Location of Repository

Creativity-function nexus; creativity and functional attentiveness in design studio teaching

By Amira Elnokaly, Ahmed Elseragy and Sara Al-Saadani

Abstract

Can creative forms enclose functionally-efficient\ud spaces? Do functional considerations restrict\ud creative design products?\ud The question of creative form versus function is one\ud that is very debatable, and has been in question\ud for a long time in both architectural education and\ud practice. Milestone fi gures of architecture all have\ud their different views on what comes fi rst, form or\ud functional spaces. They also vary in their defi nitions\ud of creativity. Apparently, creativity is very strongly\ud related to ideas and how they can be generated.\ud It is also correlated with the process of thinking and\ud developing. Creative products, whether architectural\ud or otherwise, and whether tangible or intangible, are\ud originated from ‘good ideas.’ On one hand, not any\ud idea, or any good idea, can be considered creative\ud but, on the other hand, any creative result can be\ud traced back to a good idea that initiated it in the\ud beginning (Goldschmit and Tatsa, 2005).\ud However, how can a good idea be classifi ed,\ud which ideas are useful and helpful, and how can\ud they be characterized, are main questions that this\ud research work aims to answer. This paper attempts to\ud discuss and compare various, and often opposing,\ud viewpoints of both students and teaching staff, at\ud the possibility of striking a balance between exciting\ud forms and functional precision in the design studio.\ud The research examines the confl ict that students\ud often face when assigned with a design project,\ud and the diffi culties they experience in translating\ud theoretical and fundamentally-important data into\ud a novel architectural interpretation. Furthermore, the\ud investigation aims at relating the continuous, nonlinear\ud process of review and modifi cation, customary\ud to traditional design-studio approaches, to the fi nal\ud products students submit as part of their design-studio\ud applications. The fi nal issue in question is the role of\ud criticism and assessment in the forms of juries or crits,\ud assessment criteria, and whether this traditional aspect\ud of design-studio education truly provides architectural\ud students with the constructive criticism they need\ud amid feelings of tension and limited time constraints.\ud The Architectural Engineering and Environmental\ud Design department at the Arab Academy for Science\ud and Technology (AAST) is exploit as a case study for\ud the research work presented in this paper

Topics: K100 Architecture, K130 Architectural Technology
Publisher: Archnet
Year: 2008
OAI identifier: oai:eprints.lincoln.ac.uk:3631
Download PDF:
Sorry, we are unable to provide the full text but you may find it at the following location(s):
  • http://eprints.lincoln.ac.uk/3... (external link)
  • http://archnet.org/library/doc... (external link)
  • http://eprints.lincoln.ac.uk/3... (external link)
  • Suggested articles


    To submit an update or takedown request for this paper, please submit an Update/Correction/Removal Request.