Aprender de lo elemental: modelo didáctico para la enseñanza de la arquitectura
- Autores: Rafael Enrique Villazón Godoy
- Directores de la Tesis: Albert Casals Balagué (dir. tes.)
- Lectura: En la Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya (UPC) ( España ) en 2011
- Idioma: español
- Tribunal Calificador de la Tesis: César Díaz Gómez (presid.), José Luis González Moreno-Navarro (secret.), Alfonso Muñoz Cosme (voc.), Vicenç Sarrablo Moreno (voc.), Cyrille Simonnet (voc.)
- Materias:
- Enlaces
- Tesis en acceso abierto en: TDX
- Resumen
The current research is based on an experimental prototype that has been developed over a two-year period at Universidad de los Andes' architecture degree programme in Bogotá. The conjoining of a theoretical development with the experience gained by students and teachers throughout the course of the project allowed an alternative educational model to be suggested. This model was centred around a key space: the architecture-teaching studio, which allows the architect's intellectual development to be focused upon. Emphasis can be directed towards the learning of the discipline's values and fundamental concepts, which therefore, makes it different to basic training. The studio exhorts a clear pedagogic intention: you do not do architecture. It is taught, and you learn to learn it. This teaching approach takes into consideration the fact that the process of knowledge acquisition is a slow one. It also holds the teacher in charge of designing the learning environment in high regard as well as the activities that create the gradual build-up of knowledge. Architectural models have the capacity to perfectly demonstrate architecture's complex fundamental problems. It is for this reason that they are used as a teaching method in which each activity is paramount for intellectual development in terms of information (knowledge), techniques (abilities), and values (behaviours). As such, any object of study is valid as long as it allows the teachers and students to be able to excogitate and experiment with the fundamental principles of architecture. It is of the utmost importance to establish a systematic procedure for the information as well as for the procedures themselves. Therefore, the educational model suggests a strategy based on three teaching techniques of gradually increasing complexity: Architectural problem based learning is a teaching technique with a student focus. It seeks to develop the students' abilities when they are systematically faced with the basic aspects of architecture whilst at the same time leaving out the complexity of working within the confines of a project. This method allows the students to work collaboratively when endeavouring to resolve theoretical problems and encourages self-learning: a process through which the teacher can be seen as the guide. Architectural case based learning centred requires a process of reasoning and individual learning through which the student gains knowledge through prior experiences. When using this model there is a clear teaching purpose, and infinite possibilities exist to understand the teaching of architecture as over and above simply developing a project. These previous projects allow specific topics that are in their formative stages to be concentrated upon. A body of information will be generated to find solutions through what has been learnt form other architects, the acquisition of primary information, and the development of theoretic models. Architectural project based learning dictates a style of teaching through which the teachers and students work together on real issues. This emphasises the importance of interdisciplinary work, and as such ignites the need for research, experimentation, and the confrontation of self-learning. A project-based exercise does not simply mean designing a building. Complex situations will be encountered in which spatial, analogical, analytical, and purposeful thought are paramount to be able to understand the project and its limitations. The three methods detailed above are based on a heuristic approach that does not take as a given that there is one finite answer to a problem: quite the opposite in fact. The path taken to resolve the problem requires a process of investigation and discovery. The solution to a complex conundrum ¿ or at least to its understanding ¿ can only be achieved by focusing on individual aspects and studying them in great detail.
