Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
Loading next page...
/lp/multidisciplinary-digital-publishing-institute/visual-communication-for-students-creative-thinking-in-the-design-2eSZCHfg2A
References
References for this paper are not available at this time. We will be adding them shortly, thank you for your patience.
- Publisher
- Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute
- Copyright
- © 1996-2021 MDPI (Basel, Switzerland) unless otherwise stated Disclaimer The statements, opinions and data contained in the journals are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publisher and the editor(s). MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. Terms and Conditions Privacy Policy
- ISSN
- 2075-5309
- DOI
- 10.3390/buildings11030091
- Publisher site
- See Article on Publisher Site
Abstract
Article Visual Communication for Students’ Creative Thinking in the Design Studio: Translating Filmic Spaces into Spatial Design 1 2, Eun Joo Park and Mi Jeong Kim * Department of Architecture, Sejong University, Seoul 05006, Korea; ej_park@sejong.ac.kr School of Architecture, Hanyang University, Seoul 04763, Korea * Correspondence: mijeongkim@hanyang.ac.kr Abstract: Representing visual experiences is an essential part of architectural design education for creativity. The representation of creative ideas relates to the ability to communicate spatial design concepts. This study examined whether filmic spaces could function as visual communication to enhance students’ creative thinking in architecture. It explored how creativity can be supported throughout an architectural design studio with a conceptual tool that translates filmic spaces into spa‐ tial design. To investigate the ways to translate filmic space into spatial design tools for creative think‐ ing, we conducted a design studio with first‐year university students. Focusing on using various ele‐ ments of film, including movement, frame, montage, light, and color, and scene changes to represent architectural languages, a curriculum was developed and implemented in a Visual Communication Design Studio for one semester, stimulating students to engage in expressing their ideas in three‐di‐ mensional spaces. The overall results suggested that the design education method that used the filmic space as a stimulating tool for creative thinking, emphasizing the role of visual communication, could enhance students’ creative thinking, leading to improved creative design processes. Citation: Park, E.J. and Kim, M.J. Keywords: creative thinking; visual communication; filmic spaces; representation; architectural Visual Communication for Students’ design studio; design education Creative Thinking in the Design Studio: Translating Filmic Spaces into Spatial Design. Buildings 2021, 11, 91. https://doi.org/10.3390/ buildings11030091 1. Introduction The importance of nurturing students’ creative thinking in design education has been Academic Editor: Hernan Casakin emphasized by many researchers and educators because creativity is a crucial part of ar‐ chitectural design. Critical design thinking can be a powerful way to motivate various Received: 9 January 2021 design ideas by allowing an interactive understanding of an ill‐defined design problem; Accepted: 18 February 2021 thus, researchers have tried to find effective methods to stimulate students’ creative think‐ Published: 2 March 2021 ing [1–8]. Design education has generally been delivered to students via teachers’ subjec‐ tive teaching methods rather than through a systematic academic approach [9]. Thus, de‐ Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neu‐ tral with regard to jurisdictional sign education tends to be neglected as an academic category from a general educational claims in published maps and insti‐ perspective that focuses on logical and empirical education. However, design education tutional affiliations. should have an educational model with more academic methods for improving creativity because the promotion of creativity is crucial for design and should be emphasized on a holistic, interdisciplinary basis [10]. Overall, architectural design education in a department of architecture emphasizes Copyright: © 2021 by the authors. Li‐ the promotion of creativity among students and is largely divided into two approaches— censee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. the theoretical background of design and the practical application of design ideas. Stu‐ This article is an open access article dents in design studios in the department of architecture are often instructed to gather distributed under the terms and con‐ information on a given problem, analyze the collected materials, transform them into ditions of the Creative Commons At‐ spaces, and critically present their ideas to present a satisfactory solution. In the field of tribution (CC BY) license (http://crea‐ architecture, many studies have conducted mutual exchanges with other fields, and more tivecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). diverse architectural languages have been used through interaction with them. However, Buildings 2021, 11, 91. https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings11030091 www.mdpi.com/journal/buildings Buildings 2021, 11, 91 2 of 19 such research is still insufficient in the field of education, and most research is focused on theoretical approaches to the architectural space. This study introduces an architectural design studio to investigate multi‐dimensional spatial expressions by taking filmic char‐ acteristics and discussing creative approaches to evaluating their achievements. Architecture and film have similarities in the ways they are perceived in terms of the relationship between time and space, the experience of continuity, and movement. There‐ fore, it was expected that the exploration of film could promote students’ creativity by revealing the applicability of spatial design through the correlation between real spaces and filmic spaces. Assignments given in courses would address the problem‐based learn‐ ing presented in previous literature, focusing on creative stimulation rather than func‐ tional consideration and reflecting a changing educational environment. The field of ar‐ chitectural design is particularly interested in creative spatial design because it always requires new and integrated solutions to the complex and multidisciplinary issues associ‐ ated with spaces. In this respect, this study aims to introduce a Visual Communication Design Studio for first‐year students at the department of architecture in a university lo‐ cated in Korea, which performed the translation of filmic spaces into spatial designs over one semester (16 weeks). This study investigates how the students developed filmic spaces into spatial designs as a way of acquiring novel techniques of architectural expression. The Visual Communi‐ cation Design Studio aims to find the constituent elements of the film that can be adopted into real space by analyzing the inter‐relationships between the two fields based on the theoretical consideration of space and film. The main intention of this design studio was to enhance the creativity of its students by providing an alternative way to develop crea‐ tive thinking in architectural design education. Rather than focusing on the final output to the problem, it sought an exploration of the challenges in the design development pro‐ cess in an effort to define the problem and the process of “finding a way to solve it” under the guidance of professors. In architectural design, it is important to reframe problems for solution formulation and to develop designs accordingly. Professors and students were encouraged to communicate by using various representation techniques in their design processes. This research was developed based on the following assumptions: (1) It is essential to express creativity and visual experience in architectural design education; thus, repre‐ sentation skills should be provided to improve students’ creativity in architectural design education; (2) the applicability of filmic language to architectural space can be expressed in various ways, leading to divergent interpretations; and (3) the introduction of a filmic component to architectural spaces would induce active and independent participation in the method of the experience, creating interactions between the two spaces. 