HOLISTIC EDUCATION IN BUILDING: PREMISES and APPROACH Abstract This paper discusses the need for and the premises of a holistic approach
to education in building and proposes a framework within which such studies
may be conducted. It is argued that the present fragmented structure of
building studies and the manner in which building specialists are trained
are neither based on appropriate premises nor sufficient in scope to cover
the diverse problem areas of building. The argument is based on the conception
of building as a human activity process consisting of planning, design,
construction and use. The nature of such different professional occupations
as architecture, engineering, construction and realty are examined and
contrasted, along with their reflection on educational methods. The problems
generated by present approaches to education are discussed and the need
for integration in building studies is stressed.
The approach proposed for holistic education comprises two stages. Basic
building studies, the first stage, is devoted to an analysis of the fundamental
factors influencing the formation of the built environment, along with
the development of basic analytical skills. The second stage, specialized
studies, is structured in three tracks: design, construction and building
science. The paper discusses the characteristics of each of these stages
and tracks, and contains suggestions for the problem areas and methods
that may be treated in each.
Keywords: Education, building, architecture, engineering, specialization.
Introduction As it is not often clear what exactly is meant by the word building,
I feel the need to clarify my use of it at the outset. In this paper, the
word building is used as an overarching word covering a wide range of
meanings--in particular three distinct concepts. According to the first
of these, building is an activity conducted by humans to answer basic needs--first
and foremost shelter, along with other social individual and abstract needs.
Thus, it is a process of production and use. Secondly, building is
a product of that process: this is the facility or the built environment
that man designs and builds. Finally, it is a complex, interacting set
of physical, social and cultural phenomena that occur in building, as process
and as product. Thus, what I mean by building is one of the fundamental
activities and products of man, just like agriculture, animal husbandry,
health and medicine.
In order to investigate, to understand, to design and to produce building,
we restrict our perspective to narrower conceptions, models or paradigms.
In doing this, we choose one of the three conceptions of building outlined
above: the process, the product or the phenomenon. For example, when examining
problems related to organization in construction, we view building as a
process. If we are designing a building, we talk of the spatial arrangement,
the structural system or the circulation structure: it becomes more convenient
to view our efforts as pertaining to parts of a system, i.e. the product.
On the other hand, when we are examining the thermal or acoustic phenomena
that take place in a building, we try to formulate these phenomena in terms
of the variables thought to be relevant and their interrelationships.
This is indeed a useful approach for concentrating our efforts and making
more them more efficient. By extension, however, we also assume the same
attitude in our dealings with problems related to professions and education.
In our day, building professions are often conceived through an understanding
of building as a product; thus, professions are formed and organized with
respect to the subsystems of building. Building professions have been compartmentalized
into groups such as architects, various engineers, surveyors, contractors
and realtors, each of which has formed its own terminology and modes of
operation. For example, [a]lthough architectural and engineering designers
both deal with building, they each think very differently about the same
subject matter. ... [n]either profession often even cares to make the effort
to understand each other (Peters 1991, 23-24).
The same attitude is also visible in many institutions of higher education
dealing with building. These educational programs are generally based on
an understanding of building as a system. Problems in the spatial organization
of buildings with respect to functional, visual and semantic requirements
are considered to be the domain of architects; this understanding finds
its reflection in the organization of these aspects as autonomous programs
in schools of architecture. With a tradition of describing building decisions
mainly in drawings, education in architecture has visual design as its
essential basis and medium. Thus, these institutions are often organized
within or in close relation with education in fine arts and have at the
foundation of their studies visual elements and principles, originating
from aesthetic notions. Such organizations often give no, or at best minimal,
attention to either principles such as efficiency and buildability, or
to stages of building such as construction, use and maintenance. In a study
on the education of building professionals, it has been found that [t]his
is especially true for architectural schools that de-emphasize the use
of technology in ... construction methods, materials, and systems in favor
of teaching broad design subjects (Committee
on Education of Facilities Design and Construction Professionals 1995,
2).
On the other hand, topics related to the structural, sanitary and environmental
systems of buildings have been conceived as the domain of various engineers.
The education of these specialists has been structured along lines originating
in disciplines outside building and which often remain marginal in that
field itself, vis. illumination design in electrical engineering. Mathematical
models of the physical world, such as mechanics and thermodynamics, have
been placed at the foundation of their studies and design has been transformed
into a process of computation of sufficiency or safety. The study mentioned
above has also found that [t]echnology has been largely eliminated from
the engineering curriculum in most schools so as to focus on science, math,
and basic engineering principles (Committee on Education
of Facilities Design and Construction Professionals 1995, 2). In this
kind of building education, there appears to be no place for either human
requirements, culture or aesthetics.
When areas of building such as construction, use, maintenance or management
are considered, we observe that these functions are undertaken either by
entrepreneurs with no educational background in building or by professionals
who have learnt to deal with these problems on the job. Furthermore, it
may be claimed that policy makers and legislators dealing with building
often have no educational background it. Educational programs in these
areas are still rare, and those that are available are often not well established
and developed sufficiently from either an academic or a professional perspective.
