Professional Documents
Culture Documents
1
Acknowledgements
I would like to take this opportunity to thank those individuals who have
helped me soldier through this long, but extremely rewarding, project,
and enabled me to complete this piece of writing to the best of my ability.
I would also like to thank my house mates Andrew and Benjamin, as well
as my girlfriend Caroline, for their support throughout this project.
2
Contents
Craftsmanship Today
- Contemporary Psychological Theory pg. 21
‘The Hand Hits Back’ pg. 21
The Craft of the Glassblower pg. 22
The Pot and the Hand pg. 23
Ancient Letter Carving pg. 23
A Return to Ruskin pg. 24
3
Building in the Studio pg. 25
Oxford Conference 2008 pg. 27
The Unwritten Assumption pg. 28
INTBAU Training Model pg. 28
Conclusion pg. 47
References pg. 52
Bibliography pg. 62
Appendix pg. 64
List of Illustrations
4
Figure 1.1. Bauhaus Curriculum. (Naylor: 1985. The Bauhaus Reassessed.)
5
Introduction
6
Methodology
7
The final element of this piece of writing will examine the information that
has been collected for both the ‘contemporary analysis’ and the ‘student
analysis’, and consider the arguments for and potential barriers against, the
introduction of traditional approaches to future architectural pedagogy.
This section will also identify from the discussed models for
education, one model that would be most suitable for current architectural
academia, and then consider how it might help to bridge or repair the
perceived skills and knowledge gap between academia and practice, if this is
at all the right thing to do.
8
Definition of ‘Traditional Teaching’
9
Historical Context
Craft apprenticeships became a far less popular entry route into the field
of architecture following the introduction of Pupillage (Earle: 1989 p85-6).
Pupillage was a form of training introduced in the 18th century, and was
an alternative route into the profession of architecture at that time (Crinson
and Lubbock p22). Initially it was very similar to that of the craft
apprenticeship, with the two routes being differentiated only by the fact
10
that while the pupil paid for his education, the apprentice exchanged his
labour for his instruction (Earle: 1989 p85-6).
Traditionally, it was common for apprentices from a variety of
classes and backgrounds to enter into a craft-apprenticeship under a
master craftsman or architect. However, the rising popularity of pupillage,
as a result of the industry’s professionalisation, and the requirement for
payment in return for education, led to a difference in status with more
of the professions recruits now coming from the middle classes (Saint: 1983
p57), and a variety of classes and backgrounds undertaking apprenticeships
(Crinson and Lubbock p24).
In the quote above, Ruskin clearly expresses his dismay over the deep
division and contradiction that was occurring in early 19th century
architecture, namely between the arts and the science and economics of
11
building, seen primarily as a result of the industrial revolution (St John
Wilson 2000).
12
that had been lost during the industrial revolution, following the path and
ideas of Ruskin (Crinson and Lubbock: 1994 p65). He also correctly perceived
the emerging professionalisation as a symptom of the divide that was
occurring within the building industry (Saint: 1983 p64).
As a result of this, Lethaby suggested the introduction of a new
school of architecture and building trades, one which followed the
precept of Ruskin, and which ultimately materialised in the Central
School of Arts and Crafts, London, (which he jointly-directed)- an
institution that taught architecture as design, craft and construction
(Frampton: 2007 p49). After realising this approach could not in itself re-
orientate architectural training, he went onto establish several schools
which focused specifically on building trades (Crinson and Lubbock: 1994
p69).
13
the Beaux-Arts model, which was grounded in the academy, to infiltrate
the situation.
At the same time the RIBA was beginning to make a significant push
towards professionalisation- namely through their creation of the optional
Examination in Architecture in 1863, which became compulsory in 1882
(RIBA 2003 p5-6).
14
to this system, and the resulting birth of the modernist system of
teaching, a system which eradicated that system preceding it.
Functionalism
15
The Bauhaus
‘Vorkurs’
At this time, the Bauhaus was led by the figure of Johannes Itten whose
educational ideas drew upon studies on the educational effects of
environment and guided self-discovery (Crinson and Lubbock: 1994 p 92). He
established the Bauhaus’s most influential technique for first year
students, the Vorkurs, which aimed to develop individual design ingenuity
through various design exercises. Itten believed this technique could be
16
used as a tool to cleanse students of formal preconceptions in order to
achieve knowledge and skills that were their own. The approach marked a
radical shift away from the ideas of pupillage and academic training,
which were based around the use of previous learning to develop further
knowledge and skills. Ittens approach to architectural pedagogy soon
changed however, when Gropius’s interests shifted towards industrial
design (Crinson and Lubbock: 1994 p92-93).
