The Cross-Culture Concept in the Topics of Architectural Design Classes in Japanese Universities

aspect. Through their combination, the cross-culture
concept could be recognized. Accordingly, three topic
types with their sub-types could be found (fig.1).

P1 Site Context
・Town in Tohoku Region,
Seawall area
・City of Plymouth,MA(USA)S1 Social Background (Macro)[jp][ov]

in design class?

Chap 4.
Cross-Culture Concept
and Topic Types- Site Dominant- Common Issue Dominant- Assemblage
Topic Types with
Culture Shperes

P2 Project Type・Masterplandisaster memorial・Memorial House(Museum)
Cultural Factor:

・3.11 earthquake,・Government policy

Educational Tool T
T1 Learning Method[jp]

S2 Speciﬁc Local Issue (Micro)
・Local culture/history
・Community memory/
character・Livelihood ・Ritual[jp]・Critical thinking
・Theory (of western
intellects )・Methodology[jp][ov]
・Site Research

T2 Presentation Tool[jp]=of Japan [ov]=of Overseas [com]=Common Issue/Shared Interest

Chapter 4 : Types of Cross-Culture Topics

Combination
Topic TypeP1[jp][ov] + S2 [jp]+ T1[jp][ov]Assemblage

fig.1 Research Methodology
Exampleof Analysis
figand
1.Exampleof AnalysisP[ j p][ov]

T[ov]

S

[ov]

W

[overseas]

Total
(360)

A

(62%)

225
S1 34
WS S1' 45 AS
86 S2 1 3
S2' 6
J1 19
J1' 40WJ J2 12 AJ
139 J2' 62 34
J3 4
J3'

2

K

+

(10%)

[Japan]

S1
S1'
S2
S2'
J1
J1'
J2
J2'
J3

37
1
0 KS
1 3
1
4
9
9 KJ
12 95
0

J3'

0

(27%)

98
S1 2
S1' 0
S2 0
S2' 1
J1 9
J1' 12J2 25
J2' 48
J3 1

J3'

0

fig.3 Class Type with Culture Sphereof Cross-Culture Counterparts

Cases Count
Basic Class Types

One Time Repitetion

Class
LocationJapan

Overseas

Repetitive of The Topic

Professor Cross-Culture

Students Participant

Joint Workshop Studio

Joint Workshop Studio

Culture Sphere of the
Cross-Culture Counterparts

Public Building vs.

fig.2 Class TypeTopic countClass Types

One Time Repitetion

Repetitive of The Topic

Japan Class

Overseas

Location

Students Participant

Professor Cross-Culture

〇 〇
〇 〇

fig.4 Elements and Three Aspects of the Topics

225
37
98
S1 34
S1 1
S1 2
WS
AS S1' 0 KS S1' 0
P1 Site: Urban vs. Village/Rural/RegionalS1' 45P2 ProjectType : Housing vs. Public
86 S2 1 3 S2 1 3 S2 0
2005
2005
S2' 6
S2'
1
S2' 41
1
3
2010
2010
2
1
2
1
J1 19
J1
45
J1
9 2
2015
2015 284
2
55
WJ J1' 2020
40 AJ J1' 9 KJ J1' 12
2020
18
7
9
9
12
18
139 J2 12 34 J2 9 95 J2 25
50%J2' 4875%
100%
0%
25%
50%
75%
100% J2' 62 0%
J2'25%12
Historical Area
Residential Suburb
Housing
J3
4
J3
0
J3
1
City in General

Village / Rural / Regional

J3'

2

3.1 The Three Aspects
Physical Context [P] includes two sub-groups: Physical Site Context[P1]and Building Types[P2]. [P1]categorized various sites, including Tokyo Metropolis(12), Commercial Centre (9), Old Neighbourhood(10), Residential suburbs (18). In contrast with urban
environments, Village/Rural/Regional(29) received
much attention.
Social Context[S] includes Social Background(Macro)[S1] and Specific Local Issue(Micro)[S2]. The
former regards global and national issues, such as
disaster (16), aging issue (7), urbanization (17),Social Context [S]O
X EducationalO
X Tool [T]
O
X
S1 37
S1
O
X
O
X
X O
S1'Social
46 Background (44)Physical Context
O
X [P]X OOX
S2 (Macro)
1
Disaster(3.11/Flood)
16
O
X
X O
X O
S2' 8
P1 Site context (84)
P2 Project Type (53)Olympic
6
O O
O
X
O
X
J1 33
Aging
Issue
7
O HousingOO
X 23 X O
J1' 64City in General
8
Urbanization/
17
Space/O PublicO
X O 13 O
X
J2 46
Tokyo Metropolis
12
Urbanism
O Building
O
X O
X O
J2' 127
Commercial Centre
9
Ancient
5
Old Neighbourhood 10
O MuseumO
O O 7 OX
J3 5 History/Hall
Traditional
Residential Suburb 18
O CultureO
O O 2 X O
J3' 2 Culture
Disaster Shelter 4Modernity
4
Historical Area
9
Railway Station 3
Market4
Government Policy/ 12
Hotel/
2Culture SpheretheSocialof
Power
Waterfront
8
Cross-Culture Counterparts
Accomondation
EconomyPark
6
6
2
Dormitory
Sustainable
22
Village/Rural/
29
Energy Resource
3
Regional
Internate/Media
1
Campus11