Most architectural and engineering students leave school with little knowledge
of business, economics, and management, adversely affecting graduates
ability to serve their clients, understand the concerns of their employers,
manage projects effectively, and qualify for more responsible positions
(Committee on Education of Facilities Design and Construction
Professionals 1995, 2).
Having such different world views and value judgments arising from their
educational background, professionals from their different disciplines
have a distorted conception of the importance of their own field within
building. For example, Salvadori points out that
[t]he potential differences between architectural and engineering students
are recognized, magnified, and made more rigid by the difference in their
education (1991, xiv). Different professional jargons and looking down
upon the efforts of others as secondary, lead to many problems in communication
and coordination among these professionals. There result the many incompatibilities,
inefficiencies and human discontent that we observe daily in our buildings
and environment. Decisions made at any stage or aspect of building by professionally
biased or non-informed decision makers often can not be corrected at any
later time.
Some improvement to this present state of affairs may be brought by
reorganizing education in building in an integrated, rather than fragmented
manner. Building should be conceived in the holistic and autonomous manner
I have described at the outset of the paper and education in building should
be structured in conformity with this understanding.
A process understanding of building envisions building as a special
instance of a generic concept of human activities. In a manner similar
to all other human activities, building can be conceived as a repetitive
process, with its phases and medium remaining generically the same in each
repetition. Whereas the general process is made up of the four stages of
problem definition, problem solution, implementation and use, these correspond
in building to the stages of programming, design, construction and use.
Building takes place in a medium characterized by two fundamental factors--environmental
and cultural. The former consists of all factors related to the natural
environment comprising climatological, topographic and geological aspects.
The latter, on the other hand, consists of value systems, hypothetico-theoretical
knowledge and technology, which last is a concept integrating technical
knowledge, techniques and technics. Building is affected and determined
by these factors directly and, in turn, influences and changes them. The
phases of the building process, the environmental and cultural factors
of the medium in which they take place and their interrelationships as
well must be determined and analyzed sufficiently in order that the building
process is understood and managed properly.
Education in building Approaching building education with the understanding outlined above
allows one to handle all topics related to building in a holistic manner.
An adequate professional education in building may only be structured when
all of the four stages are considered in detail. Furthermore, because the
process needs to be considered along with the factors that make up its
medium and all products obtained through it, such an educational
structure will facilitate the consideration of all system and phenomenon
related aspects in a holistic manner.
A prerequisite of this, however, is to recognize building as an autonomous
field, dissociating it from educational programs in architecture or engineering.
It would be appropriate to establish an independent school or a faculty
within the present structure of higher education. The term Faculty of
Building may be preferable firstly because it connotes a center
of university studies rather than one of professional training. Secondly
it avoids the use of professionally value laden terms such as architecture
or engineering because their use would imply the conventional content
of and the approaches used in such courses.
The traditional two-tiered structure of undergraduate studies followed
by graduate education appears to be appropriate as a form of organization.
The courses should proceed from required courses in the initial stages
to specialized electives in the later years.
Undergraduate programs The aims of undergraduate education in building should be to educate
students as
To this end, it is important to equip students with three important
tools:
An undergraduate program aimed at achieving these objectives can be
structured in a two-tiered form consisting of basic building studies and
specialized building studies. Basic building studies should cover instruction
in the fundamentals of building and provide, as well, an introduction to
general university studies. Specialized studies, on the other hand, should
be so designed as to respond to the intellectual interests and capabilities
of individual students. In this manner education may be channeled into
professional training or towards further advanced studies in building.
Basic studies The aim of basic building studies is to acquaint the student with the
world of the intellect as intended in higher education, and, specifically,
with the fundamental issues of building. This level should extend over
two years and should be required of all students enrolled in the faculty
of building. It should be conceived of as being a period of general education
and should not involve any important training component. The students should
be exposed to the general factors that affect building, to design, communication
and production issues, and to the basic modes of thought directed at understanding
the built environment. As a matter of principle, the courses at this level
should be taught by the most experienced staff members.
The first year of basic studies may be devoted to general studies. The
program should aim to form and develop the student's awareness of and attitude
to the built environment. The following subjects may be handled in an introductory
manner:
The second year of basic building studies should be devoted to studies
aimed at understanding and analyzing buildings. They should now be concentrated
on the built environment and especially on buildings. Studies should develop
the analytic capacities of the student through discussions of the issues
involved on examples specifically chosen from the accessible environment.
The following topics may be studied during this year:
The end of basic studies should be considered a fundamental point in
the program, terminated by an Associate in Building degree.
