Architecture / Mimarlık

Permanent URI for this collectionhttps://hdl.handle.net/11147/24

Browse

Filters

2013 - 201912020 - 20211

Settings

Author: search.filters.author.Doğan, FehmiSubject: search.filters.subject.Creativity

Search Results

Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
  • Article
    Citation - WoS: 25
    Citation - Scopus: 28
    How To Learn To Be Creative in Design: Architecture Students' Perceptions of Design, Design Process, Design Learning, and Their Transformations Throughout Their Education
    (Elsevier, 2021) Taneri, Batuhan; Doğan, Fehmi
    The study explores students? perceptions of experiential learning, design and design process, and design education, and whether these perceptions vary according to school year students are in based on qualitative and quantitative data collected from two architectural schools. We inquire into how creativity and design could be learned through repeated design tasks without structured instructions about the creative design process. The explorative study employs surveys and semistructured focus group interviews. The results indicate problem-solving view of design is the most common characterization, students think design is not a straightforward problem solving and is most related to art and creativity. Finally, students report school has a limited impact on how they learn designing. We conclude experiential learning in the studio create shortcomings if not accompanied with a critical and reflective stance and that undertaking design tasks one after the other without explicit reflection on these tasks is an inefficient strategy in learning about the creative design process.
  • Article
    Citation - WoS: 96
    Citation - Scopus: 112
    Cognitive Strategies of Analogical Reasoning in Design: Differences Between Expert and Novice Designers
    (Elsevier Ltd., 2013) Özkan, Özgü; Doğan, Fehmi
    This study investigates differences in analogical reasoning among first, second, and fourth year students and expert architects. Participants took part in an experiment consisting of four tasks: rating source examples, selecting a source domain, explaining their selection, and designing a bus stop. The results indicate significant differences among participants with respect to their soundness ratings. The results also show significant relation between level of expertise and participants' selection of source categories, the stated reasons for their selection, and the type of similarity they established between source and target. We conclude that experts preferred ‘mental hops’ while first year students preferred ‘mental leaps.’ Second and fourth year students preferred neither ‘mental leaps’ nor ‘mental hops’ but to literally copy the sources.