2. Related Research 2.1. Creativity and Design Education Creativity is characterized by the ability to address ideas of expression and produce unique and useful outcomes [11]. The creative design process is an extraordinary type of design for generating innovative ideas [12,13]. Creativity is a qualification often consid‐ ered in the final result, but it can be associated with specific processes that are likely to generate creative artifacts in design [12,14]. Creative thinking is closely related to the con‐ cept of restructuring that reflects the designer’s transformative perception of a problem [15]. Guilford pointed out that creativity is closely related to the ability to reconstruct problems and reinterpret thinking, which leads to freedom from fixedness when devel‐ oping logical solutions [16]. Constructive awareness is essential for promoting reinterpre‐ tations in design development [17,18]. Constructive perception provides designers with the opportunity to be more creative by allowing them to change focus and perceive in different ways [19]. Dorst [5] defined design‐derived reasoning patterns, studying the core Buildings 2021, 11, 91 3 of 19 of design thinking for idea generation and emphasizing abduction as a fundamental rea‐ soning pattern for creative thinking. To create maximum value for students’ design re‐ sults, it is crucial to understand the key aspects of students’ design problems and adopt effective reasoning methods to create a creative design process. Many researchers have emphasized the need to encourage different ways of thinking to promote creativity in design education. Design education is important for improving the creativity of students in the early stages of architecture education [20,21], and new teaching methods are required accordingly. It is crucial to develop and use teaching strat‐ egies that promote student‐centered thinking activities. Design education is related to the teaching methods that educate students to acquire relevant knowledge or skills. Students are generally educated to develop logical and convergent thinking for correct answers; therefore, they tend to adopt linear thinking even when solving ill‐defined design prob‐ lems in architectural design [2,6]. Most students follow a routine order of (1) site analysis, (2) planning, (3) basic design, and 4) creating a working drawing in the architectural de‐ sign studios of universities in Korea. However, students should be educated to adopt a non‐linear approach for developing divergent thinking in the design process. The design studio is the most fundamental course in architectural education, wherein students obtain practical and theoretical knowledge and learn how to transform this knowledge into rep‐ resentations of their design process with creativity [10,22]. By including effective strate‐ gies, such as filmic spaces for creative thinking, students’ creativity can be stimulated and developed. 2.2. Architectural Representation Many studies on architectural representation have suggested a distinct but similar framework for understanding its role in the design process [23]. Goldschmidt proposed culture/history, cognition, and technology/media as the main dimensions of the frame‐ work [24]. De la Fuente Suarez suggested a distinction between creative and interpretive processes [25]. Previous research on design representation attempted to define its roles and best practices in various design contexts and found that sketches are the fundamental representation of communication between mental and external images [26]. It was also found that representation methods play an important role in conveying design intentions [27], and computational technologies affect architectural representations in every step of the design process [28]. Numerous studies on visualization have compared human responses to object rep‐ resentations, but the methods were mostly limited to quantitative perceptual approaches [29], in which statistical differences depended on the degree of accuracy or realism, and the level of abstraction, participation, and comprehensiveness [30]. These methods have helped to understand the correlation of the various dimensions of evaluation with the reliability of representation; however, the results did not lead to practical standards for designers to create a visualization of architectural designs. In other words, guidelines for the selection, creation, and targeting of architectural representation along with the per‐ ceptual behaviors that support practical utilization have not been fully investigated for these methods [24,25]. An architects’ primary medium is drawing [31], and architectural drawings bring into being something that did not yet exist [32]. Drawings and representations have al‐ ways played a variety of roles within architecture, from technical explanations and ex‐ pressions to radical proposals and the articulation of imagination. Representation helps designers form, experience, communicate, and evaluate design concepts throughout the design process [23]. Effective representation is a more efficient way of drawing viewers’ attention to one aspect of the displayed object than directly experiencing it [25]. In terms of architecture, representation is a basic tool for transforming, for example, knowledge, ideas, and emotions, into specific ideas [33]. In architectural studios, representation has strong potential in the fields of art and design in that the entire process is carried out to portray ideas through various media [30]. Drawing has been much discussed as a medium Buildings 2021, 11, 91 4 of 19 for design and for communication in architecture, but the potential of its role as a medium for analysis, although recognized, has not been given the same attention [34]. In this re‐ spect, this study focuses on the perceptual category by comparing visual perception with different representations and focusing on the relationship between creativity and archi‐ tectural design education through cognition, representation type, and perception. 2.3. Filmic Spaces To stimulate creative thinking, it is necessary to break the fixating effects of prece‐ dents in design [35–37]. Problem framing is critical for identifying and understanding de‐ sign problems, and it has been argued that encouraging designers to find new ways to frame problems may mitigate design fixation [36]. The initial definition of problems may be related to work contexts that are similar to those in which previous problems have been defined; thus, to avoid a fixation effect associated with existing solutions, design problems need to be redefined outside a designer’s typical work situation [38]. For example, Choi and Kim [39] conducted an empirical study that used a digital world as a design strategic approach to negating design fixation. Filmic spaces might have the potential to provide creative stimuli to architectural representation as a new approach to problem identification in designing. Filmic elements such as shooting, montage, and mise‐en‐scène are the design methods for visualizing aes‐ thetics and style [40]. These elements provide a new opportunity to design a student in‐ terface that can provide a personalized way to find interesting films for the analysis of filmic spaces instead of using the traditional classifications of film based on explicit attrib‐ utes such as genre and cast. Closer observation and analysis of these elements in film could provide a vastly improved way of viewing [41]. Similar to architecture, which has the