Here we can begin to understand that although craft was central
to the Bauhaus curriculum, it was more emphasised on the individualised
exploration of craft- an approach whose present day existence and
inherent benefits we will aim to reveal through our student investigation.
17
positions on the RIBA board, before suddenly acquiring complete power
in the 1950’s (Crinson and Lubbock: 1994 p125).
18
Modernist Influence Today
Summary
19
We have seen the slow decline of the apprenticeship and pupillage
based approaches to teaching, and their eventual replacement by the
school of architecture- a result of the industry’s professionalisation and
the influence of the modernist agenda.
Despite some resistance to these changes, namely through those
who valued craft and tradition at the time, we saw the creation of two
dominating models for architectural education- the Ecole des Beaux Arts
and the Bauhaus. This was helped by the first Oxford Conference on
architecture which created the mould for academic system of architecture
prevalent in the UK today.
20
Craftsmanship Today
21
The Craft of the Glassblower
22
We are also able to use this example and apply it to academia, considering
how such an empirical process might help to improve the students design
skills, knowledge and understanding of materials, as well as their work
ethic.
Swan Hung Hotz discusses a similar theory to that of Sennett within the
article ‘A Pot for the Hand’ (Hotz: 2009 p5), when he compares the intimate
relationship between a pot and the hand of a potter, and the ‘ideological
empathy’ that can exist between concept and user (Dutoit and McVicar: 2009
p3). At one point within the article, Hotz describes the ability of crafted
objects to transmit ‘tactile knowledge’ and ‘sensual experience’ direct to
the user, revealing a narrative of the craftsman’s ideas and knowledge
process (Hotz: 2009 p5).
When relating such an example back to academia, we can begin to
understand how it might prove advantageous to students of architecture.
Through crafted objects, students are able to ‘convey the ideas,
knowledge, and perceptive tale’ (Hotz: 2009 p5) of their design process, an
act which is visually nourishing, and one which could ultimately make the
learning process far more efficient and enjoyable for all involved.
23
nourishment, which express the essentially human aspect of spirit
(Kindersley: 2008 p53).
A Return to Ruskin
Writing within the article ‘Not Arts and Crafts’, Hanson (Hanson: 1995)
states that in order to achieve Ruskin’s idea of an architecture that ‘lives in
detail’, rather than one that just looks good on the page, a return to a
pupillage/apprenticeship form of architectural education is required
(Hanson: 1995 p107).
24
Building in the Studio
Summary
25
Berman and Sennett also share similar ideas when they place
importance on the role of the whole body and its sensory experience to
provide us with a full understanding of three dimensional spaces and
form, as well to help express our full creativity when designing.
Additionally, Lynch and Hotz both praise the opportunity for
designers to use craftsmanship to transmit their own characteristics,
intuitions and desires into their work, while at the same time extracting
significant enjoyment from the experience. Kindersley then supports this
notion, by expressing the significant joy he receives when inscribing
stones by hand. He also describes crafted objects as visually nourishing,
and is quite clearly opposed to the use of technology- a preference that
also seems to be adopted by Berman when he criticises CAD machines.
When discussing those theories on craftsmanship and making set
out above, we can begin to understand the positive role such a technique
can adopt for students while learning during the design process. And now
we have analysed the actual theoretical and psychological benefits the
‘hands-on’ design process can foster and provide its participants, we will
consider some physical models and examples of how such an approach
might be realised within schools of architecture in the second element of
this chapter.
26
Oxford Conference 2008
The readings from the conference are detailed within ‘The Oxford
Conference: A Re-evaluation of Education in Architecture’ (Roaf and
Bairstow: 2008) and these include many different views and opinions on the
current state of architectural pedagogy, as well as proposals for how its
structure and its teaching programmes might be changed. Many speakers
at the conference highlight their scepticism of the techniques used within
the current architectural teaching system, particularly its inability to ready
students for movement into practice. A number of these opinions had a
particular focus on craft, building and ‘hands-on’ learning techniques,
and we will now analyse these in more detail to gain an understanding of
the potential mould architectural pedagogy could take in the future.