Kanji Circle

Social Context S

〇
〇
〇
〇
〇
〇

S1 37
S1' 46
S2 1
S2' 8
J1 33
J1' 64J2 46
J2' 127
J3 5
J3' 2

3. Elements and Three Aspects
126 topics with detailed descriptions were selected
and taken for in-depth analysis in this chapter. Elements were extracted and placed under three aspects,
which collectively compose one valid topic(fig.4).

Educational Tool [T]S2 Speciﬁc Local (64)Issue (Micro)

History/Culture
21
Community
18
Character/Memory
16
Livelihood3
Traditional Ritual
6
Atmosphere2
Local Material/
Resource
Nature Environment 2

T1 Learning Method(142)

T2 Special Outcome (30)Theory/Methodology
Site Research
Critical Thinking
Open Proposal
Creative Stretagy
Software,
New Technology

Ukiyo-eFilm
Exhibition
Installation
BookletPhotography
3D Model

42
44
27
21
8
3

1
5
7
3
12
1
1

T3 Viewpoint (41)

Solving Problem
7
Improving The Current State(Health, Well-being, Lifestyle) 10
9Disaster Prevention
5
Contextual Design
Historical Preservation and Revitalization
8
Cross-discipline/Multiple-participants/Public involved 10

China, Korea
etc.

HOW

Physical Context P

× ×
〇 ×
〇 ×
× 〇
× 〇

〇 ×
× 〇
〇 ×
× 〇
〇 ×
× 〇
〇 ×
× 〇
〇 ×
× 〇

Physical Context [P] Social Context [C]Elements

Asia (exclude
Kanji Circle)
Thailand,Singapore,etc.

is in cross-culture

Course Description
The studio project is to design; 1) masterplan in the red zone area of Shichigahama, which is the area that was
damaged by the tsunami, or 2 ) design Shichigahama House in Plymouth, MA. The project requires the students towork with and critique government's proposal for the red zone, and incorporate a way to remember the disasters.
There are three issues to consider during analysis and design processes. They are Foucault's critique, Haraway's
implosion, and Benjamin's history. Critique targets govemmentality. What govern us are not only the state but also
culture, tradition and language in which a set of rules deﬁnes what is proper and not. ....Using design, we will
critically examine the reconstruction and memorialization projects in Tohoku. Based on... seen from diﬀerent pointsof view. People in Shichigahama have experienced a tragedy in 2011, and they continue to live with their memories.
For them, history is not over. It is not frozen. When designing a disaster memorial in Shichigahama, we should not
see the past as an isolated entity but rather as a part of the present and the future.

〇 ×
〇 ×
× 〇

×
×
×
×

Topic

Western World

WHAT

Chapter 3 : Key Elements and Three Aspects

〇
〇
〇
〇
〇
〇
〇
〇
〇
〇

126 Topics for Analysis(Europe, USA,
Australia etc.)(Objective)

Country/Region : USA
Cross-Culture Participant Syracuse University, New York
Professor : Yutaka Sho Student : - Culture Sphere : Western World
2 Class Location
Shichigahama (site) and Tokyo, Japan
3 Repetition of the Topic
One time
Class Type: Studio1

2.2. Culture spheres of the Cross-Culture Counterpart
The Cross-culture topic is not a physical accumulation of two, it is a certain perception of one groupof people to the other 4). The perception from thedifferent regions to Japan would be utterly distinct.
Some academics previously discussed the importantrole of Japan within the Asia education framework,when Europe and US education is weak to tackle thesurging developing issue in China, Japan could play abetter role for reference5). Thus, when the distinct culture and education of Japan meet the following threeculture spheres6), the distribution of Class Types(fig.1) and the tendency of topic could be recognized:
East Asia/Kanji Circle[K] (96/360) including China,
Korea, etc. They were classified into one group due
to significant proximity in language, history and men-

Class Types
Joint Workshop Studio

Educational
Tool [T]Chapter 2 : Class Type

Kanji Circle

PhysicalSocialContext [P] Context [S]TT05

China, Korea
etc.