characteristic of using a combination of time and space, film is an art that relies on sight to express time and space and is temporally and spatially expressive in that it largely depends on visual images. Space is also an object that is perceived by sight and is primarily dependent on vision. Many previous studies on filmic approaches in architecture relate to the motion of the camera [42–45]. Motion is a fundamental characteristic of films, and films provide a unique perceptual element with a sense of realism through images and movement. The film expresses movement on a two‐ dimensional plane within the frame and is generated as a combination of time and space, a reality that is distinct from the real world, and an immaterial means of expression. The temporal and spatial characteristics of the film have provided a rich spatial vocabulary in the architectural space by presenting a new expression method for design ideas. In the Visual Communication Design Studio in Seoul, Korea, students were encour‐ aged to find their own expression methods and interpretations to create a new three‐di‐ mensional space. Architectural design education is a product of processes in which archi‐ tectural experiments are actively conducted through the diversification of spaces and the convergence of other fields. Thus, the studio sought to provide students with filmic spaces as a medium through which to experience new architectural spaces as reproduced through visual experiences. The hypothesis is that filmic spaces could be recreated as novel architectural spaces based on creative architectural thinking and design methods. 3. Methods 3.1. Curriculum and Architectural Design Studio Setup Through exposure to academic offerings at the university, from first‐ to fifth‐year programs, students are given broad access to the tools, strategies, and methodologies that are developed within the university at large. The visual communication class is a single‐ semester (16 weeks) course, providing a full‐time introduction to architecture and design as part of a five‐year undergraduate professional degree program in the university. The Visual Communication Design Studio is a place of experimentation and variation to pur‐ sue unforeseen opportunities and consequences in terms of architectural representations. Buildings 2021, 11, 91 5 of 19 The first year could be defined as an adaptation period by a learning‐through‐making approach; the students thus obtain basic architectural knowledge and the tools and meth‐ ods that help to foster an exploratory and intellectual interest in the physical and social environment. In the first‐year course, three individual studios were developed to encour‐ age students to take a disparate range of approaches and techniques for the purpose of multiplicity, which discourages and disrupts the formation of a singular design method‐ ology. This challenge required each student to proactively seek discussions to inform their work, establish the skills necessary to communicate ideas, and actively challenge their approaches by working individually within studio projects. Throughout the semester, the students were required to navigate a series of projects that generated a debate and confronted ambiguous definitions of architectural practice. The program was designed in accordance with the accreditation standards of the proce‐ dures and conditions of the Korea Architecture Accreditation Board (KAAB) [46]. The Ko‐ rea Institute of Architecture Education Accreditation specifies the core competencies that each university/graduate architecture education program must meet to obtain KAAB cer‐ tification, and its corresponding student performance criteria (SPC) [40]. Out of the 26 criteria of SPC, the Visual Communication Design Studio set its curriculum centered on five criteria. Details of each criterion are shown in Table 1. Table 1. Student performance criteria (SPC) [40]. SPC Criteria Goals/Student Performance of the Studio 1 Oral and Literal Communication - The course encourages design thinking through drawings and the use of a variety of Ability to communicate architectural techniques, e.g., photography, drawing, ideas in writing and speech, and the painting, model making, and mapping. ability to communicate in a foreign - By the end of the year, students will produce language. a comprehensive portfolio that explores dif‐ ferent media throughout the semester. Communication 2 Various Means of Expression - The drawing workshop encourages the de‐ Ability to express architectural ideas velopment of the technique of representation appropriately by means of various me‐ and translation by analyzing different ele‐ dia, such as sketches, models, draw‐ ments of filmic spaces. ing, writing, and digital drawings. - The project introduces observation, analysis, and inspiration. 3 Architecture, Science, Technology, and Fine Art - Students realize that form and function in ar‐ chitecture are strongly associated with the de‐ velopment of science, technology, and fine Cultural Context Understanding of the relationship be‐ art. (History–Behav‐ tween architecture, science, technol‐ - Throughout the class, students are brought to ior–Environment) ogy, and fine art. understand the influence of artistic sense, ac‐ quired through the development of sci‐ ence/technology and fine art. 7 Human Behavior Buildings 2021, 11, 91 6 of 19 - Students are led to understand theories and Understanding of theories and meth‐ methods related to the physical environ‐ odologies that identify the relationship ment and human behavior and to study the between the physical environment and principles and methods to apply their un‐ human behavior. derstanding of functional and spatial de‐ sign. 9 Form and Spatial Organization - Architectural design requires, as a basis, a Understanding of the basic principles three‐dimensional thinking ability to com‐ of 2D and 3D forms, design, and archi‐ pose form and space. Design tectural composition, and the ability to - Students learn the basic spatial elements, apply these principles to design a the basic principles, and composition meth‐ building. ods, and develop a three‐dimensional ar‐ chitectural form utilizing their learning. 3.2. Studio Course Procedure The visual communication course is the first stage of architectural design education in the first semester and 15 first‐year students worked on ideas for expressions using rep‐ resentation techniques over 16 weeks. The empirical basis of the studio consisted of the studies of these students, working on a small design assignment in a studio setting in the context of the subject. The studio was designed based on the analysis of film techniques, aesthetics, and the various elements of the film scenes selected by students. Throughout the semester, the students explored creative ideas and representation techniques using various media, such as text, photography, drawing, model making, and mapping. The studio possessed a different environment for learning than a typical lecture room (see Fig‐ ure 1). (a) (b) Figure 1. The view of the first‐year design studio. (a) A group of students share the working table together. (b) Drawing of the studio space plan. In the Visual Communication Design Studio, students’ works were developed using the following methods: conceptual sketches, divergent drawing transformations, and con‐ vergent physical‐model making. The course was intimately coordinated to provide a the‐ oretical framework for design studios from three areas—cultural context, technology, and professional practice. The studio course schedule and teaching methods are shown in Ta‐ ble 2. Buildings 2021, 11, 91 7 of 19 Table 2. Studio course schedule and teaching methods. Design Task/ Week Given Materials/Teaching Method Phase SPC Tutorial - Introduce the studio agenda. Project intro‐ - Explain the representation techniques for filmic 1 1, 2, 3 duction spaces. - Select a film and choose interesting scenes. (1) Conceptual sketches: the analysis of the filmic - Develop students’ conceptual ideas through ex‐ space periments with a wide range of representation Drawing work‐ 2–3 techniques. 