27
The Unspoken Assumption
28
Such an approach provides a suitable model of ‘practical, workshop
based’ learning, and one that supports the student desire and satisfaction
that exists within UK architectural pedagogy for a more practical
approach to design. It also acts as an example of the form pedagogy might
take in the future, in order to create benefits simultaneously for both
students and the teachers working alongside them.
29
Contemporary Educational Models
30
we might support craftsmanship, if it became a mainstream element of
architectural pedagogy and curriculum in the future. Questions might
also be asked on whether it’s worth gaining a ‘hands-on’ understanding,
and knowledge of a material or technique in the workshop, if that
knowledge cannot be applied to a real life, physical object.
Within the degree laboratory, Callicott and Sheil discuss the way in
which craft is underpinned by a necessity to attain a ‘specific body of
knowledge’, and they mention a set of parameters that craft is created
within, namely; available equipment, skills and materials, and
time/budget constraints (Callicot & Sheil: 2000 p72). They also go on to
compare ‘failed decisions’ within the two different working
environments- that of the academic, where they are deemed purely as
failures; and that of workshop where it can be viewed as a ‘purposeful-
test’, one which forms a core part of a successful workpiece (Callicot & Sheil:
2000 p73).
31
This programme is particularly useful for our exploration of craft
today, as it closely relates to those theories on creativity discussed by
Sennett. But more importantly it begins to discuss how the exploration
process inherent within craft, and hands-on learning, enables students to
understand material properties, attain knowledge and skills and begin to
understand realistic constraints, such as time and budget, which would be
imperative when working on live projects within architectural practice.
32
Although this hands-on laboratory experiment has not yet been
realised as a permanent teaching facility (Prizeman: 2005 p57), there is
however, a graduate diploma course at the AA titled ‘Design + Make’
which is due to commence in the 2010 academic year. The programme is
located in the heart of Hooke Park, and believes in the philosophy that
architects learn best by imagining, developing and realising full type
prototype structures. The AA believe that through the actual engagement
in all stages of making and building, students have the opportunity to
develop a rich understanding of architecture (AA: 2010 p1).
33
Auburn University’s ‘Rural Studio’ is an undergraduate teaching
programme within their school of architecture, grounded in hands-on
craft and aimed at fostering design and build projects for the deprived
local population (Forney: 2005 p92).
Within the article ‘Learning in Newbern- Rural Studio in Year
Ten’ (Forney: 2005) John Forney explains how the ‘Rural Studio’ tends to
local projects, learning and applying lessons of ‘custom and experience’
(Forney: 2005 p95). He emphasises the value of craft, and its ability to
encourage participants design ingenuity, as well as a positive attitude
towards constrained resources and skills.
Forney continues by comparing this hands-on, direct approach to
buildings, with the more abstract dealing which is common within
architectural curriculum today (Forney: 2005 p94). He writes that where
universities approaches often distinguish and distance their students
knowledge from the realities of industry and practice, the Rural Studio
model integrates its students into real community situations, while
simultaneously familiarising them with the building processes and
materials (Forney: 2005 p95).
34
Summary
35
RIBA Control Over Curriculum
36
opportunities for the expansion of knowledge through ‘case studies’ of
influential buildings (RIBA 2007 p41), although again there is no specific
advice on how these case studies might be undertaken.
After studying its content, it is quite clear that within the outline
syllabus the focus on types of teaching is intentionally vague, maintaining
the RIBA’s quest for ‘flexibility’ in their guidelines. However, one begins
to question this structure when it focuses so heavily upon the knowledge
to be gained, but not on the technique by which students gain that
knowledge. Our student analysis provides us with some useful
information regarding student’s opinions on various teaching techniques,
which in turn enables us to gauge craftsmanship’s importance and the
position it might take within future architectural curriculum and the
RIBA’s syllabus.
37
Student Voices on Craftsmanship
Student Survey
38
within the participant’s course as a whole. The second element focused on
the ‘process of design’, with the aim of understanding the extent to which
these learning techniques are used during the design process, as well as the
consequent skills and benefits they can bring to the students design
ability.
39
In the following question, the participants were asked to elaborate further
on their experiences of various techniques when learning about
‘construction technology’, by explaining why exactly they felt certain
techniques were more beneficial than others.
