Abstract

Today, technology is developing rapidly. It changes architectural design and building techniques. To these changes up education system should be updated and be integrated with the novel technology. Tomorrow’s professionals only be educated with this way. To make novel technology a part of architectural education, computational fabrication laboratories should be established and be integrated with architectural curriculum. They have the potential to transform architectural education processes. Within this context, this study tries to integrate computational fabrication methods with architectural education. The aim of the study is to share the process and results of a series of exercises applied to the use of computational fabrication tools and methods at the undergraduate level of architectural education. The study deals with exercise processes in a multidimensional scope. In this framework, constructivist learning processes, the concept of metacognition, the flipped classroom model and portfolio evaluation method played a role in the creation and evaluation of the exercise processes. Integrating computational fabrication laboratories with educational processes brings the student to play an active role in the exercise process. This approach is defined as constructivist learning process. In this way, it is ensured that the students can construct their own thinking and understanding processes. While the verb "teaching" is in question in conventional or objectivist education processes, the verb "learning" comes to the fore in constructivist processes. The instructor does not give the information directly but directs the student to reach the information. Flipped classroom model and portfolio evaluation are used as the methods of this study. The background of the exercises is supported by constructivist learning processes and metacognition concept. Within the exercise processes computational fabrication processes such as CNC laser machining and robotic milling were experienced. Within this study four exercises were performed to make the students experience computational fabrication methods: Unfolding, Tessellation, Sectioning, Folding and Moulding. To evaluate the exercise series success portfolio evaluation method was used. The answers in the portfolio to the questions of “What is the aim of this study?” and “What did you learn from this study?” are compared with the aim and learning outcomes of the exercises. As a result of this study, it is seen that the students’ knowledge on file-to-factory process is increased. They learned how to make ready a parametric model for computational fabrication. Based on student portfolios, it has been determined that students have begun to realize the potentials of computational fabrication tools. The students learned how to use computer aided manufacturing software, and even they could manage to define toolpaths on their own. This shows that, undergraduate architectural education level is not early to teach students computational fabrication tools and software.

Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call