1, 2, 3 shop - Analyze unreal cities from filmic spaces and ap‐ ply critical thinking to self‐initiated research. - Develop the scenes found in the film. (2) 4–6 Design tutorial 1, 2, 3 - Find their own representation techniques. Extract architectural ele‐ ments: the expression Mid‐term - Individual presentation in groups. 7 1, 2, 3 technique presentation - A jury with invited critics from outside of class. - Revise and improve the works. Design develop‐ (3) Synthetic drawings: 1, 2, 3, 8–13 - Articulate works in greater depth by applying ment the design development 7, 9 the representation technique to a real city. Representation - Develop own representation techniques. 1, 2, 3, 14–15 technique de‐ - Make physical models. 7, 9 velopment (4) The ongoing project - Individual presentation in groups. and review Final presenta‐ - A jury with invited critics from outside of class. 1, 2, 3, 16 tion - Production of a comprehensive analog and dig‐ 7, 9 ital portfolio for the exhibition. Exhibition 3.2.1. Introduction Stage: In‐depth Lectures and Conceptual Ideas In the first stage, students were given in‐depth lectures to orient the project and then to investigate prior design studies for analyzing film scenes in filmic spaces (weeks 1–3). Students were encouraged to develop their conceptual ideas through experiments with a wide range of representation techniques during the drawing workshop for two weeks. The drawing workshop encouraged students to develop representation and translation techniques by analyzing unreal cities in filmic spaces and applying critical thinking to their self‐initiated research. Individual projects helped students to undertake the constant translation from observation to material interpretation and to focus on developing skills through a series of references. 3.2.2. Expression Technique and Design Development Stage: Ideas Transformation During the expression technique stage (weeks 4–7), a design idea was developed from the scenes in a film for translation into spaces by using expression methods selected by the students. We provided weekly comments on the students’ initial designs, and the students used representation tools to instantly revise the design work in progress. Ongo‐ ing work was regularly discussed in individual tutorials, individual presentations in groups, and juries with invited critics, and, accordingly, students developed their work in Buildings 2021, 11, 91 8 of 19 greater depth and articulated individual inquiries. During the design development stage (weeks 8–13), the students undertook speculative experimentation and methodical inter‐ action using a wide range of techniques. In the mid‐term presentation, the jurors were invited to critique the students’ work and provided suggestions for the designs. The guest judges sought to ascertain how creatively the students had developed the filmic spaces and translated them into architectural spaces. The students used a variety of design tools to present their designs effectively in the critical sessions. 3.2.3. Final Critique Stage: Articulation of Visual Representation Following the final critique stage, the students revised and improved the design for the end‐of‐semester display as the final step in the studio process (weeks 14–16). The stu‐ dents articulated their work from an unreal city into a real city in greater depth by apply‐ ing their representation technique. Physical models were proposed after deriving the characteristics of space expressed in the films. By the end of the semester, each student had produced a comprehensive analog and digital portfolio that illustrated their own highly personal journey through the design studio. In addition to completing the portfolio and the summative assessment, the students were given an opportunity to reflect on the work produced throughout the semester and exhibit their products. 3.3. Design Task: Idea Stimulation The course aimed to analyze the types and features of the effective manipulation of filmic spaces to improve the students’ creativity. In the first phase, the students watched Citizen Kane (1941) by Orson Welles; Rear Window (1954) and Vertigo (1958) by Alfred Hitchcock; The Mirror (1975) by Andrei Tarkovsky; and The Purple Rose of Cairo (1985) by Woody Allen. The students then developed skills from the observation of a spatial frag‐ ment through the images of filmic spaces. Those films were selected because of their jux‐ taposition of virtual and real spaces [47] with highly recognizable and remarkable visual elements. The students conducted theoretical research and focused on the expressions and techniques of editing in films. In the Visual Communication Design Studio, students developed a “filmic space” concept based on Bernard Tschumi’s Manhattan Transcripts [48], which applied the mon‐ tage theory, a form of film composition to think about the relationship between space and motion, and expressed this by borrowing the film’s methodology (see Figure 2). Through Tschumi’s theory, they found the concept of a film in which pieces of fragments are merged, collided with, and confronted, and wherein new meanings and continuity are formed by the superposition of disconnected scenes. Figure 2. Bernard Tschumi’s Manhattan Transcripts provide the possibility of different interpreta‐ tions of architecture through a set of disjunctions among use, form, and social values [42]. Buildings 2021, 11, 91 9 of 19 To achieve the translation of filmic spaces into spatial design, the students presented a study in two stages. In the first stage, they researched different elements of filmic spaces mainly in terms of editing technique, encompassing movement, frames, zooming in/out, montages, and express emotional changes. In particular, they focused on the fact that real and virtual spaces coexist in films so that the method of conversion or expression between the two spaces is remarkable. In the second stage, each film’s scene was analyzed accord‐ ing to the editing techniques listed above, in addition to the spatial image that appears in the film and the corresponding motion. In filmic spaces, the cause of events or movements could be found through the con‐ cept of simultaneity, and the real spaces could be expressed using techniques found in filmic spaces. In other words, the meaning of the continuous experience was enhanced by applying filmic components into spatial design. It was also possible to create an interac‐ tion between the filmic space and the real space by introducing the characteristics of filmic spaces. 3.4. Analysis Framework The study aimed to identify the features and potential of the manipulation of filmic spaces for the improvement of students’ creativity. An analysis framework was developed to investigate the translation of filmic spaces into spatial design, emphasizing the creativ‐ ity of visual communication. The analysis framework was derived from the research of Choi and Kim [39] and extended by factors associated with the characteristics of the crea‐ tive design process (see Table 3). Table 3. A framework for analyzing the features of visual communication. Classification Key Analysis Point Problem reframing Reconstituting the problem from various perspectives Unconventional idea‐ Reflecting on ideas in a different way tion Brainstorming/Reflec‐ Mutual evaluation and communication to enable understand‐ tion ing Divergent reasoning Inferential thinking to produce diverse ideas Representation of Movement, frame, montage, light and color, and scene architectural language changes 4. Results 4.1. Project Development 4.1.1. Translating Filmic Spaces into Spatial Design Phase 1: Conceptual Sketches Sketching is another means to communicate what is happening inside the designer’s mind. Many activities and processes, such as conception, perception, evaluation, decision