The participants that selected ‘one-on-one tutorials with studio
masters’ as one of the most beneficial techniques, then went on to state
that it allowed them to gain invaluable knowledge directly from studio
masters; allowed for discussions on problems areas which were unique to
them; as well as providing immediate solutions for personal queries.
Those participants that selected personal research and reading as
being particularly beneficial to their process of learning, then stated that it
gave them the freedom to build on basic lecture knowledge, creating
advanced knowledge; to explore a range of different reading material by
reading around the subject and applying it to a set task; as well as using
existing building case studies for guidance.
Those that selected ‘theory’ based approaches (lectures) as being
one of the most beneficial of all the learning techniques, then justified
their choice by stating that lectures were to the point; and helped to
provide a basic overview or foundation of knowledge from which to build
on.
The reasons outlined by those who selected ‘hands-on’ workshop
based learning, have been compiled along with answers gained from
question 7, on part 2 of the survey.
40
In the following question, participants were simply asked
whether their current learning techniques had provided them with, or
will provide them with, the expertise necessary for the transition into
architectural practice (See figure 3.3 for results).
Those participants that stated ‘no’ they were not ready for this
transition were then asked to consider which learning technique might
provide them with the necessary skills to do so. In response to this,
students detailed the following techniques:
• A more balanced combination of theory and practical work;
• Introduction of carpentry, bricklaying or similar craft courses;
• A greater emphasis on physics of buildings and structures in
both lectures and design studio time;
• A placement year with on-site training;
• Opportunities to interact with past students; and
• Opportunities to build their designs and evaluate their
constructability.
41
Those participants who were undertaking a part-time
undergraduate course- combining academic study with industry practice,
also revealed some interesting results. They highlighted the way in which
the topics covered within their syllabus are brought to life at work-
academia and practice working hand in hand to solidify their learning.
They also describe how fellow peers and superiors within the workplace
can play a similar role to that of a tutor within the design studio, aiding
them during the design process.
This desire for creating a balance between theory and real life
practice matches that of the pupillage based route in architectural
pedagogy which found its origins in the early 18th century (Crinson &
Lubbock p22). Understanding the benefits of such an approach to the
students themselves, helps us to then consider how it might take up a
more prominent role within architectural pedagogy in the future.
42
Research into Curricula
To gain a more accurate understanding of the emphasis the remaining
UK schools had given to ‘hands-on, workshop based learning’ within
their teaching programmes, it was also necessary for us to analyse their
current curriculum. When undertaking our analysis, we highlighted any
mention of ‘workshop- based learning’ within the syllabus as a sufficient
indicator for its existence at that particular school. (See figure 3.4 for results).
The results collated from this survey, highlight that around half of
the remaining schools have placed some emphasis within their course
programmes on workshop based learning.
Summary
43
Results- Process of Design
Within the second element of the student survey, which was focused on
the ‘process of design’, the participants were first asked to specify if they
felt ‘workshop-based learning’ techniques were beneficial during the
design process (See figure 3.6 for results). They were then asked to provide
reasoning for these responses.
It is evident from these results that a significant number of
participants found the workshop based learning approach to be
beneficial to them. When asked to describe why it was beneficial, the
following answers were given:
• Provides a physical object, to be discovered, learned from
and remembered for future detailing;
• Provides a basic overview and 3-dimensional understanding
of technical details before proceeding onto a 2-dimensional
technical drawing;
• Enabled the complexities of the detail to become more easily
understood;
• Handling of construction materials and tools ensures
understanding of the materials properties, which can then be
applied during the design process; and
• Group workshop based learning allows students to work
closely with one another, bouncing knowledge back and
forth, with the addition of the workshop assistant’s guidance.
44
considering the position of ‘traditional teaching’ within architectural
curriculum.
The final area of focus on the design process element of the survey,
enquired into the students experience of ‘workshop-based learning’ as
a means of learning about the properties and efficient usage of various
materials when designing (See figure 3.8 for results).
Those students that felt ‘workshop-based learning’ was beneficial to
them were then asked to describe their reasoning for this. Specified
reasons included the following:
• Enabled an understanding of a materials response to
specific conditions and its affect on the overall building in
terms of environment, aesthetics and function;
45
• Creation of ‘material consciousness’ through sensory
experience i.e. touch, visual perception; and
• Handling materials enables the student to remember and
visualise the materials properties and simultaneously
inform their design projects.
