Mimari tasarım eğitiminde stüdyo kültürü araştırması: Öğrenen-merkezli ortamın yansımaları
Studio culture in architectural design education: Reflections of learner-centered environment
Yazar: CEMİLE SANEM ERSİNE MASATLIOĞLU
Danışman: DOÇ. DR. NURBİN PAKER KAHVECİOĞLU
İstanbul Teknik Üniversitesi / Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü / Mimarlık Ana Bilim Dalı / Mimari Tasarım Bilim Dalı
Derece: Doktora, 2018
Konu: Mimarlık = Architecture

Özet:
Bu tez, mimari tasarım eğitiminde "stüdyo kültürü" kavramına, kurumların resmî dokümanları ve stüdyodaki karşılıklı aktörler olan eğitimciler ve öğrencilerin deneyimleri üzerinden yapılan araştırmalar ışığında bakmaktadır. Bu bağlamda "stüdyo kültürü" üzerine genel bir kuramsal okumanın ardından, deneysel pratik olarak İstanbul Teknik Üniversitesi Mimarlık Bölümü içindeki stüdyo deneyimleri ile detaylanan, tanımlayıcı ve karşılaştırmalı bir ilişkisel anlatı sunmaktadır. Ön çalışmalar ve deneysel alan çalışmalarından elde edilen "mimarlık eğitimindeki stüdyo kültürü bileşenleri, yönlendiricileri ve öğrenme deneyimleri" gibi bileşenlere bağlı bulgular üzerinden yapılan değerlendirmelerle, ulusal mimarlık eğitimi platformu tartışmalarına katkısı olacak problemlerin işaret edilmesi amaçlanmaktadır. 
"Stüdyo kültürü" tanımı, yükseköğretimde, akreditasyon stratejileri üzerinden resmîleştirilen ve yaygınlaştırılan, bir nevi manifesto olarak dokümanlarda karşımıza çıkmaktadır. Fakat stüdyo eğitiminin öğrenen bireye ve birlikte öğrenmeye açık pedagojik tabanı dolayısıyla, özellikli bir olgu olarak açıklanması gereğinin altı çizilmelidir. Bu konuda yapılacak bir araştırmada, akademinin özünde olan entelektüel merak ve karşılıklı öğrenme zemini üzerinden gelişen kültürel yapının belgelenmesinde, nitel araçların kullanılmasıyla keşiflerin zenginleşeceği öngörülmektedir. Kâğıt üzerindeki tanımlamalar yanında, ne öğrendiğimizin ve nasıl öğrendiğimizin araştırılmasının önem kazandığı düşüncesiyle, tasarım eğitiminde ölçülebilenler yerine, ölçülemeyen ya da ölçülmesi zor olan konuların açılması kritik önem taşımaktadır. Bu doğrultuda tez çalışması kapsamında, mimarlık eğitiminde stüdyo kültürünün yönlendirdiği deneyimler ve bağıntılı değişkenleriyle ilişkilerinin incelenmesi konusu, temel araştırma çerçevesini oluşturmaktadır. Bu bağlamda, eğitim bilimlerinde öğrenen-merkezli pedagojik model tabanlı çalışmalardaki öğrenme hedefleri ve eğitimcilerin belirlediği organizasyonlar ile öğrenenlerdeki konstrüktif öğrenme tabanlı bireysel gelişim ilişkilerinin verileri çalışmanın yöntemi için yol gösterici olmuştur.
Çalışmanın başlangıcında, öncelikle literatür incelemesi üzerinden mimarlık eğitimi ve pratiğinin, 20. ve 21. yüzyıllarda evrensel ölçekteki sosyo-kültürel değişimler doğrultusunda karşılaştığı yenilikler ve kırılma noktalarına bakılmaktadır. Eğitimde öğrenen-merkezli pedagojik modellerin dinamikleri ile stüdyo tabanlı eğitimin ilişkisi araştırılmaktadır. Mimari tasarım eğitimi paradigmalarının, tasarım stüdyosu ortamını etkileyen kültürel ağların doğrudan etki alanında olduğu hipotezi ortaya konmaktadır. Devamında genel anlamda 'kültür' kavramına yüklenen anlamların kronolojik okumasında görülen değişimlerle, tasarım stüdyosunu etkileyen kültürel ağlar birlikte yorumlanarak ele alınmaktadır.
