대한건축학회논문집 (Journal of the Architectural Institute of Korea)

  • 제36권8호
  • /
  • Pages.29-40
  • /
  • 2020
  • /
  • 2733-6239(pISSN)
  • /
  • 2733-6247(eISSN)
대한건축학회 (Architectural Institute of Korea)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

건축학프로그램의 건축재료 교과과정과 교육방법에 대한 분석 - 한국과 미국의 건축재료수업 비교 연구 -

Current Pedagogy and Teaching Methods of Architectural Materials in Professional Architectural Degree Programs - Comparative Analysis of Courses in Korea and USA -

  • 윤정원 (서울시립대학교 건축학부)
  • Yoon, Jungwon (Department of Architecture, University of Seoul)
  • 투고 : 2020.06.25
  • 심사 : 2020.08.18
  • 발행 : 2020.08.30
⟨ 이전 논문 다음 논문 ⟩

초록

The purpose of this study was to review the current status of pedagogical objects, contents and teaching methods for the course of architectural materials conducted in 5-year professional architectural degree programs in Korea in conjunction with the comparative analysis of required criteria for architectural materials as the student performance criteria between Korea and USA. To discuss on pedagogy and teaching methods of architectural/building material courses, this research presents the analysis framework with four factors - curriculum, achievement, faculty and student, as well as criteria for comparative analysis of curriculum objectives and contents. From the holistic qualitative and quantitative analysis of the student performance criteria (SPC) by the accrediting boards, and architectural/building material courses provided by universities and programs, we aim to propose measures to improve the education methods of materials, in order to stimulate the desirable technological knowledge and skills in technology as well as applicability and creativity for architectural design.

키워드

과제정보

이 논문은 2018년도 서울시립대학교 교내학술연구비에 의하여 지원되었음. 과제번호:201805011011

참고문헌

  1. Ahlquist, S., Thun, G., Newell, C., & Velikov, K. (2013). Toward a Pedagogy of Material Systems Research. TxA Interactive, (November 2013), 22-33.
  2. Akin, F., & Pedgley, O. (2014). Sample libraries to expedite materials experience for design: A survey of global provision. Materials and Design, 90, 1207-1217. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2015.04.045
  3. Baum, E. M. (2013). Comparative anatomy: A beginning course in architectural design. Journal of Architectural Education, 67(2), 195-204. https://doi.org/10.1080/10464883.2013.817158
  4. Bloom, B. (1956). Taxonomy of Educational Objectives: The Classification of Educational Goals: Handbook I: The Cognitive Domain, 2nd ed., New York, Addison-Wesley Longman Ltd.
  5. Bovill, C., Gardner, A. E., & Wiedemann, G. (1997). Intention, form, and execution: A comprehensive studio curriculum. Journal of Architectural Education, 51(2), 84-91. https://doi.org/10.1080/10464883.1997.10734755
  6. Carlson-Reddig, K. (1997). Students consider architecture's materiality. Journal of Architectural Education, 51(2), 96-104. https://doi.org/10.1080/10464883.1997.10734757
  7. Celani, G. (2012). Digital Fabrication Laboratories: Pedagogy and Impacts on Architectural Education. Nexus Network Journal, 14(3), 469-482. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00004-012-0120-x
  8. Fernandez-Antolin, M. M., del Rio, J. M., & Gonzalez-Lezcano, R. A. (2020). The use of gamification in higher technical education: perception of university students on innovative teaching materials. International Journal of Technology and Design Education.
  9. Gutierrez, M., & Lee, L. (2013). Engineering. Multiscale design and integration of sustainable building functions. Science (New York, N.Y.), 341(6143), 247-248. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1237278
  10. Guney, D. (2015). The Importance of Computer-aided Courses in Architectural Education. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 176, 757-765. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.01.537
  11. Ishida, A. (2015). Media Contexts in Teaching Building Materials. Pedagogy in Practice, (May), 12-15.
  12. Ku, B.D. (2017a). A Study on the Models of Architectural Design Pedagogy and Design Studio. Journal of the Architectural Institute of Korea Planning & Design, 33(2), 69-78. https://doi.org/10.5659/JAIK_PD.2017.33.2.69
  13. Ku, B.D. (2017b). An Analysis of Characteristics and Pedagogic Models of Architectural Design Studio Tutors in Korea. Journal of the Architectural Institute of Korea Planning & Design, 33(3), 77-86. https://doi.org/10.5659/JAIK_PD.2017.33.3.77
  14. Kurt, S. (2018). Assessing the quality of architecture schools. Quality and Quantity, 52, 863-888. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-018-0695-8
  15. Lee, E.D., Kim, D.H., Shim, J.H., & Kim, H.S. (2012). Practical Importance of Student Performance Criteria in the Architectural Accreditation. Journal of the Architectural Institute of Korea Planning & Design, 28(1), 59-68. https://doi.org/10.5659/JAIK_PD.2012.28.1.59
  16. Lee, J. (2010). A Study on Demands of Study Courses for 5 Year Professional Architectural Degree Programs on the bases of Student Performance Criteria Matrix. Journal of the Architectural Institute of Korea Planning & Design, 26(10), 11-20.
  17. Lee, J. (2015). A Study on Survey Result by the Site Visit Team Members for the Student Performance Criteria of the Conditions and Procedures of the Korea Architectural Accrediting Board. Journal of the Architectural Institute of Korea Planning & Design, 31(6), 55-63. https://doi.org/10.5659/JAIK_PD.2015.31.6.55
  18. NAAB. (2017). 2017 Visiting Team Report: California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo. College of Architecture and Environmental Design. The National Architectural Accrediting Board.
  19. Oxman R. & Oxman, R. eds. (2010). The New Structuralism: Design, Engineering and Architectural Technologies. Architectural Design, 80(4). London: Wiley.
  20. Raspall, F. (2015). A procedural framework for design to fabrication. Automation in Construction, 51, 132-139. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2014.12.003
  21. Reno, J. (1992). A Role for Building Technology in Architectural Design Education. Journal of Architectural Education, 45(3), 161-170. https://doi.org/10.1080/10464883.1992.10734505
  22. Rowe, P. G. (2002). Professional Design Education and Practice. In A. M. A. Salama, W. O'Reilly, & K. Noschis (Eds.), Architectural Education Today: Cross-Cultural Perspectives. Lausanne, Switzerland: Comportements, 25-29
  23. Saettler, P. (2004). The Meaning of Educational Technology. In The Evolution of American Educational Technology. Greenwich, CO, USA: Information Age Publishing, 6.
  24. Sanandiya, N., Dimopoulou, M., Dritsas, S., & Fernandez, J. (2018). Large-scale additive manufacturing with bioinspired cellulosic materials. Scientific Reports (Nature Publisher Group), 8(1), 1-8.
  25. Smith, D. L. (1987). Integrating technology into the architectural curriculum. Journal of Architectural Education, 41(1), 4-9. https://doi.org/10.1080/10464883.1987.10758459
  26. Whitehead, R. (2015). Rebuilding a framework for learning: Rethinking structural design instruction in an architectural curriculum. Proceedings of the 2015 Structures Congress, 2600-2612.