46
Conclusion
The primary aim of this dissertation has been to explore the existence of
traditional teaching approaches within architectural curriculum in the
UK; to understand student’s views on this approach; and ultimately gauge
the level of support that exists for the permanent introduction of such an
approach into architecture schools in the future, in the hope that its
introduction might help to bridge the perceived knowledge and skills gap,
particularly in technological areas, that exists between academia and
practice.
Prior to discussing the state of today’s education, the first chapter
sets out to provide a historical context for craftsmanship. This section is
supplemented with an extensive literature review that ensures the content
of the writing remains accurate.
The section following this analysed the existing support within both
architectural academia and practice for change in architectural pedagogy.
The extensive range of relevant literature we examined expressed both
psychological theories and physical, realised models of education with
craftsmanship at their core.
Many of the theorists we have explored paid special attention to the
relationship between the hand and the mind, and its ability to
dramatically improve creativity levels. Additionally, they also mention the
ability of craft within the workshop to create a fruitful, thriving
environment, as well as to provide knowledge, skills and a work ethic
within students that will always remain with them.
47
schools of architecture that might aim to change their learning approach
in the future. It also, however, highlighted the financial issues that exist at
many universities. As a privately funded school, the AA has significantly
greater financial power, when compared to other universities functioning
within the government-funded structure, and can therefore afford
facilities and resources of a much higher quality. Even with the ambition
for change towards a crafts-based approach, financial issues at certain
schools might act as a barrier to this change.
We also studied the RIBA’s validation criteria, and while doing so,
its vagueness when discussing the delivery of learning was particularly
notable, especially when discussing workshop based approaches to
technology. It is quite evident that while this criterion remains
unchanged, it will be difficult to implement new approaches to learning,
because schools follow the criteria so closely. However, if the importance
of these traditional approaches is realised and it is incorporated into the
criteria, schools of architecture might begin to understand the value of
such approaches and as a result incorporate them into their curriculum.
48
approaches, and students identified such techniques as one of the most
beneficial approaches when learning about technological issues and
developing, as one student said, a ‘material consciousness’.
The survey also identified an area of architectural pedagogy that
craft and workshop-based learning might help to appease in the future. A
notable lack of groupwork activities during design projects- a method
preferred by the majority of survey participants was identified in most
schools of architecture. Craftsmanship often encompasses workshop-
based, group approaches to design problems which can create an efficient
learning environment, and thus could serve to fill this niche in the
curriculum.
49
emphasis on the learning approaches, let alone the alternative approach
we are discussing here.
As well as this, we must consider the important factor which was
identified by one survey participant, that of time. Will architecture
schools find time within their curriculum for such techniques? And if so,
what techniques will be sacrificed in its place? This is again an issue that
can only be addressed by the efforts of the individual architecture school,
or at a wider scale through changes in the guidance and criteria set out
within the RIBA outline syllabus. Without this, it may be some time
before any diversion from the norm is seen within architectural
curriculum, a situation that will in turn see the gap between academia and
practice become ever wider.
50
References
Books
B., 2000. The Degree Laboratory: The work of Unit Six at the
CALLICOT, N., SHEIL, B.,
Bartlett School, University College London. In: NICOL, D., PILLING, S., 2000. Changing
Architectural Education: Towards a new professionalism. Spoon Press. London.
EARLE, P., 1989. The Making of the English Middle Class- Business, Society and Family Life in
London [Online]... University of California Press. Berkeley.
Available from: http://escholarship.org/editions/view?docId=ft8489p27k;brand=ucpress
HU U
Accessed 25/02/210.
FORTY, A., 2000. Words and Buildings- A Vocabularly of Modern Architecture. Thames &
Hudson INC. USA.
FRAMPTON, K., 2007. Modern architecture: a critical history. 4th ed. Thames & Hudson
Ltd. London.
51
M., WODEHOUSE, L., 2003. A World History of Architecture.
MOFFET, M., FAZIO, M.,
Lawrence King Publishing Ltd. London.
NAYLOR, G., 1985. The Bauhaus Reassessed- Sources and Design Theory. The Herbert Press.
London.
PEARCE, M., TOY, M., 1995. Educating Architects. 1st Ed. Academy Group Ltd.
Manchester University Press.
1983 . The Image of the Architect. Yale University Press. New Haven and London.
SAINT, A., 1983.
SALAMA, A., 2005. New Trends in Architectural Education- Designing the Design Studio. 3rd
ed. [Online] Ashraf Salama. United States Agency.