Devamında, yükseköğretim ve meslek pratiği ile ilgili konularla da ilişkili olarak, 'stüdyo kültürü' kavramının resmî olarak ortaya çıkışındaki zemine odaklanan çalışma, mimarlık alanıyla ilgili kurumların açıklamalarını konu alan literatür üzerinden ilerlemektedir. Bu bağlamda, formel ve örtük müfredat, yeterlilikler, akreditasyon, öğrenme kültürü konularının, stüdyo kültürü politikası ve içeriğine ışık tutucu yönleri konu edilmektedir. Devamında, stüdyo kültürü kavramı, referans kurumların belgeleri üzerinden ve referans yönetici-eğitimcilerle görüşmeler üzerinden değerlendirmelerle detaylandırılarak ortaya konmaya çalışılmıştır. Bu analizler sonucunda ortaya çıkan verilerin değerlendirilmesi sonucunda; ulusal ve uluslararası platformda 21. yüzyıl mimarlık eğitimi stüdyosunda, öğrenme ortamının beş temel yönlendirici ilkesi olarak, (1) eleştirel düşünce, (2) iletişim ve etkileşim, (3) çeşitlilik, (4) iş birliği içinde bireysellik, (5) sosyal sorumluluk kavramları, temel konu başlıkları olarak belirlenmiştir. Belge taraması analizinin verileri, sözlü belge kodlama aracı MAXQDA aracılığıyla nicel frekans karşılıkları ile de gösterilmiştir. 
Alan çalışması kapsamında, öğrenme kültürü ve yeterlilikler ilişkisinde düzenlenmiş olan sorular aracılığıyla, İTÜ Mimarlık Bölümü öğrencileri ve proje stüdyosu yürütücüleri ile yarı-yapılandırılmış derinlemesine röportajlar gerçekleştirilmiştir. İTÜ Mimarlık Bölümü, Türkiye'de mimarlık eğitimi kurumları içindeki köklü eğitim kurumlarından biri ve ilk uluslararası mimarlık akreditasyonu alan kurum olması nedeniyle bu görüşmeler için referans kurum olarak seçilmiştir. Stüdyo kültürü temel ilkeleri olarak önerilen kavramsal çıktı alanları esas alınarak, bu iki röportaj setinden elde edilen verilerin netleştirilmesi, birebir aktarımların ve yorumlamalı analizlerin yapılabilmesini kolaylaştırması amacıyla, röportaj transkriptleri, MAXQDA programı ortamında kodlanmıştır. Ayrıca kodlama aracılığıyla elde edilen kavramların birbirleriyle yakınlık derecelerini gösteren matris tablosu ve ağ haritası yardımıyla da alan çalışmasının değerlendirmesi yapılmaya çalışılmıştır. 
Sonuç olarak, belge taraması ve elit-görüşmeler sonucu yönetici seviyesinde eğitimciler ve kurumlar tarafının, eğitimci ve öğrenci görüşmeleri sonucu da stüdyodaki aktif öğrenenler tarafının, stüdyo kültürünü nasıl anladığı ve bu kavramdan ne bekledikleri üzerine kapsamlı bulgular elde edilmiştir. Değerlendirmeler, öğrenme deneyimlerinin daha yaratıcı ve derin olması adına örtük müfredatın kritikliği üzerine ampirik kanıtlar sunmuştur.

Abstract:
In self-construction-based, learning-centered teaching models, information is not dictated but structured by experience, and it is acknowledged that pre-existing values and knowledge influence the learning process. In the second half of the 20th-century, avant-garde paradigms of creative education saw the potential of a dynamic and interactive learning environment and its effect on self-constructed and self-developed learning experiences. In this study, it is assumed that the concept of studio culture, which describes the organization for the self-construction of students in an intensive network of communication and interaction, basically coincides with learning-centered pedagogical models. In a 21st-century design studio, learning should occur through a process of understanding that involves doing by investigating, criticizing, applicating, analyzing, synthesizing, developing, evaluating etc. in an intercrossed order. For sure, the curriculum aims to be the main medium for the development of professional knowledge and abilities. But professional culture and ethics, and the individual visions and lifestyle tend to be constructed and re-constructed around social circles and cultural artifacts. Accordingly, lifelong learning calls for a meticulous communication-based pedagogy devoted to the individual learner and the learning community.
