【作者】 Mozahim Mohammed Mustafa（莫扎西姆）；

【导师】 戴志中；

【作者基本信息】 重庆大学 ， 建筑设计及其理论， 2011， 博士

【摘要】 建筑研究是工程和艺术,思想与感情特有的交融。在人类历史文化的长河中,建筑是一门最古老的行业。建筑教育和培训已取得了普遍发展,从学徒制的普遍形式,发展到以设计课为基础的教学形式。设计课教学强调设计实践的模拟,设计师与项目客户的实际互动。今天,在全球已有许多学校开设建筑设计课程。虽然每个学校都有自己的课程设置和教育方式,但仍有许多相似之处。因为所有教育环境的最主要目的是教授设计理论,以及如何设计。最近的报告强调有必要重新评估教学方法和方案,以应对社会经济和技术条件的重大变化。为应对这个广泛而深刻的变化,建筑教育需要新的教学办法和改进教学方案。设计课是建筑教育的核心。在许多建筑学校,设计课要求大量的学时,巨大的工作量,极为重要的是需要教育工作者和学生最密集的时间投入。设计课意在整合所有其他课程和教育经验于一点。进入21世纪,设计课仍然对艺术与设计领域的教学环境的创造有持续而强大的影响力。在一个设计课中,学生通过直接参与设计项目学习知识,并与其他同学及导师的相互交流中增长社交经验。专家与初学者共融的设计课教学模式已被证明对培养学生捕捉那些典型却极易忽视的设计元素的敏感性特别有效。这些敏感性包括问题的探寻与解答,团队合作,对市场机会的敏感性,洞悉细节和创新的能力。的确,设计教育中的设计课教学取得成功的主要原因之一往往归因于其社会性质。但实际上,相关建筑教育的文献证实,就建筑设计是什么的问题还存在一些根本分歧。这在本质上表达了对于不同的教育者,建筑设计教育意味着不同的事情,每个教育工作者根据他/她自己的思想和信仰及自己的一套教育方式,与别人是截然不同。同时,在不同的学校,甚至一所学校中,有关设计教育的内容、重点领域、教学方法,都存在巨大差异。此外,有大量文献回顾建筑教育方案及设计课有助于巩固世界领域的发展。总体来说,本研究旨在探究和调查设计课及它的教学意义,然后对重庆大学(中国)和摩苏尔大学(伊拉克)建筑设计课教学模式进行案例研究,通过比较、评估各自的教学方案,指出它们的优点和弱点。最后,为适应世界的发展,提出改进设计课的意见。这必将有助于两所大学之间的经验交流。五个主要结论是:一、关于总的结论,二,关于建筑设计课;三、与建筑设计课的教学相关;四、关于设计课教学情景(授课方式项目);五、设计课教学实践的成效。因此,研究结果表明,无论在重庆(中国)和摩苏尔(伊拉克),建筑设计都是建筑教育的核心。与其它课程比较,建筑设计具有极端的重要性。在建筑设计课中,建筑设计的教学方法是基于解决实际问题-建筑设计(Problem Finding and Solving问题的发现和解决)。而这两个大学的差异在于不同的教学模型。重庆大学的教学以类比模型为基础,其目的在于实现可持续建筑,而摩苏尔大学的教学则基于一种隐藏的课程模式。因此,在建筑设计课中,两所大学的具体目标和教学设计的模型均有差异。在两所大学的设计课教学中,都存在各个方面的缺陷。如,教师在开启一个项目前,对项目的目的、怎样制定设计概念、怎样运用设计的概念解释的不够清楚。并且,常常没有留给学生足够的机会表达他们自己的设计概念和方法,没有正确地衡量留给学生完成本项目的时间是否合适。而就教授学生怎样从文献资料当中获取有利的信息,怎样将这些信息运用于整个设计的过程当中也缺乏充足的解释。而另一方面,两所大学的教学都有一些可取之处。比如,教师在教学中更重视教学的过程而不仅仅局限于项目设计本身的质量,学生往往表现出更高的积极性。同时,教学中学生又能够得到合作学习的机会,一方面,学生会非常喜欢这种教学模式,另一方面,如导师将学生分成各个小组,小组成员的能力各不相同,其中的差生更容易得到提高。并且由于大多数的建筑设计课导师们(此处指全职的专业教师)同时也是本行业的从业人员,他们可以将教学工作与专业设计经历相结合。这一现象不仅能提高教学质量,同时也能向学生传授更多的实际经验同时本研究还表明,手绘与电脑绘图相结合才是设计绘图的最好方式,因为除了在第一学年基础阶段中手绘是学生的重心之外,这两种方法在设计过程中起着同等重要的作用。另一方面,两所大学的基础课程和专业技术课程在为学生提供辅助的知识以解决建筑设计课中的问题上都发挥着极其重要的作用。更多还原