Chap 3.

No. Code

Asia (excluding
Kanji Circle)
Thailand,Singapore,etc.

(Subjective)

Year2018 5(Europe, USA,
Australia etc.)

into
3 aspects+elements

Course Title

Shichigahama Red Zone "Anti" Masterplan
University in JapanTokyo Institute of Technology

Western Sphere

Chap 2.
- Basic information:
Time, location,
participant.
- Culture Sphere of
the counterpart.

1.2 Research Objects and Methodology
360 topics from 17 universities in Kanto Region arecollected through publication, online resources, andinterviews with 7 professors teaching at Japanese
univesities2). Chapter 2 studies the basic informationand culture spheres of the counterpart, which will betaken as tools for the analysis in a later stage. Chapter
3 studies the elements and three associated aspects
through close reading and analysis of 126 selected
topics3). Chapter 4 illustrates cultural factors on eachClass Types
J. Workshop (268) Studio (92)Class Topic.............................
.............................

tion and education resources, while traditional anddistinct culture confronts homogenization. Cross-culture topics bring forth the unknown of another culture, and alternative views to challenge the familiar
norm of one’s own.
This research closely analysis the topics of designclasses taught by overseas professors and international joint workshop. Through proposing the fundamental questions of "What and How": What is specificin cross-culture context and How does it operate ina design class topic. Progressively investigate theemerging concept, factor, types, and characters ofcross-culture in architectural design education.

Urban Site

1. Introduction
1.1 Background and Aim
The international exchange has been a significant
move in Japanese architecture education. Since the1990s, increasing numbers of foreign visiting professors and international joint workshops have promoted
architecture knowledge exchange and revealed the diversity of culture in the world. It has brought refreshing ideas and viewpoints, along with introducing thestudio system to the underpinning laboratory format
of Japanese university1). Though the study benefit ofthese classes was frequent mentioned, it remains arather generic image of “being international”. Few
studies have focused on the actual content of class
topics and thoroughly discussed the cross-culture
concept. It is reasonable to argue that these topics,
which by default under cross-culture context, obtain aspecific concept in architecture discipline. These topics, which are often planned collectively by the overseas and the Japanese educators in host universities,
contain an important academic value. They reveal theattention on architecture study of overseas educators’
to Japan, vice versa Japan to the world. The current
global mobility allows instant exchange of informa-

2. Class Types and Culture Spheres
2.1 Class Types Based on Participant and Location
Two Class Types were classified base on the participant, location, repetition(fig.2). Studio(92) refers
to the class taught by visiting professors for onetime(37), or a long-term foreign professor in a Japanese University(55). Joint Workshop(268) refers to
the classes participated by Japanese and overseas universities. Within this type, sites overseas (173) surpass
sites in Japan (97), meanwhile mostly are series workshops (191) that repeat annually. The series workshop
sometimes under a principle topic (e.g. “Housing“
WO01, and “Historical city redevelopment“ TT37).

vs.

安田研究室 18M58147 肖 雪 (Emma Xue XIAO)

tality with Japan. The major class type in Kanji Circle
is Joint Workshop (95/98), which almost ¾ amountthem locate overseas. This tendency is possibly due
to physical proximity and mutual understanding.
Asia Sphere (excluding Kanji Circle)[A](36/360)
refers to Southeast Asia countries such as Thailand
and Singapore, they are geometrically close to Japanand share issues such as waterfront and rapid urbanization, while different in climate and ethnic culture.
Similar to the Kanji Circle, the major class type isjoining workshop(34/37), which ⅔ located overseas.
Western Sphere [W](223/360) includes universitiesof the USA, Europe, and other regions of western
civilization groups in contrast with Asia civilization.
It appears the majority of Studio(92) was taught byeducators from Western Sphere(86/92).