The hypothesis of this research acknowledges that the concept of studio culture incorporates the relationship between animate actors, i.e. instructors, students, guest educators and peers, and the hidden curriculum. The formal curriculum, course learning objectives and learning outputs, studio space and school's working environments as other inanimate actors have a great effect on the operation of the studio culture as well. However, beyond formal descriptions of course content and objectives, studio-based learning brings ever-changing activities and understandings. In time, reflecting on these experiences add up to a self-constructive development for every other learner. In this context, for studio-based education, it is considered inevitably critical to open and discuss topics that are not measurable or difficult to measure instead of measurable and tangible ones. Thus, this research doesn't aim to product-oriented analysis, such as measuring or evaluating student performance or design projects. As foreground, the output problem in the question 'what are the inputs and outputs of the studio?' is considered conceptually. Not the development process of any design product but the process in a signifying sense of the formation of intellectual and behavioral activities for individual development during mutual learning is implied. In short, this paper is a result of a research on students' learning experiences that are directed by the concept of studio culture. Thus, it has been aimed to reveal the associations of students' self-constructed individual development, determined by various studio organizations, and architecture education in general. Assuming that the actors of the studio change as the studio culture changes and vice versa, it is expected to gain some specific data about the reflections of architectural design education's hidden curriculum on the learners and accordingly on the studio culture. The content of this data will be formed by the introduction of largely experience-based, hard to understand information, so-called "implicit knowledge". In this context, the aim of this study has been turned towards searching for subjectivity within the cultural spheres of the studio as multiplicity environments.
The concept of studio culture, which can be used to describe the direct impact of the "learning culture" of institutions in the design studio pedagogy, is handled in this investigation as referring to the above-mentioned relational environment. It is noteworthy that this concept's formalization on paper has started with the students creating a feedback-based participatory discussion ground. In 2000, AIAS (The American Institute of Architectural Students) established the first "Studio Culture Task Force" to work on contemporary architectural education. "The Redesign of Studio Culture" published in 2002, points out the problematic points of architectural education in the USA (United States of America) and aims to describe a cultural framework on the upper scale desired for any studio. NAAB (National Architectural Accrediting Board) Validation Conference in 2003 concluded with the decision to place the "Studio Culture Policy" as a condition of accreditation. Acknowledging that accreditation systems would not tend towards standardization of educational philosophies, multiplicity is celebrated. The originality of different national and even institutional cultures should reflect on the educational programs. With this vision, MİAK (Mimarlık Akreditasyon Kurulu, Architectural Accrediting Board) from Turkey aims to control and elevate architectural education. This type of accreditation assures the mutual recognition of national and international institutions, controlling and easing the relations of individuals, institutions, and the profession. In addition, it provides a means of documentation for the institutional memory. 
Depending on the actors and the acts, studio culture reflects an interactive concept. But looking into the studio culture policies helps to define the general position of the subject institutions. However, it is a fundamental problem whether or not these policies reflect the actuality of the institutions' studio environments. With this research, that problem is tried to be handled with an investigation on NAAB-substantial accredited program of ITU (Istanbul Technical University) Department of Architecture. Learning experiences of the program's students are investigated to inform on what kinds of studio organizations the main principles of the 21st-century studio culture operate or don't. The investigation made it possible to document oral data including student feedback on the vision and learning environment of the institution in general, along with diverse studio cultures within. 
For the investigation of the research problem, the meaning and actualization of the concept studio culture, a qualitative analysis is carried out, including document reviews and semi-structured in-depth interviews. Primarily, for the document analysis data set in Chapter 3.2, NAAB is preferred as the overseas reference because of its role on the terminology of the studio culture concept and as the guide for the Turkish architectural accreditation system MİAK. First, with the help of the coding-based software tool MAXQDA12, the documents are reviewed and organized. The explanatory texts are summarized as interrelated concepts came across, which resulted in a list of priority principles of 21st-century studio culture. These are summarized as; (1) critical thinking, (2) communication and interaction, (3) multiplicity, (4) individuality in collaboration, (5) social responsibility, (6 ) self-regulation for NAAB referenced programs. The initial five outcomes are similar for MİAK accredited programs and NAAB accredited ITU Architecture Program. Henceforth, interpretations are made looking through the main scopes collated. In short, the studio culture policies of programs from Turkey and Northern Cyprus show similarities and differences between the ones from the USA. The most different point is seen where the programs' suggestions and evaluations are mostly based on epistemological and/or methodological objectives of a studio. Another important difference is that from the guiding principles emerging in the NAAB analysis, students' self-regulation ability is very little emphasized. Schools in the prior analysis showed interest in psychological positions as well as the cognitive positions of the learners. As the similarity, it is seen that every MİAK accredited program mentioned competencies superimposing with NAAB accredited ones in their studio culture policies. However, the significance of these lacks if read with corresponding NAAB reports.