【Abstract】 The study of architecture is a very specific intersection of engineering and artistic expression, thinking and feeling. Architecture belongs to the oldest professions in the cultural human history. Architectural education and training has progressed from the prevalent forms of apprenticeship to the forms of studio-based tutorial learning. Design Studio teaching is a simulation of design practice, with designer/client interactions over actual projects. Today, there are many schools that give architecture education all over the world, each one has its own curriculum and educational style, but there are still many similarities since the main aim of all of these educational settings is to teach design theory and how to design. Recent reports emphasize the need to re-evaluate educational approaches and programs in response to significant changes in socio-economic and technology conditions; a scale and quality of change, which demand new approaches and improve their programs in architectural education.The design studio lies at the core of architectural education. In architecture schools, studio courses command the most credit hours, the largest workloads, the most intensive time commitment from educators and students, and supreme importance. Studio courses are intended as the point of integration for all other coursework and educational experiences. In the 21st century the‘design studio’continues to have a powerful influence on the creation of environments for teaching and learning in art and design. In a design studio, students learn through a direct involvement in design projects and by socially interacting with other students and their tutors. The model of studio teaching as a community of experts and novices has been proved particularly effective for developing sensitivities to those classic but fugitive elements of design education such as problem finding and problem solving, teamwork, sensitivity to market opportunities,‘eye’for detail and the ability to generate innovation. Indeed, one of the main reasons of the success of studio teaching in design education is often attributed to its social nature. But actually, the literature on architectural education corroborates that there are some fundamental disagreements over what is meant by architecture and design. This in essence conveys that teaching architectural design means different things to different people; each educator teaches according to his/her own set of ideologies and beliefs and in a manner that is distinct from others. Concomitantly, there is a tremendous diversity of contents, areas of emphasis, and methods of teaching in different schools and even within one school. Also, there are many literatures reviewing the programs of architecture education and design studio to convoy the development of the world fields.This study aims to explore and investigate the design studio and its teaching aspects in general; then a case study on Chongqing University (China) and Mosul University (Iraq) architecture design studio teaching models was conducted to evaluate their programs, compare them, point out their strengthens and weakness, then propose ideas to improve their curriculums to suit with the developments of the world. This will also help in exchanging experiences between the two universities.Five main conclusions have been drawn. The first conclusion is with regard to the theory framework of thesis, the second conclusion is with regard to the architectural design studio, and the third conclusion is related with teaching at the Architectural Design Studio, the fourth conclusion is related with teaching studio scenario, the fifth conclusion is related with the effectiveness of studio teaching practice.Thus, findings from this study show that the architectural design is the center of architectural education both in Chongqing (China) and Mosul (Iraq) Universities, and has great importance compared with other lessons. The method of teaching students architecture design in design studio is based on resolving design problems (Problem Finding and Solving). But the difference lies in the teaching model of each of these universities. Chongqing University deliberates on the analogy model in teaching, to achieve the sustainable architecture, while, the teaching of Mosul University is based on a hidden curriculum model. So the detailed goals and the model of teaching design in architectural design studio at both these universities are different.There are deficiencies in several aspects in the teaching design studio at both of the two universities. Firstly the presentation in the lecture given by the teacher before starting the project, such as on the aim of the design project, the way to make the design concept and the application of the design concept in the project, was not sufficient. Secondly, the teachers often did not give the students enough opportunity to express their own way and concepts in design, nor did they weigh properly how long they should give to the students to complete the design project. In addition, they also lack in explaining how students could get the beneficial knowledge from the architectural literature and how they can apply this knowledge through design process.On the other hand, there are also positive aspects in the teaching design studio of these two universities. Such as, the teaching is mainly focused on the process of design project rather than only the quality of it, which enhanced the students’active participation in this kind of learning. In addition, the students were provided with the cooperation activities in learning, for example, the tutor divides students into small groups without looking for the design ability of students, and this is a good way to improve the ability of poor students. And most of the teachers (all of them are full time teacher) supervising the architectural design studio are also practitioners at the same time, who can combine the academic work and their own professional experiences. This has positive effects on the development of the academic education of students.The findings from this study also show that, on the one hand, the best way for the design drawing is combination of the hand drawing and the computer drawing, because each of these tools play an important role during the stages of design process, except for the first academic year which is the foundation stage for student to learn hand drawing. On the other hand, the fundamental courses and technology based courses in both universities have a significant effect on supporting the student’s knowledge to increase their ability to solve design problems in architectural design studio.更多还原