Abstract
This paper aims to provide a better understanding of the transfer of experiential knowledge in the education of design in architecture. A lot of knowledge in architectural design, such as knowledge of construction, plan organization, etc. can be communicated verbally or under written form, however, the experience and appreciation of spatial quality, i.e. experiential knowledge, is difficult to communicate explicitly. Nevertheless, we believe that this knowledge transfer happens to a larger or lesser extent in the Design Studio, not explicit but tacit. Because it deals with appreciation, one can introduce the concept of connoisseurship, i.e. the art of appreciation (Eisner, 2002) The act then of making public what someone as a connoisseur has experienced requires an act of criticism (Eisner, 2002). When it comes to recognizing and disclosing spatial quality in architecture, one can speak of spatial connoisseurship and spatial criticism. The question is then: how the experience of spatial quality actually is transferred in an educational environment? When is the educational spatial connoisseur a spatial critic? The paper provides a theoretical framework for detecting and analyzing this transfer of experiential knowledge as it happens in dialogues between teachers and students in the Design Studio. In the theoretical discourse we argue that having a well formed sentiment (Hume, SOT), a rich imagination and refined multi-sensory capacities, are important properties of a spatial connoisseur in order to be able to experience and appreciate spatial qualities. The study shows, on the basis of a protocol analysis of the dialogues, that in current teaching situations the emphasis is mainly on rational argumentation in appreciating spatial qualities, rather than on sentiment, imagination and multi-sensory capabilities.
Keywords
Education, architecture, experiential knowledge, connoisseurship, emotions
DOI
https://doi.org/10.21606/eksig2011.117
Citation
Michels, M., Meeus, W.,and De Walsche, J.(2011) The Educational Spatial Connoisseur as the Spatial Critic, in Niedderer, K., Mey, K., Roworth-Stokes, S. (eds.), EKSIG 2011: Skin Deep - Experiential Knowledge & Multi-sensory Communication, 23–24 June 2011, Farnham, United Kingdom. https://doi.org/10.21606/eksig2011.117
Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License
The Educational Spatial Connoisseur as the Spatial Critic
This paper aims to provide a better understanding of the transfer of experiential knowledge in the education of design in architecture. A lot of knowledge in architectural design, such as knowledge of construction, plan organization, etc. can be communicated verbally or under written form, however, the experience and appreciation of spatial quality, i.e. experiential knowledge, is difficult to communicate explicitly. Nevertheless, we believe that this knowledge transfer happens to a larger or lesser extent in the Design Studio, not explicit but tacit. Because it deals with appreciation, one can introduce the concept of connoisseurship, i.e. the art of appreciation (Eisner, 2002) The act then of making public what someone as a connoisseur has experienced requires an act of criticism (Eisner, 2002). When it comes to recognizing and disclosing spatial quality in architecture, one can speak of spatial connoisseurship and spatial criticism. The question is then: how the experience of spatial quality actually is transferred in an educational environment? When is the educational spatial connoisseur a spatial critic? The paper provides a theoretical framework for detecting and analyzing this transfer of experiential knowledge as it happens in dialogues between teachers and students in the Design Studio. In the theoretical discourse we argue that having a well formed sentiment (Hume, SOT), a rich imagination and refined multi-sensory capacities, are important properties of a spatial connoisseur in order to be able to experience and appreciate spatial qualities. The study shows, on the basis of a protocol analysis of the dialogues, that in current teaching situations the emphasis is mainly on rational argumentation in appreciating spatial qualities, rather than on sentiment, imagination and multi-sensory capabilities.