Available from: http://archnet.org/library/documents/one-document.jsp?document_id=6330
HU UH
Accessed 25/02/2010.
ST JOHN WILSON, C., 1995. The Other Tradition of Modern Architecture- the uncompleted
project. Academy Group Ltd. National Book Network INC. USA.
52
Journals
CHADWICK, M., 2004. Back to School. Architectural Design. Wiley Academy. UK.
DUTOIT, A., MCVICAR, M., 2009. MADE. Welsh School of Architecture, Cardiff
University. Cardiff.
HOTZ, S.H., 2009. A Pot for the Hand. In: DUTOIT, A., MCVICAR, M., 2009. MADE.
Welsh School of Architecture, Cardiff University. Cardiff.
53
Conference Readings/Lectures
ALEXANDER, C., 2008. The unspoken assumption and its antidotes. In: ROAF, S.,
BAIRSTOW, A., 2008. The Oxford Conference. A Re-Evaluation of Education in Architecture.
WIT Press. Cambridge Printing.
BERMAN, A., 2008. The Hand Hits Back. In: ROAF, S., BAIRSTOW, A., 2008. The
Oxford Conference. A Re-Evaluation of Education in Architecture. WIT Press. Cambridge
Printing.
ROAF, S., BAIRSTOW, A., 2008. The Oxford Conference. A Re-Evaluation of Education in
Architecture. WIT Press. Cambridge Printing. UK.
54
Curriculum/Prospectuses
Accessed: 16/03/2010
Accessed: 16/03/2010
options/undergraduate-full-time/architecture U
Accessed: 16/03/2010
University of Bath.,
Bath., 2010.
Bsc Architecture. (Course Prospectus)
Available at: http://www.bath.ac.uk/catalogues/2009-2010/ar/UEAR-ANB08.htm
HU U
Accessed: 16/03/2010
MArch Architecture. (Course Prospectus)
Available at: http://www.bath.ac.uk/catalogues/2009-2010/ar/UEAR-ANB08.htm
HU U
Accessed: 16/03/2010
55
Queens University Belfast., 2010.
Bsc Architecture. (Course Prospectus)
Available at: http://www.qub.ac.uk/schools/arc/Education/BachelorofScienceinArchitecture-
HU
PartI/ U
Accessed: 16/03/2010
MArch Architecture. (Course Prospectus)
Available at: http://www.qub.ac.uk/schools/arc/Education/MasterofArchitecture-PartII/
HU UH
Accessed: 16/03/2010
Accessed: 16/03/2010
Msc Architectural Studies (Course Prospectus)
Available at: http://www.adbe.ulster.ac.uk/schools/archi_design/courses/view/course/7750
HU U
Accessed: 16/03/2010
MArch Architecture. (Course Prospectus)
Available at: http://www.adbe.ulster.ac.uk/schools/archi_design/courses/view/course/7763
HU U
Accessed: 16/03/2010
Accessed: 16/03/2010
BA (Hons) Architecture. (Course Prospectus)
Available at: http://www.bcu.ac.uk/courses/architecture-riba-part-i-exemption
Accessed: 16/03/2010
PGDip Architecture
Available at: http://www.bcu.ac.uk/courses/architecture-riba-part-ii-exemption-pgdip
Accessed: 16/03/2010
56
University of Cambridge., 2010.
BA Hons Architecture. (Course Prospectus)
Available at:
http://www.arct.cam.ac.uk/Arct/Section.aspx?p=23&ix=23&pid=1214&prcid=4&ppid=1214
HU UH
Accessed: 16/03/2010
MPhil (B) Architecture
Available at:
http://www.arct.cam.ac.uk/Arct/Section.aspx?p=23&ix=24&pid=1214&prcid=4&ppid=1214
HU UH
Accessed: 16/03/2010
University College
College for Creative Arts, Canterbury., 2010.
BA (Hons) Architecture. (Course Prospectus)
Available at: http://www.ucreative.ac.uk/index.cfm?articleid=20463
HU U
Accessed: 16/03/2010
Accessed: 16/03/2010
57
University of Strathclyde., 2010.
Bsc Architecture Studies. (Course Prospectus)
Available at: http://www.strath.ac.uk/architecture/courses/undergraduatearchitecturalstudies/
HU U
Accessed: 16/03/2010
Accessed: 16/03/2010
University of Liverpool.,2010.