making, and representation, occur during conceptual designing [49]. After watching the selected films listed above (in Session 3.3), the students selected their own interesting scenes to analyze and then extracted the lines or circles and derived layers for creating a new space. In this step, the students did not focus on the concept of a city or a building; instead, they focused on creating a filmic space and making a single, completed space by using different aspects of each layer founded on conceptual sketches. For instance, the students chose various elements, including the movement of the camera angle, the Buildings 2021, 11, 91 10 of 19 static/dynamic coexistence between actors, and their emotions. The students sought to emphasize lines, faces, and spatial aspects using various materials (see Figure 3). Figure 3. An example of a student’s work: The process of concept development and sketches dur‐ ing the first stage of the two‐week drawing workshop. At the beginning of the class, the students had difficulty defining exactly what the filmic spaces would be. They were obsessed with the idea of finding architectural ele‐ ments and tended to participate in the evaluation of which process would be the “right” or “wrong” one to develop for the next step. Through a one‐on‐one design tutorial in weeks 2–3, each student analyzed the scene and managed to learn how the elements could comprise spaces. We found that it was interesting for students to express the subject of space through the scenes of the film they analyzed rather than the limited subject of the city or buildings. They also analyzed the space for creative ways to represent using their own techniques and tried to avoid stereotypical thinking about the architectural design process. Through the conceptual drawings, the ability to categorize and determine things that did not fall into exact criteria was also enhanced. Not only did the students undertake problem reframing to understand and create spatial elements from the given filmic space, but they also tried to analyze and reflect on filmic spaces in an unconventional way that was different from a general architectural design approach. Phase 2: Extract Architectural Elements In weeks 4–6, each student tried to analyze and develop a set of architectural tools using various factors in each scene to create their own filmic space. For instance, a student watched the film Vertigo (1958) by Alfred Hitchcock. She selected a scene because she found it interesting when the long shot was taken, and the camera moved from the ac‐ tress’s side to the front and then zoomed out to show the emotional changes of the actress. To represent the filmic space, she first captured a picture of the film and drew lines or shapes on the paper to show the progress of the analysis. Next, the student represented the camera’s movement by zooming in/out and then expressing emotion changes with different colors (see Figure 4a). The student drew the octant, marked the path through which the camera moved, and wrote down all the time periods at which the emotion changed (see Figure 4b). This accumulation of analysis naturally produced one’s own filmic space. Through this process, the student managed to find ways to express emotional changes, using precise circles to show an exact octant and connecting emotion with colors. Buildings 2021, 11, 91 11 of 19 (b) (a) Figure 4. An example of a student’s work: (a) representing filmic space and (b) extracting architec‐ tural elements from the conceptual sketch. At this stage, the students were not initially convinced of how to translate their own interpretation of the filmic space into architectural elements. It seemed difficult to realize enough ideas in the inspiration and idea stages under the pressure to find something orig‐ inal and unique, or methods that other students had not chosen. Additionally, a number of students frequently stated, “I have no idea what I have to do,” or asked, “Is this cor‐ rect?” When developing the project, students grew concerned when their idea became “stuck” or when there was no “confidence,” and they approached the work worrying that they had difficulty expressing images in their minds and that their expressions might be wrong. However, as time passed, the students tried to reflect intensively in their sketches to solve the given task and gradually began to undertake active brainstorming for mutual evaluation and communication to enable a more in‐depth understanding of the given problem. Phase 3: Synthetic Drawings The students started designing using various synthetic drawings through which they could develop their concepts and the representation of filmic spaces. After performing the initial designing tasks, an analysis of filmic spaces, the concept articulation, and the form composition and proposition through conceptual sketching, the students were encour‐ aged to explore and develop their conceptual ideas by drawing synthetic drawings. All lines were produced based on an analysis of the scenes of the films (see Figure 5). Figure 5. Various synthetic drawings of students’ designs. Based on the synthetic drawings conducted as part of the Visual Communication De‐ sign Studio, we found that the use of filmic spaces for translation into architectural spaces could create unique architectural drawings because the filmic spaces, by developing pro‐ jects beyond students’ limits of expression, could become novel venues for students to produce unusual ideas. Not a single student synthesized the drawings in the same way, which suggests that the students performed inferential thinking to produce diverse ideas Buildings 2021, 11, 91 12 of 19 through their drawings. Each student was satisfied with making their own drawing using unique techniques founded in architectural elements. 4.1.2. Self‐Evaluation Questions In the architectural design studio course, we applied self‐evaluation questions to in‐ vestigate difficulties and solutions in the design phase every week and identify the con‐ tributions of applied techniques to the design process and the students’ interests. The questionnaire was specifically designed to help the students review their performance on their own during the design process. These questions were used to encourage reflection and facilitate students to spend time considering what they wanted to achieve at each stage. The questionnaire was applied to 15 students every week. Examples of the ques‐ tionnaire and the students’ responses are shown in Table 4. Table 4. Self‐evaluation questions: an example of the questionnaire and the student responses. Questionnaire Students’ Response This week, I developed my ideas into pictures. I’ve got some useful ideas from 1‐1 Professor Park. 1. What tasks did you I chose the movie that I wanted (from) among the list that the professor suggested. perform this week? 1‐2 Then, I watched and analyzed three scenes that I found interesting … technically and aesthetically. Those basements are related to my design concept directly. Those are the founda‐ 2‐1 tion of my work. And I try to add color and use various ingredient(s) on them to develop my idea. 2. How do they relate to your current concept? Although the first conceptual drawing was deeply connected to the film, the plan 2‐2 was quite unrealistic, and I found it would be difficult to make a model for the next step. I learn the reason why I have to do this kind of task and how those works help to improve my initial idea. And I found that I should try a lot of trials rather than just 3‐1 doing nothing. 3. Why and how were This project was very interesting because I could see the very basic theory of archi‐ these tasks useful? tecture. Every architecture has a concept and inspiration. I could understand the 3‐2 fundamental principle of architecture while taking the Visual Communication class. I did not know what to do and was still confused about my works. I could not de‐ 4‐1 cide what to draw, and how to draw exactly. 