina Campus.

Research Instrument

The researcher developed a structured questionnaire to be answered by the

students, which was constructed based on the readings and findings of different

literatures from books, internet, and also from the researcher questions itself base

on the respondent’s proficiency. The questionnaire has attached the description of

the purpose and importance of the study covers the topic of the learning between

Design practice and Architectural principles in the students of Architect in University

of Mindanao.

Data Gathering Procedure

The researcher study included analysis of all the research and articles that

support the study of the learning between Design practice and Architectural

principles to provide information on the variables under this study.

The following were the steps undergone by the researchers in conducting the

study:

1. Administration and Retrieval of the Questionnaire.

The researchers personally distribute the questionnaire and were thoroughly

given instruction. Questions and clarification were entertained and after each

14

respondent was done answering the questionnaire the researchers immediately

retrieved.

2. Retrieval of the Instrument.

The gathered data through the questionnaire were collated, tallied, and was

subjected to statistical analysis and carefully encode and presented.

Statistical Data

The responses of the participants through questionnaire were tested using

the following statistical tools:

Mean. This was used to determine the difference and the learning between

Design practice and Architectural principles preparing by the Architecture students of

University of Mindanao.

Person-r. This is a measure of relationship between the two alternative ways.

This was used to determine the significance of the learning between the Design

practice and Architectural principles that exerted by the students of Architecture.

T-test. Was used to assess whether the difference and the learning between

Design practice and Architectural principles are statistically different from each other.

15

Chapter 3

RESULTS AND DISCUSION

This chapter deals with the discussion of the specific problem that shown

earlier in the chapter 1 of this paper.

The respondents were mostly male that results to 43% with 57% by female.

Most of the students are in 1st year level with 37%, with among 2nd year (47%), 3rd

year and 4th year (6.67%) and 5th year (3.33%). It can be seen in the tables below.

Table 1

Year Level 1st year 2nd year 3rd year 4th year 5TH year Total

Total with Percentage

11

(37%)

14

(47%)

2

(6.67%)

2

(6.67%)

1

(3.33%)

30

(100%)

Table 2

Gender Female Male

Total with

Percentage

17

(57%)

13

(43%)

16

Table 3

School Year Level

Design Practice PrinciplesYes No Yes No

1st Year 94 6 62 382nd Year 118 22 103 373rd Year 18 2 17 34th Year 20 0 20 05th Year 10 0 10 0TOTAL 260

(86.6%)30

(10%)212

(70.6%)78

(26%)

The table above shows the result that the respondents are more

knowledgeable in terms of design practice than learning principles. However there

are factors that the students cannot be applied especially in design practice. This

may appear in contrast to the first statement but the results also explain that design

principle is still what the students prefer. But both factors show importance because

the respondents respond positively.

It may be by the opinions of the students that probably both design practice

and design principle would help them to become better designers. In addition, there

is moderate agreement between design practice and design principle would help

them to become a better architect in the future.

17

CHAPTER 4

SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION

Presented in this chapter are the summary, conclusion and recommendation

drawn by the researchers that based from the result of the investigation.

Summary

The researcher surveyed to the 30 architecture students in the University of

Mindanao. They answered a Yes or No type of questionnaire and they studied,

analysed and interpreted the results of the gathered data.

The purpose of this study is to know if design practice and design principle

are balance.

Conclusion

Based on the findings of the study, the following conclusions are drawn:

1. Based on the result of the study and data gathered, we conclude that Design

is very important in terms of propagating new ideas and creating new

solutions to formulate creative strategies in designing.

2. Principles of Architecture helps students to engage analytical concepts and

knowledge in planning most especially in the awareness of relevant codes,

regulations and standards of planning, design, construction, health, safety

and use of built environments.

18

3. Design Practice is dependent to the principles of architecture in such way that

these principles serve as the foundation of knowledge and understanding the

concept of designing.

4. Design Practice absolutely affects the learning of principles of architecture; by

focusing design other important areas of study may be undermined and

students might graduate without an appropriate breadth and depth of

architectural knowledge.

5. The result shows that the architecture students are confident that their

knowledge in both methods could lead them to become a good architect in

the future.

Recommendation

Based on the finding and conclusions of the study, the following

recommendations are given:

1. The school administrator shall treat both factors equally and cater the

needs of the students that would help them accomplish those activities in both

factors.

2 .The professor of architecture should give a clear instructions, competent

and open to the students on their teaching ways in order to students understand the

lessons and to prevent pressure and failure to the student’s academic performance.

19

3. The architecture students should focus and concentrate on their lessons

and activities on both factors, and they must be open on suggestions, questions or

any matter that bothered their understanding in their lessons.

4. The future researchers may conduct another study that helps to the future

architecture students to help and understand those things that hesitate and bother

their understanding as well they obtain values knowledge and comprehensions to

improve and help to architecture students study.

20

References

ACSA. ACSA Reports from the ACSA Topic Groups Preparing for the October 2008

NAAB Accreditation Review Conference. Washington, D.C.( 2008).

Jones, J.C. (1980).Describing Design: A Comparison of Paradigms, PhD thesis,

Delft: Delft University of Technology.