Specialized studies Specialized studies in building allow associates to have further education
in building suited to their own interests and capacities. Therefore, these
studies should have a structure of multiple tracks, allowing specialization
in different aspects of building such as design, construction, management
or in studies in depth in specific fields such as history, building science,
etc. The duration, phasing and requirements of specialized studies may
vary depending on the track.
It is important that these tracks of specialization are not organized
into autonomous departments as this would run contrary to the spirit of
holistic education and would end in a reversion to previous forms of fragmented
education.
Specialization in building design Specialization in design is essentially professional training that aims
at equipping the student with knowledge and skills necessary for designing
various aspects of buildings. It would be convenient to effect this training
in master-apprentice form on designs of real projects. Accordingly instruction
may take place in design studios that form the backbone of this program;
the topics handled in these studios should be progressively more complex.
The principle of using successful and influential professional designers
as studio instructors should be seen as a fundamental aspect of this training.
Students in the design specialization track may choose to organize their
studies towards one aspect of design, such as spatial, structural or services
design, starting in the second year of their studies.
Studio work should be supplemented by required and elective courses
offered by the design specialization track or other tracks. These courses
may cover the following topics:
Specialization in building construction Specialization in construction consists of professional training that
aims at equipping the student with knowledge and skills necessary for constructing
the built environment and especially buildings in an efficient manner and
of high quality. Instruction should be structured around construction projects
that form the backbone of this program. Project-oriented study ... might
benefit students motivation to seek answers to solve problems ... reinforcing
a team approach that includes communication skills and exposes students
to different disciplines (Committee on Education
of Facilities Design and Construction Professionals 1995, 62). The
topics handled in these projects would be progressively more complex. The
principle of using successful and influential construction professionals
as instructors in these projects should be seen as a fundamental aspect
also of this training.
Planning projects should be supplemented by required and elective courses
in the construction specialization track or in other tracks. Specialty
courses may cover the following topics:
Specialization in building management Specialization in building management is aimed at equipping the student
with knowledge and skills necessary for formulating and administering policies
on the development and use of the built environment. Instruction should
be so structured that graduates of the program may easily continue their
graduate studies in building or, alternatively, work as consultants, facility
managers, realtors, administrators in policy making positions related to
building or in careers of building legislation.
Specialty courses in the management track may cover the following topics:
Specialization in building science Specialization in building science aims at equipping the student with
the knowledge and skills necessary for furthering their studies in building
at an advanced level. Instruction should be so structured that graduates
of the program may easily continue their graduate studies in building and
work as researchers in academia or professional research centers, or as
other specialists.
Building science courses should be so structured as to advance from
predominantly required courses to predominantly elective courses. Some
of these courses may cover the following topics:
Graduate studies Graduate studies in building aim at equipping students with the knowledge
and skills necessary for independently developing original solutions, new
methods of approach, new knowledge and interpretations in the design, construction
and study of the built environment, especially of buildings. Graduate education
should be geared, in particular, to educating future academics and research
personnel.
The prominent characteristics of graduate study are individual and independent
work. It should be designed so as to answer the needs and interests of
the student, and as a precondition of this, should require a high degree
of active and independent involvement from the student. Graduate courses
should expose the student to up-to-date concepts and research topics and
seek the students direct involvement in these. The function of graduate
theses should be to incite the students towards new solutions, methods
and interpretations and to present their findings in an adequate and effective
manner.
Graduate study in building may be structured in the traditional two-tiered
manner, namely the masters and doctorate levels. The essential difference
between these two levels lies not in the requirements and the operational
aspects but in the nature of the thesis expected of the student. A masters
thesis should reflect the students capacity to develop new syntheses using
available knowledge and methods. In the doctoral dissertation, on the other
hand, the student should originate a new method, new knowledge, or should
synthesize and interpret available knowledge in a manner deemed to be an
important contribution to the understanding of building.
Conclusion Among all of the fundamental activities of man, there is no other that
answers as many needs and has as many different aspects as does building.
It is perhaps because of this variety of aspects that education in building
is conducted in different forms and has not been able to develop an integrated
approach.
The views expressed in this paper have been formulated in the belief
that holistic education may bring a solution to some of the problems in
building that have arisen over time. The specific approach proposed and
the courses suggested may of course be varied extensively, but it would
be beneficial to preserve the general understanding and attitude discussed
in adopting it.
References Committee on Education of Facilities Design
and Construction Professionals. (1995) Education of Architects and Engineers
for Careers in Facility Design and Construction, National Academy Press,
Washington, DC.
Peters, T. (1991) Architectural and engineering
design: two forms of technological thought on the borderline between empiricism
and science in Bridging the Gap: Rethinking the Relationship of Architect
and Engineer. Van Nostrand Reinhold, New York, pp. 23-35.
Salvadori, M. (1991) Introduction: architect
versus engineer in Bridging the Gap: Rethinking the Relationship of
Architect and Engineer. Van Nostrand Reinhold, New York, pp. xii-xv.
Akademik Şeyler sayfasına dönmek için tıklayınız. |
||||