Akademik Veri Yönetim Sistemi
ARCHITECTURAL EPISODES 02: NEW DIALOGUES IN ARCHITECTURAL EDUCATION AND PRACTICE, ISTANBUL KÜLTÜR UNIVERSITY, İstanbul, Türkiye, 25 Mart 2022, ss.294-308
This paper attempts to produce an epistemological investigation based on Bauhaus-invented pedagogic terminology and notions. Since Bauhaus paradigm has created a vast amount of pedagogical terms, these terms have not only been used in Bauhaus but also moved both geographically and epistemologically throughout the world and time. In this context, it is meaningful to divulge these terms and make an epistemological investigation considering their move not only geographically but also pedagogically. Herein, it is significant to ask some questions: Who proposed these terms? In which places and contexts are these terms used? And, how these terms are transferred to different geographies by which translations? At this juncture, the paper focuses on “Vorkurs” as a term that has reflected on theoretical, cultural, social, historical, political and even economic issues and established dialogues between architectural education and new potentials of interdisciplinarity, design-thinking and collaborative approaches in different geographies by different translations. This paper mainly highlights how language use -in the section of terms and nouns- relates to its social, political and historical context. Unlike linguistic approaches that focus only on the rules of language use, this analysis emphasizes the contextual meaning of language by considering it inseparable from its social, political and historical context. As the move of the term “Vorkurs” sheds a light on tectonics of architectural education even in present, discovering current potentials in architectural education becomes feasible with epistemological investigation of this paper.
The aim was fulfilled by following the move of “Vorkurs”, looking at different translations like “Vorlehre”, “Grundlehre”, “Hazırlık dersi”, “Temel tasarım”, “Temel tasar”, “basic course”, “basic design”, “preliminary course”, “orientation course” and “foundation course” with their separate contexts and then discussing them on a theoretical basis. Archival research method was used in this epistemological investigation by focusing on secondary sources like Bauhaus Manifesto, books and texts written by Bauhaus masters. In conclusion, this paper laid down an academic discussion on current possibilities of design-thinking and co-approaches in architectural education. This investigation may make us ask that, can there be a coincidence in Bauhaus-invented ‘Vorkurs’s moving, both geographically and pedagogically, since Bauhaus had never isolated itself from Germany’s political, economic and historical background? Or, is there a possibility for ‘Vorkurs’ to move both geographically and pedagogically even through present because of its foundation which questions current designer and by this way current design product and education on every field that are connected more or less by itself? Today, how is the situation of the course “Temel tasarım” or “Temel tasar” in our country? Is it constantly transforming itself according to the political, educational, economic background of our time just like ‘Vorkurs’, as it is included with potentials and developments related to design education and the pursuit for current designer?