Continuing this analysis, which is derived from concrete data on the perception of studio culture, a phenomenological investigation is necessary to gather intangible and pedagogy-based socio-cultural information. Thus, an elite-interview study has been conducted to narrow down and inform deeper the research problem. The results of this study conducted with four professors, who worked as former Head of ITU Department of Architecture, serves as the second data set of this research. The interview data analyzed with the software tool through coding reinforced the six outcome areas determined as the main principles of studio culture from the document analysis. Also, well-marked explanations helped the researcher to gain a broader perspective on the issue of learner-centered environments. All the interviewees were in agreement that architectural culture or any cultural structure cannot be transferred directly but can be earned and developed through dialog and sharing. The role of the educator came into prominence again, for the self-construction of ideas, culture, skills and consequently commitment for becoming a lifelong learner.
In Chapter 4, which consists of this work's main case study, students and educators from ITU Department of Architecture are interviewed. For the development of the students-interview structure, the aforementioned six outcome areas have been taken into account from the analysis of the studio culture policy documents. The aim here is to look at the cultural structures of the studios from a different side than the manager-educators, from the side of the students of ITU Department of Architecture, selected as the study area. The lack of formal documentation of architectural students' voices in Turkey, similar to the AIAS example, has triggered this aim. Primarily, a series of fourteen interviews were held with the senior students of ITU Department of Architecture in order to obtain data onto studio pedagogy and culture. Mature students are chosen in the prospect of leading to fruitful analyses. The participants took most of the lessons in the curriculum, have incorporated various experiences through working with various educators with diverse pedagogies, and have participated in internships and/or informal learning environments. Semi-structured interviews conducted by the researcher on an individual basis with fourteen students, including ten main questions elaborated by follow-up questions on the answers, enabled a comprehensive phenomenological study. The MAXQDA12 software provided the ground for managing the process of sorting and analyzing the written text in excess through coding, so as to evaluate the data without comments. Experimenting with the policies' performance in a real time-space axis on an institutional culture ground, a representative map of dynamics of undergraduate architectural design studios in ITU was able to be illustrated. Briefly, the interview data showed that the actuality of any studio culture puts the educator-student relation first. The definitions for accreditation give an insight into the institution's vision, rules, values, opportunities etc., which contribute to the learning culture. Yet all the strengths and weaknesses of the studio-based learning experiences encountered by the students connect together around the interactions with the instructor. A primary concern of this untraditional mode of teaching is the direct effect on levels of motivation or demotivation, accordingly the learning and production process.
Secondly, a series of nine interviews were held with design studio instructors of ITU Department of Architecture. Same research and analysis method of student-interviews is followed. Results showed that the pedagogical approach in the context of constructivist learning is inevitable, but it is also challenging for both sides. The continuity of the mutual and social learning environment depends on the active line of the role of organizing the modes of communications and interactions allowing intellectual curiosity and awareness. In other words, the educator must be able to adapt the environment to changing situations and actors. Different from the students' approaches, the topic social responsibility come forward strongly as the main learning objectives of the architectural design studio. Additionally, the concept of informality, which is often associated with activities outside the classroom, is assigned as an important concept helping to develop motivational or other self-regulation skills in students. Both the elite-interviews and the studio educator interviews, the emphasis is strong that the university cannot be defined by learning, especially not by teaching. In short, the prior mission is to educate individuals with an intellectual mind structure and the professional gains will be the secondary achievement. At this point, it is possible to evaluate that the individual competencies to be gained at the intersection of the pedagogical approach and the cultural sharing environment described above will bring multi-directional and multi-layered professional knowledge along.