PublicJ3' Building/Space
0J3'

S1 S2 Social Context: Macro vs. Micro
2005
2010
2015
2020
0%

0

fig.5 Chronological Study of Paired Elements and Issues, from 2005 to 2020

3
11
20

7
15
18
61

42
25%

50%

75%

S1 Social Background (Macro)
S2 Special Local Context (Micro)

T3 Improving on Methodology/Theory
2005
2010
2015
2020

100%

0%

1

9
14

3

21

7
21

45
25%

50%

75%

Methodology/Theory Study
No Speciﬁc Mention

100%CONCEPT
Cultural Factor andCombination in 3 aspects

Special Thanks to David B. Stewart, Yoshiharu Tsukamoto, Ryo Murata, Tom Heneghan,
Mitsuko Takeuchi, Manuel Tardits, Davisi Boontharm, Darko Radović (honorific titles omitted),for generously sharing their precious experience and knowledge in the interviews, and providing
crucial information for this research.
Note:1) Kitayama,K., Tsukamoto,Y., JABS建築雑誌201306_特集- 拡張する大学院,2013..
2) Material sources include: 1.Department yearbook and university websites 2. Booklets and otherpublications 3. Material from direct contact and interviews with 7 professors involved cross-culture teaching in Japanese universities.
3) From the total 360 topics, 126 topics with detailed written record of background, objective,
outcome, comment from teaching professor etc., were selected for further analysis in chapter 3.
4) Riccardi,P, “Cross Cultural Communication”, TEDxBergen, 20145) 100年の教室 古谷·田辺·有賀3教授に聞く「世界と早稻田建教育」,早稲田建築学報2011,2011.
6) Hall, E. 1959,1976, Theory of “High-context and low-context cultures”
7) The “Culture spheres” in this resaerch were to categorize countries and regions of participants,base on their architecture education system and general culture group, with reference to Frobenius, E., 1898, Graebner,F., 1911, concept of “Kulturkreis” (“culture circle”).
8) DeLanda, M., 2016, Assemblage Theory9) Baudrillard, J, 1998, The Consumer Society, Theory of media.

-

4

[jp]
[ov]

[jp]
[ov]

-

5

[jp+ov]-6-[jp+ov]

-

[jp]
[jp]
8 [jp]+[ov] [jp]+[ov]

[ov]
[ov]

3

7

HOW

Objective | "What"-

2

Site DominantW(71) P1|Shinjuku(4/26)
P1
Railway Station (3/26)(38) P2|DisasterP2
Shelter (2/26)

Site in Japan

Urban Design (4/26)
e.g. “AGING TOKYO 2, ... thefuture of Tokyo based on shifting
demographics, focus on the
S1 Japan Modernity
characteristic facade in Tokyo, site
History(3/26)
in Yanesen area.” (WA02)
Olympic(3/26)

Site in Overseas(33) W P[ov]e.g. “Improvement of Housing and(33)
Living Environment of Historical
Area in Vientiane,Laos, heritage(3/16)
P1 Waterfront
and trandition under drastical
S1 Governmentchanging in globalization.”(3/16)Development
Plan(SH18_01)

K(3/4)
P1 Village(1/4)
Historical City
S2 Trandition,
Community
Characture/Livelihood(3/4)

Common on Physical Context(13)Subjective | "HOW"

Site DominantCommon Social Context (14)

3 aspects
compose one topic

a specific lensseeking common
in [jp] and [ov].

P1 City Waterfront (1/8)
P2 Wooden Structure (2/8)(1/8)
S1 Earthquake(28)
Site of Japan and Tool of Overseas (26)Both [jp] and [ov]attached to different aspect in one
combination.
keyword:_multiple_non-hierarchy_mutualism

e.g. “Research Japanese modernitiy
and vernacular things such as
stove, bathroom, with theory andmethodology of “Mechanization” bySiegfried Giedion. (TT01)

Re-design an Overseas(2)
Project into Japanese Context
e.g. ’Without Venturi’,study the existing
peoject overseas architect, re-design
it to a Japanese site with contextual
thinking.” (TT16)[jp]

Dominating aspect

A
P1` City Waterfront/
River
(2/3)
Market(1/3)
P2 Rapid AsianS1 Urbanization,
Water Related
Disaster(1/3)

e.g. ”in the 19th century, it was a
medical facility of the Japanese ArS[j p +ov]
my...changed to a Taiwanese militaryfacility...to preserve it as part of a newurban revitalization. This workshop
aims to take this opportunity to uncov- S2 Food Industry, Economy (2/3)
er the layers of memory and rethink the
future.” (SH07_02)
W

Assemblage

with cultural factor
of Japan[ov]