4. What were the diffi‐ cult concepts to under‐ At the first time, I could not understand how I could analyze the filmic spaces. stand? 4‐2 Naturally, I just focused on the narrative and tried to describe the story well, and I could make my idea … clear[er] after communicating with [the] Professor. Self‐determining and progressing of imagination into the design was the most dif‐ 5‐1 ficult part of [the] work. In the beginning, I was occupied with my own thoughts 5. What difficulties did that I should do my work perfectly and this made me stuck. you have in progressing The most difficult part of the work was representing my idea in visual [mode]. I your work? 5‐2 wanted to analyze the perspective, but I could not find the best way to express what I want[ed] to show. Buildings 2021, 11, 91 13 of 19 Communicat[ing] with [the] professor and searching for useful references helped 6‐1 me to think and determine my idea. I could develop my ideas gradually every week. 6. How did you over‐ come the difficulties? The system of “every class 1:1 critique” was very helpful to me. Giving the critique 6‐2 is the best thing I think since the work should be done by myself. Just giving the direction to get in the right way must be the best way in this design studio. Most students answered that they found these design tasks useful and agreed that the process was interesting. However, some students responded that certain stages of the process were difficult, especially because they had never experienced them before. By re‐ ferring to the students’ difficulties and solutions on a weekly basis, the design studio course enabled a discussion of approaches to creation, research, conceptualization, and solution processing. The students were then asked to evaluate the difficulties and meth‐ ods for spatializing creative thinking obtained beyond the architecture. This allowed us to measure the performance achieved in the studio process, the positive or negative atti‐ tudes, and the perceptions of the process. It was important to ask how to use the self‐evaluation questions in the studio. We could see how the students understood the class well and how they developed their de‐ sign methods at each stage. This helped the students who were new to architectural design to understand the detailed design process by including when they found it difficult and how to solve problems in more depth. Through the self‐evaluation questions, we intended to develop a teaching method that would enable communication with students in both directions rather than requiring the students to follow the professor’s classes unilaterally. This method was also used as a means of communication between students. 4.2. Representation Outcomes 4.2.1. Representation of Architectural Languages The contents of the students’ analysis of filmic elements were as follows: (1) Movement: Filmic space associated a spatial form with a specific camera move‐ ment. In a film, these movements could be seen in three ways—the movement of the per‐ son, the movement of the camera, and the movement of the scene through the change of time. The movement brought about by the change of gaze would become a realistic space, the movement of the scene resulted from the editing of the film, and the other scenes were arranged in a continuous and unified manner; (2) frame: the frame was a unit of a film and was a rectangular image that appeared when projected onto the screen. The frame confined the object within a rectangular box; however, students expanded the image be‐ yond the frame. Therefore, the screen was not the concept of a frame, but a window or city that showed a part of the whole; (3) montage: Montage was the most basic and im‐ portant element in the film. The basic concept of montage was the confrontation and inte‐ gration of disparate elements, that is, juxtaposition, which means editing. The montage affected the motion of images toward the whole and indirectly revealed the image of time; (4) light and colors: The use of light and color in a mise‐en‐scène produced filmic realism. Light and color played an important role in determining the overall mood and emotion of the filmic spaces. The contrast in lighting expressed the color, shape, and texture of the subject, and was crucial in revealing the psychology of the subject; and (5) scene change: The narrative of the movie was the flow of time and space. The reduction and expansion of time and the movement of space accompanying the scene change could be presented more originally and creatively according to the pattern of the mise‐en‐scène composition, situation, and shape similarity. For scene changes, various optical effects, such as dissolve, overlap, flashback/forward, and fade in/out were used. The main purpose of this phase was to extract architectural language from the filmic scenes. The students derived the elements—movement, frame, montage, light and color, Buildings 2021, 11, 91 14 of 19 and scene change—from the filmic space that could be schematized in the architectural de‐ sign stage, for example, line, layer, and thickness. For instance, a student could gain practical knowledge, such as the thickness and symbol of the line, by using tracing paper to extract different layers. In analyzing the students’ work, it could be confirmed that segments, tem‐ porality, and spatiality appeared in the frames. In each case, not only one but several char‐ acteristics appeared at the same time. The three components of frame, shot, and montage were not clearly distinct elements but interacted with each other (see Table 5). Table 5. Student representations of filmic elements. Elements Phase 1 Phase 2 Movement and Frame After watching the film Rear Window, a student analyzed the scenes in which the main character, Jeff, was watching a window across from his house. These scenes were arranged in the order in which they occurred, and the window frames and the shapes of the man being observed were an‐ alyzed using lines and faces, respectively. Movement and Montage After watching Vertigo, a student made a photo collage and analyzed the filmic spaces. He could express his thoughts about the concept in various ways, such as by drawing conceptual sketches on tracing paper. By drawing these sketches, he could gain practical knowledge of elements such as the thickness and symbolic function of the line. Montage and Frame Scene Change Buildings 2021, 11, 91 15 of 19 A student analyzed the film scene—the process of breaking up in a newlywed couple’s golden age—and then drew the space to describe how, when a couple is newly married, they share love in one place, and as they become estranged, space is divided into two. 4.2.2. Physical Models The students applied various expressions from filmic space and conceptualization to drawing and physical model making. In the process of making models, the students began to think about how to translate lines, layers, and thickness from drawings to models (see Figure 6). We encouraged the students to play with various materials and media and made several mock‐up models following the processes with which they had already be‐ come familiar in the drawing workshop. The students’ creative ideas and various perspec‐ tives were supported by the studio atmosphere to stimulate intellectual curiosity and to physically express it. By examining the model‐making processes related to developing visual creativity, the study could identify how the translation of the filmic spaces into architectural spaces was achieved more specifically because physical modeling is an ef‐ fective way to record the innovative transitions of forms during conceptual design. Figure 6. Physical model examples of students’ work. 4.2.3. Phase 4: Juries and Exhibition In the middle of the semester (week 7), we invited external jurors to review the stu‐ dents’ progress and provide feedback. The students presented their projects in front of the jurors and other students in the studio for