BA (Hons) Architecture. (Course Prospectus)
Available at: http://www.liv.ac.uk/lsa/ba_arch/index.htm
HU UH
Accessed: 16/03/2010
Accessed: 16/03/2010
Accessed: 16/03/2010
PGDip Architecture
Available at: http://www.bartlett.ucl.ac.uk/architecture/programmes/diploma.htm
HU UH
Accessed: 16/03/2010
58
London Metropolitan University.,2010.
BA (Hons) Architecture. (Course Prospectus)
Available at: http://www.londonmet.ac.uk/architecture/courses/undergraduate/ba-
HU
architecture.cfm UH
Accessed: 16/03/2010
Accessed: 16/03/2010
Northumbria University.,2010.
BA (Hons) Architecture. (Course Prospectus)
Available at:
http://www.northumbria.ac.uk/?view=CourseDetail&code=UUFARC1&page=detail
HU U
Accessed: 16/03/2010
University of Nottingham.,2010.
Dip Architecture. (Course Prospectus)
Available at: http://www.nottingham.ac.uk/ugstudy/course.php?code=019467
HU UH
Accessed: 16/03/2010
1/10/BArch_%28Hons%29_Architecture.aspx UH
Accessed: 16/03/2010
59
Reports
Royal Institute of British Architects (RIBA)., 2007. Report of the RIBA Visiting Board to the
Architectural Association [Online]. RIBA. London.
Available at:
http://www.architecture.com/Files/RIBAProfessionalServices/Education/Validation/BoardRep
HU
ortsSummaryReports/ArchitecturalAssociationLondon/Visiting%20Board%20Report%20200
7.pdf U
Accessed: 18/03/2010
Guides
Roberts, A., 2007. Problem Based Learning in Architecture. [Online] The Centre for Education
in the Built Environment (CEBE). Cardiff.
Available at:
http://wzww.heacademy.ac.uk/assets/cebe/documents/resources/briefingguides/BriefingGuide_
HU
11.pdf U
Accessed: 19/03/2010
60
Bibliography
ALEXANDER, C., 2002. The Nature of Order- An Essay on the Art of Building and the Nature
of the Universe. The Process of Creating Life. Center for Environmental Structure. California.
CURTIS J.R, WILLIAM., 1996. Modern Architecture Since 1900. Phaidon Press Ltd. New
York.
MATURANA,
MATURANA, B.,
B., 2008. Resetting Agendas- a conference on climate change. ARQ Vol 12.
No3/4. p210.
MORDANT CROOK, J., 1987. The Dilemma of Style- Architectural Ideas from the
Picturesque to the Post-Modern. John Murray Ltd. London.
MORDEN, I., RUEDI RAY, K., 2006. The Dissertation: An Architecture Students Handbook.
Architectural Press. Oxford. UK.
MORROW, R., BELFORD, T., 2008. Soft Garniture: developing hybrid materials
between academia and industry. In: ROAF, S., BAIRSTOW, A., 2008. The Oxford
Conference. A Re-Evaluation of Education in Architecture. WIT Press. Cambridge Printing.
SCOTT, G., 1999. The Architecture of Humanism- A Study in the History of Taste. W.W
Norton Company INC. USA
61
SUMMERSON, J., 2006. The Classical Language of Architecture. Thames & Hudson World
of Art. London.
62
Appendix
1. Survey Example
The three-page survey, which is shown in the following, was produced online through a survey
company called smart-survey©. A link for the survey was distributed online through the social
networking site Facebook©, as well as other architecture student forums.
Students were asked for consent to undertake the survey prior to its commencement and
were informed that their answers would form part of a student dissertation project. The use of
the students name in the survey was clearly described as optional information.
63
Survey Page 2- Section 1- Course Content Q’s 2- 6.
64
Survey Page 2- Section 2- Process of Design Q’s 7- 13.
65
2. Surveyed Universities and Participants Table.
The table shown in the following outlines those universities that were included in the student
survey results, and the number of participants who undertook the survey from each of them.
66
3. Student Analysis and Curriculum Analysis Results.
The table in the following the combined results from our analysis on the existence of hands-on,
workshop base approaches to teaching construction technology and design.
(Individual References, for those universities whose prospectuses were analysed, have been
listed in the ‘Curriculum/Prospectus’ section within the references.)
67