P [j p]W

S [ov]

T[ov][jp]+[ov]fig6. Cross-Culture Topic Types, Example of each type, Key Elements, Characters

Aspect with both[jp] and [ov]K+

Elements

Class Types
West. Asia. Kanji C.
WS WJ AS AJ KS KJ
15 12 1 1 1 8

27K

S1 Urbanization/(8/15)
Modernity
Aging Issue (2/15)
S2 Local Character/
Livelihood (5/15)

14

9

K

4

15

41

6

0 8

1 2 0 32 2

0 0 0 9

8

3

24

3

P1|
P1 Waterfront (2/3)
P2|
P2 Culture Hall,
Express Culture
Exchange (1/3)
K

4

12
S2 Community Character/
Livelihood(7/26)
Phenomena(2/26)[jp+ov]

2

5 9 0 4 1 14

P1 Village/Rural (7/15)(6/15)
P2 Housing

P1 Village/Regional(6/9)
S2 History And Culture,
Sustainable Regeneration (6/9)

P1 Tokyo Metropolis(4/26)
Tokyo, Densed Commercial Centre (2/26)
Tokyo Old Neighbourhood,(2/26)
Campus (4/25) Park (2/25) Ecology (3/26)(5/26)
P2 Public Building/Space
Earthquake(3/26)
Urban Design, Strategy(4/26)
Urban Research(2/26)

with cultural factorof overseasAA[j p +ov]

e.g. “River in the city and issues on
urban waterfront in both Tokyo andLondon.” (MU09_01)

W

(5/9)
P1 Housing
Tokyo Suburb(5/9)
Old Neighbourhood (2/9)
S1 Tokyo Urbanization (5/9)
S2 Traditional Culture(4/9)
T3 Disaster Prevention (2/9)
Contexture Design (2/9)

Common Issue Dominant (27) W P

Chronological Study ofTopic Types
LEGEND

Topic Types in three Culture Spheres and Class Types
P[j p]

with sub-types

Base on the site
Physical andSocial aspect
no specificallyaddress Educational Tool [T]LEGEND[jp] cultural factor of Japan[ov] cultural factor of overseas- non-dominant factor

70

3TOPIC TYPES

WHAT

in design class?

[jp]
[ov]

1

TOPIC TYPES

is in cross-culture

Education
PhysicalSocialConcept[P] Context[S] Tool [T]Assamblage Common Issue Dominant

A chronological study of Topic Types shows a steadyincrease of all three types since 2015, with a surge
in the last 5 years (fig.7). This study, in association
with the earlier chronological study on elements(fig.6), could be recognized as the epitome of thisunprecedented global mobility era. The sweeping power of internet media and mobile devices,though allows overseas education resources to be
more accessible everywhere, causes distinction andmentality confront homogenization 9). When modernity assimilates the image of cities around theworld, cross-culture topics pay attention towards
the micro context in vernacular sites such as suburbs and villages, where local characters remained.
4.3 Topic Types with Culture Sphereexchange. In this era of global mobility and information exchange, architecture education is inevitably
involved, yet ought to bear awareness and a criticalview, undertake contextual thinking in the built environment and culture landscape.

5. Conclusion
This research studied the topics of design classes withoverseas participants, investigated cross-culture concepts, which within mere three decades has evolved
and diversified. Three Topic Types and patterns basedon culture spheres were clarified. The result hopefully could provide a reference for future academic

2020

4. Cross-Culture Concept and Topic Types
4.1 Cultural Factor and Cross-Culture Concept
It is worth to note that all topics in this researchcarry the cross-culture concept by default, due totheir de facto international participants. The attempt
is trying to find a measure, with this non-measurable
subject, out of the general slogan of “internationalclass”. With elements that were identified in the previous step, this Chapter discusses the crucial questionof how cross-culture implement and evolve in designclass.
As previously mentioned, the three aspects compose
one valid topic, each aspect was considered to fit one“cultural factor” to identify if it related to cultureof Japan[jp], or to overseas [ov], or both in somecases. For Physical Context, the cultural factor evidently follows the location, for example, if the site
is Tsukiji market, means the [P] has a “culture factor
of Japan”, written in the form of P[jp]. Equally, anoverseas site is P[ov]. For Social Context, cultural
factor mainly follows the location, for example, aging