the first time. In front of the mid‐term jury, most students were not properly prepared because they did not know how to undertake their first university presentation. However, through the process of organizing their work and presenting it in front of others, students were able to check the logic of the project’s process and derive a conception of the direction in which to develop it. The discussion specifically revolved around some of the most memorable comments from the jurors. The collaborative brainstorming process occurred through ongoing communication with pro‐ fessors, students, and the invited jurors. The final jury created a greater awareness of the possibilities of how criticism could be integrated into the design studio setting. The stu‐ dents were encouraged to participate in the jury discussions of other students’ projects, and critiques from jurors and peers gave the students inspiration to better represent their creative ideas (see Figure 7a). The jury was pleased to advise on the possibility of devel‐ opment over the next semester without pointing out the negatives; thus, the students were Buildings 2021, 11, 91 16 of 19 satisfied that they had completed the process for the first semester. For the end‐of‐semes‐ ter exhibition, the students produced a comprehensive portfolio that explored different media throughout the course. Through the exhibition, the students had an opportunity to appreciate their own work and other students’ work, further contributing to the work’s development and student motivation. (b) (a) Figure 7. Final jury and exhibition of student work: (a) a student presented his work in front of jury members and (b) the view of the end‐of‐semester exhibition. 5. Discussion and Conclusions This study was conducted in the architectural department to investigate the value of the Visual Communication Design Studio over one semester, specifically using represen‐ tation tools in the development of students’ design‐related thinking processes. The Visual Communication Design Studio offers a basic course, aiming to give students the founda‐ tions of creativity through representation useful for understanding and controlling visual and spatial relationships between two‐dimensional images (filmic spaces) and three‐di‐ mensional spaces, in addition to their role in architectural design processes. While work‐ ing in studios, students generally have similar situations for their creativity and expres‐ sion. However, the exploration of the design task in this study allowed the students to understand that careful observation, analysis, and representation are essential compo‐ nents to contextualizing and articulating design works. Furthermore, because individual characteristics are different, the outcome of creativity varies for each individual. We were interested in research focusing on the architectural design process, characterizing the gen‐ eration of concepts and ideas, and on the processes related to creative practices necessary for developing students’ own methods of expression as ways to solve problems when they encounter difficulties. Based on the results, some issues to be considered at different stages of the design studio were identified as follows. First, representation should not be considered irrelevant during design exploration in architectural education or as something to be performed after students have completed the design process. Representation techniques should follow an ongoing process of exper‐ imentation and reflection, as occurs during an architectural project. Issues of representa‐ tion associated with creativity in architecture seem to bring uncertainty to professors and students, and other fields—films, in this course—need to be utilized to find reliable expla‐ nations that could be applied to architecture in some way. Second, the design studio should include various aspects of design education, such as subject analysis, idea discus‐ sions, and problem‐solving; individual tutorials, which were the most distinctive compo‐ nents of the design studio education; juries comprising external jurors; and, finally, time to work on projects in the studio individually. Each of these elements has specific proto‐ cols and requirements to be respected. Design is associated with subjective creativity, but the empirical university paradigm emphasizes objective rationality in education [50,51]. To address more rigorous and more academic approaches to design education [50], it is necessary to adopt a new paradigm of Buildings 2021, 11, 91 17 of 19 education based on creative experience within the standards set by the university. From this perspective, the Visual Communication Design Studio has the potential to provide students with creative stimulation within the theoretical foundations during the first phase of the education process. Students can learn the main elements, principles, and de‐ sign methods to identify how to implement them in the course of practical application, produce innovative visual representations, and express their ideas through drawings or models. It is believed that creative thinking occurs with good knowledge hardware, but no one can create innovative designs with knowledge alone [21]. Creativity enhancement is of great importance to the design major and assists students to discover their vision, ac‐ quire key expertise and knowledge, and understand the professional philosophy and its foundations in the design process. It is worth noting that the curriculums, such as the programs recognized in these specializations, or the nature of goals and results, are de‐ veloped based on design creativity in one part and on theoretical foundations and knowledge in another. Students can learn from the design process and intensively demon‐ strate their creative abilities, dealing with how to communicate, discuss, and acquire knowledge [51]. Basic steps should be implemented to improve students’ thinking abili‐ ties and teach them to solve design problems, improving their skills so that they can per‐ form more design activities professionally at further stages in their careers. It is difficult to generalize the results of this study to all architectural design educa‐ tion environments because the research was conducted on first‐year students’ limited works. In design research, the interpretation of the data can be achieved by reflecting re‐ searchers’ perspectives; thus, opinions on the efficacy of the approach may be subjective in some respects; however, such an approach is still significant in the analysis of design activities. A more thorough investigation of the available information on the visual communi‐ cation design course is needed to determine whether these theories would be useful in the learning situations that are found in studios. Future studies on subjects may involve care‐ fully observing and recording the behavior of professors and students’ responses in an objective manner, in addition to considering how artifacts can be used in the architectural design process and their applicability to other contexts by coding them within a different approach. Another suggestion for future study would be to use a weekly criticism journal in which to record responses and thoughts to the criticism received from individual jurors and the design review that follows. It would thus be possible to evaluate various ways of expressing creativity in architectural design studios by adding other factors to further studies. Author Contributions: Conceptualization, E.J.P. and M.J.K.; methodology, E.J.P. and M.J.K.; inves‐ tigation, E.J.P.; writing—original draft preparation, E.J.P.; writing—review and editing, M.J.K.; vis‐ ualization, E.J.P.; supervision, M.J.K.; funding acquisition, M.J.K. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript. Funding: This research was supported by the Ministry of Education of the Republic of Korea and the National Research Foundation of Korea, grant number NRF‐2020S1A5A2A01041497. Institutional Review Board Statement: Not applicable. Informed Consent Statement: Not applicable. Data Availability Statement: Data Sharing is not applicable. Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest. The funders had no role in the writing of the manuscript. References 1. Peters, R.S. Education as Initiation; Routledge Kegan Paul: London, UK, 1965. 2. Cross, N. Designerly ways of knowing. Des. Stud. 1982, 3, 221–227. 3. Teal, R. Developing a (non‐linear) practice of design thinking. J. Art Des. Educ. 2010, 29, 295–297. Buildings 2021, 11, 91 18 of 19 4. Dorst, K. The Nature of Design Thinking. In Proceedings of the Design Thinking Research Symposium, Sydney, Australia, 19– 20 October 2010; pp. 131–139. 5. Dorst, K. The core of ‘design thinking’ and its application. Des. Stud. 2011, 32, 521–532. 6. Choi, H.H.; Kim, M.J. The Effects of Analogical and Metaphorical Reasoning on Design Thinking. Think. Ski. Creat. 2017, 23, 29– 41. 7. Baker, M.; Rudd, R. Relationship between critical and creative thinking. J. South. Agric. Educ. Res. 2001, 52, 173–188. 8. Combs, L.B.; Cennamo, K.S.; Newbill, P.L. Developing Critical and Creative Thinkers: Toward a Conceptual Model of Creative and Critical Thinking Processes. Educ. Technol. 2009, 49, 3–14. doi:/10.1007/s10798‐020‐09573‐2 9. Orbey, B.; Sarıoğlu Erdoğdu, G.P. Design process re‐visited in the first year design studio: Between intuition and reasoning. Int J. Technol. Des. Educ. 2020, 1–25. 10. Choi, H.; Cho, M.E.; Kim, M.J. A Critical Review of Research on Design Education Focusing on Creativity in Architectural Design. Arch. Des. Res. 2013, 26, 119–138. 11. Runco, M. Commentary: Divergent Thinking Is Not Synonymous With Creativity. Psychol. Aesthet. Creat. Arts 2008, 2, 93–96. 12. Gero, J.S. Shape Emergence and Symbolic Reasoning Using Maximal Lines; unpublished notes, Design Computing Unit, De‐ partment of Architectural and Design Science, University of Sydney, Sydney, 1992. 13. Dorst, K.; Cross, N. Creativity in the design process: Co‐evolution of problem‐solution. Des. Stud. 2001, 22, 425–437. 14. Visser, W. Dynamic aspects of design cognition: Elements for a cognitive model of design. In Theme 3a‐DatabasesKnowl; INRIA: Le Chesnay‐Rocquencourt, France, 2004. 15. Ohlsson, S. Restructuring revisited: I. Summary and critique of the gestalt theory of problem solving. Scand. J. Psychol. 1984, 25, 65–78. 16. Guilford, J.P. Creativity. Am. Psychol. 1950, 5, 444–454. 17. Suwa, M.; Tversky, B. External represen‐tations contribute to the dynamic construction of ideas. In Proceedings of the Diagrams ’O2 Second International Conference on Diagrammatic Representation and Inference, London, UK, 10 April 2002; pp. 341–343. 18. Kim, M.J.; Ju, S.R.; Lee, L. A Cross‐Cultural and Interdisciplinary Collaboration in a Joint Design Studio. Int. J. Art Des. Educ. 2015, 34, 102–120. 19. Damski, J.C.; Gero, J.S. An Evolutionary Approach to Generating Constraint‐Based Space Layout Topologies; CAAD Futures: Munchen, Germany, 1997; pp. 855–864. 20. Potur, A.; Barkul, O. Creative Thinking in Architectural Design Education. In Proceedings of the 1st International CIB Endorsed METU Postgraduate Conference Built Environment & Information Technologies, Ankara, Turkey, 17 March 2002. 21. Danaci, H. Creativity and Knowledge in Architectural Education. Procedia‐Soc. Behav. Sci. 2015, 174, 1309–1312. 22. Schon, D.A. Educating the Reflective Practitioner; Jossey‐Bass Publishers: San Fransisco, USA, 1987. 23. Park, J.; Jin, Y.; Ahn, S.; Lee, S. The Impact of Design Representation on Visual Perception: Comparing Eye‐Tracking Data of Architectural Scenes Between Photography and Line Drawing. Arch. Des. Res. 2019, 32, 5–29. 24. Goldschmidt, G.; Porter, W. Design Representation: Private Process; Springer: London, UK, 2004. 25. Alfonso de la Fuente Suárez, L. Towards experiential representation in architecture. J. Archit. Urban. 2016, 40, 47–58. 26. Schön, D.A. The Reflective Practitioner; New York, NY, USA, 1983. 27. Jansen, S.; Boumeester, H.; Coolen, H.; Goetgeluk, R.; Molin, E. The effect of presentation: What you see is what you value. J. Archit. Plan. Res. 2011, 28, 181–193. 28. Kalay, Y.E. The impact of information technology on design methods, products and practices. Des. Stud. 2006, 27, 357–380. 29. Downes, M.; Lange, E. What you see is not always what you get: A qualitative, comparative analysis of ex ante visualizations with ex post photography of landscape and architectural project. Landsc. Urban Plan. 2015, 142, 136–146. 30. Appleyard, D. Understanding professional media: Issues, theory, and a research agenda. In Human Behavior and Environment; Altman, I., Wohlwill, J.F., Eds.; Plenum Press: New York, NY, USA, 1977. 31. Evans, R. Translations from Drawing to Building and Other Essays; The MIT Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 1997. 32. Suess, E. Constructing the Architectural Moving Drawing: Transdisciplinary Practices between Architecture and Artists’ Film. PhD thesis, University of the Arts London, London, UK, 2020 33. Elena‐Codina, D. Architectural Representation between Imagination and Revelation. J. Civ. Eng. Archit. 2017, 11, 199–211. 34. Unwin, S. Analysing architecture through drawing. Build. Res. Inf. 2007, 35, 101–110. 35. Jansson, D.G.; Smith, S.M. Design Fixation. Des. Stud. 1991, 12, 3–11. 36. Linsey, J.; Tseng, I.; Fu, K.; Cagan, J.; Wood, K.; Schunn, C. A Study of Design Fixation, its Mitigation and Perception in Engi‐ neering Design Faculty. J. Enginerring Des. 2010, 132, 1–12. 37. Christensen, B.T.; Schunn, C. The Relationship of Analogical Distance to Analogical Function and Pre‐Inventive Structures: The Case of Engineering Design. Mem. Cogn. 2007, 35, 29–38. 38. Smith, S.M.; Linsey, J. A Three‐Pronged Approach for Overcoming Design Fixation. J. Creat. Behav. 2011, 45, 83–91. 39. Choi, H.H.; Kim, M.J. Using the Digital Context to Overcome Design Fixation: A Strategy to Expand Students’ Design Thinking. Int. J. Archit. Res. 2019, 12, 228–240. on Mise‐en‐Scene Design. In 40. Deldjoo, Y.; Elahi, M.; Cremonesi, P.; Garzotto, F.; Piazzolla, P. Recommending Movies Based Proceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI EA ‘16), New York, NY, USA; May 2016, pp. 1540–1547. Buildings 2021, 11, 91 19 of 19 41. Sreekumar, J. Creating Meaning through Interpretations: A Mise‐En‐Scene Analysis of the Film ‘The Song of Sparrows’. Online J. Commun. Media Technol. 2015, 5, 26–35. 42. Goldman, G.; Zdepski, S. Form, Color and Movement; Bancroft, P.J., Ed.; Raleigh, USA, 1987; pp. 39–50. 43. Garcia Alvarado, R.; Castillo, G.; Carlos Parra, J.; Navarro Mayorga, S. Filmic Development of Architectural Animations. Int. J. Archit. Comput. 2005, 3, 299–316. 44. Calderon, C.; Nyman, K.; Worley, N. Architectural cinematographer (AC): Creating architectural experiences in 3d real‐time environments. Int. J. Archit. Comput. 2006, 4, 71–90. 45. Alvarado, R.G. Analysis of filmmaking techniques. Metu J. Fac. Archit. 2008, 25, 133–149. 46. KAAB. Korea Architecture Accreditation Board. Availabe online: http://eng.kaab.or.kr/ (accessed on 28 September 2020). 47. Mazur, J. Applying Insights from Film Theory and Cinematic Technique to Create a Sense of Community and Participation in a Distributed Video. J. Comput. ‐Mediat. Commun. 2000, 5, JCMC542. 48. Architects, B.T. The Manhattan Transcripts. Availabe online: http://www.tschumi.com/projects/18/ (accessed on 3 October 2020). 49. Abdelhameed, W. Architectural form creation in the design studio: Physical modeling as an effective design tool. ArchNet‐IJAR Int. J. Archit. Res. 2011, 5, 81–92. 50. Wang, T. A New Paradigm for Design Studio Education. Int. J. Art Des. Educ. 2010, 29, 173–183. 51. Ustaomeroglu, A.; Aydintan, E.; Erbay, M.; Kucuk, P.; Sadiklar, Z. The Impact of Basic Design Studio Courses on Interior De‐ sign: KTU Model. Procedia‐Soc. Behav. Sci. 2015, 197, 173–183.
Journal
Buildings – Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute
Published: Mar 2, 2021