Schön, D. (1985).The Design Studio: An Exploration of its Traditions and Potentials.

London: RIBA Publications Limited.

Vitruvius M. (1914).The Ten Books on Architecture, translated by Morris Hickey

Morgan, New York: Dover

Wiley. Dorst, C.H. (1997).Literature references Cross, N. (1984) Developments in

Design Methodology.

Wiley Interscience. Rittel, W.J. and Webber, M.M. (1973).Design Methods: Seeds of

Human Futures, London.

Wiley. Rowe, P. (1987).Planning Problems are Wicked Problems, In Cross, N.

Developments in Design Methodology.

Simon, H. (1969).Design Thinking, London.

Rhowbotham, K. Problems in the British Architecture School regime. Balancing

Architectural Theory with Practical Education, Architecture's Mythos /Culture, As an

Architect or Intern, At School

21

APPENDIX

22

NAME: ________________________________ GENDER: ______________

SCHOOL YEAR: ___________

INSTRUCTION: Put a check on the blank that best describe your answer.

DESIGN YES NO1. It enables me to design buildings that fit to the global needs2. It enables me to solve problems in planning3. It enhances my ability to engage conceptualization4. I am confident with my drawing skills5. It enhances my ability to apply skills in the creation of a design solution6. It enhances my ability to design future7. It helps me understand design procedures and process8. I have the knowledge ofdesign precedents and architectural criticism9. It helps my ability to analyze and formulate planning10. It improves my ability to communicate through drafting

PRINCIPLES YES NO1. It enhances my ability to act with knowledge of historical and cultural precedent

in local and world architecture.2. I am aware of the relevant codes, regulations and standards for planning, design,

construction, health, safety and use of built environments.3. I have enough knowledge of structure, materials, and construction.4. I am aware of philosophy, politics, and ethics as related to architecture.5. I have the knowledge of the history and practice of architecture.6. It enables me to understand the life cycle of materials, issues of ecological

sustainability, environmental impact, and design for reduced use of energy, as well as passive systems and their management.

7. I have the idea in Technical knowledge of structure, materials, and construction.8. It enhances my ability to act with knowledge of the fine arts as an influence on

the quality of architectural design.9. It enhances my ability about understanding of services systems as well as

systems of transportation, communication, maintenance and safety.10. I am aware of the management of natural systems taking into account natural

disaster risks.

23

CURRICULUM VITAE

24

CHRISTIAN RENN L. GARDOSETRENTO, AGUSAN DEL SUR

__________________________________PERSONAL DATA

BIRTH DATE: September 30, 1995NATIONALITY: Filipino

__________________________________EDUCATIONAL ATTAINMENT

ELEMENTARY: Trento Central Elem. School Trento, Agusan Del SurHIGH SCHOOL:Trento National High SchoolTrento, Agusan Del SurCOLLEGE: University Of MindanaoCOURSE: Bachelor in Science in Architecture

25

MARK JEFF V. CALLANTAMANDAY, COTABATO CITY

09363367038__________________________________

PERSONAL DATABIRTH DATE: April 12, 1991NATIONALITY: Filipino


ELEMENTARY: Cotabato City Central Pilot SchoolCotabato CityHIGH SCHOOL:Notre Dame Village National High SchoolCotabato CityCOLLEGE&COURSE: Notre Dame University (BS in Electronics and Communication Engineering)University Of Mindanao(Bachelor in Science in Architecture)

26

JEDD DARYL D. MANULATBUCANA, DAVAO CITY

09499280793__________________________________

PERSONAL DATABIRTH DATE: April 03, 1997NATIONALITY: Filipino


ELEMENTARY: Cesario Villa Abrile Elem. SchoolBucana, Davao CityHIGH SCHOOL: Davao City National High SchoolF. Torres St., Davao CityCOLLEGE: University Of MindanaoCOURSE: Bachelor in Science in Architecture

27

JESSA ROSE B. MOLETORIL, DAVAO CITY

09301472810__________________________________

PERSONAL DATABIRTH DATE: November 13, 1997NATIONALITY: Filipino


ELEMENTARY: Don Juan dela Cruz Central Elem. SchoolToril, Davao CityHIGH SCHOOL:Davao Central CollegeToril, Davao CityCOLLEGE: University Of MindanaoCOURSE: Bachelor in Science in Architecture

28

MAY JOY B. VISTALTORIL, DAVAO CITY

09153407489__________________________________

PERSONAL DATABIRTH DATE: August 15, 1996NATIONALITY: Filipino


ELEMENTARY: Don Juan dela Cruz Central Elem. SchoolToril, Davao CityHIGH SCHOOL: Davao Central CollegeToril, Davao CityCOLLEGE: University Of MindanaoCOURSE: Bachelor in Science in Architecture

29

YVONNE R. MARZADOIGACOS, SAMAL CITY

09127201257

PERSONAL DATABIRTH DATE: October 02, 1997NATIONALITY: Filipino


ELEMENTARY: Tambo Elem. SchoolIgalos, Samal CityHIGH SCHOOL: Nieves Villarica National High SchoolIgalos, Samal CityCOLLEGE: University Of MindanaoCOURSE: Bachelor in Science in Architecture

30

Documents

Research Final Shit