4.2 Three Topic Types
From the above study, three Topic Types were recognized (fig.6)
Site Dominant (71) take the majority in all topics(71/126). The topic are clearly based on specific site
condition. The 38 cases in Japan shows the interestof the overseas participant to Japanese architectural
study, noticeable site and project include Shinjuku(4), Railway Station (3), Tokyo Suburb (5) and Housing (5). In the overseas site (33), Village/Rural Area
(10) associated with Tradition/Community Character/
Livelihood [S1] (8) frequently appears, showing aninterest in non-urban sites, Specific Local Context[S2], and ancient historical areas overseas.
Common Issue Dominant (28) refers to topics thatinvolve a Common Site Character (10) or Common
Social Issue (12) that is shared by Japan and the overseas counterpart. Site Characters include waterfront/
river (6) in the city. Common Social Issue includes
traditional village sustainable regeneration (6)Assemblage (28) mainly takes overseas methodology or the professor’s expertise, and applies to theresearch on a Japan site[P1], with a focus on specificsocial issues [S2]. Contexts and Educational Tool organically assembled, rather than a conventional linear
working process. There is no “dominant aspect” nor“dominant culture” that can be firmly identified. It’s
initiated by the subjective intent of the educator. A
non-hierarchy, non-essential, assemblage concept8).

The results also deliver preference of Topics Typesand elements by different counterpart culture-sphere.
Assemblage Type appears to be the most noticeable
for studios with western educators (25). Village/Rural
Area [P1] (16), housing (6), local community character (11) frequently appear in the Joint workshop with
Kanji Circle. It could relate to the mutual backgroundmentality of Kanji Circle allows subtle issues to belearned in a vernacular site. The historical city visit
also resonates for both parties. The common issue ofwaterfront (4/6) is especially noted by [A] and [K]culture spheres, which bears geographic similarity
with Japan.

2005
2010
2015

3.2 Chronological Study on Paired Elements From2005 to 2020
The rapid social renewal has also affected the focus
in architecture design. The majority of topics in thisanalysis were within 2005-2020. By placing elementsin the time-line, some tendencies could be discovered. The attention on Village/Rural/Regional has
steadily increased compared with urban areas in thesite [P1](fig.5) Within the urban range, Residential
Suburb (16/30 in 2015-2020) gradually became a major site, showing an interest in vernacular space. Public projects exceeded Housing projects [P2]. In Social
Context, Specific Local Context [S2] gradually received more attention than Social Background. As for
Learning Method [T1], there is a clear growing tendency that topics employ Methodology/Theory Study.

issue [S1] in Tokyo is [jp], Ancient history of a heritage city in Laos [S2] is [ov], However, some topics
mentioned both Japan and Thailand that shares theDisaster of water[S1] or Urbanization[S1] problem
in both Tokyo and Taiwan. In this case, the cultural
factor was presented as [jp+ov]. When both cultures
occur in one aspect, it was presented as [jp]+[ov].
Regarding Educational Tool, when there is clear mention of Theory/Methodology brought by the overseas
professors, the cultural factors appeared to be T[ov].
These results in 8 combinations of aspects with cultural factors, indicated an objective direction that
focused on the site, and the design process is rather
linear, similar to all standard design classes. The other approach took focus more on the subjective intent,
usually has a special lens to understand the fact.

1990
1995
2000

the latter regards micro-scale, highly contextual issues such as History/Culture (21), Community Character/ Memory (16), Atmosphere(6).
Educational Tool [T] refers to the architectureteaching approach, which could be seen as subjective
decisions by the educator. Learning Method [T1] indicates that apart from the universal site research (46),several classes commence with Theory/methodology(44), Critical thinking (27), as well as an open proposal (23). These showed a focus on design thinking
education, compared to conventional brief following
projects. As many topics encourage challenging thenorm, propose new questions based on discovered
issues and context, then apply to the practice. Special
Outcome [T2] (30/126) occurs in 1/4 of the total topic. These creative outcomes include making the film(5), building real installation, shows an alternativeand cross-disciplinary study format of architecture.
Viewpoint [T3] could evidently illustrate the diverse
mentality in cross-culture, includes Problem Solving(7), Improving the Current State (health, well-being,
and lifestyle) (11)

20 5

26

T1 Methodology (14/26)
T2 Special Outcome (11/26)
Film(2), Exhibition (2)Computer Model (2)Real Installation (7)Ukiyo-E Style Drawing(1)(4)
Booklet2

P2
P2|House
Design28

Aspect with common
issue of [jp]and [ov]

(2)

0

9

3

12

0 0 0 00

a range larger
than 3, elements under
this range were studied0