Short, C A (2008) What is 'architectural design research'? Building Research & Information, 36(2), pp. 195-199. ISSN 0961-3218
Abstract
The September 2007 Royal Institute of British Architects (RIBA) Research Symposium was particularly and perhaps unexpectedly well attended this year. This review speculates on the context for this renewed interest in research in architecture. The audience was swelled by many more practitioners than the organizers expected, architects interested in understanding more about 'reflective practice'. This evocative term, credited to Donald Schon, was given new force on the day by keynote speaker Leon von Schaik's account of his Melbourne Masters Architecture initiative. Subsequent speakers reported here included Piers Gough, Sean Griffiths, Kathryn Findlay, Jane Rendell, Deborah Saunt, Alex de Rijke, and Susan Francis who tackled, from various directions, the principal question emerging on the day: 'What is design research as applied to architecture?' Speakers presented built and unbuilt projects as 'design research'. In one notable case, the designer denied absolutely any research dimension to his work, anxious that an increased level of consciousness would dismantle inspiration. How might what the general academic research community considers as research, rigorously applied methodology, and unprejudiced analysis, have affected the projects shown? Is it helpful for design to be cast as research? Is there a missing third category, a funding stream for gathering innovative design work to add to those of 'teaching and learning' and 'research'? Might this new stream stimulate more than self-reflection, a much-needed innovative design programme outside conventional practice, but within academic institutions collaborating closely with practice? Le Symposium de septembre 2007 du RIBA (Institut royal des architectes britanniques) consacr la recherche a rencontr cette anne un succs particulier et quelque peu inattendu. Cet article s'interroge sur le contexte de l'intrt renouvel pour la recherche en architecture. Les participants comptaient dans leurs rangs beaucoup plus de praticiens que les organisateurs n'attendaient, des architectes cherchant mieux comprendre la pratique restrictive. Ce terme vocateur, attribu Donald Schon, a reu le soutien du principal orateur, Leon von Schaik, voquant son initiative Melbourne Masters Architecture initiative. Parmi les autres orateurs, on notait Piers Gough, Sean Griffiths, Kathryn Findlay, Jane Rendell, Deborah Saunt, Alex de Rijke et Susan Francis qui se sont attaqus sous des angles diffrents la principale question de la journe: Qu'est-ce que la recherche conceptuelle applique l'architecture?. Les orateurs ont prsent des projets construits et non construits en matire de 'recherche conceptuelle'. Dans un cas remarquable, le concepteur a rejet toute dimension de recherche dans son travail, insistant sur le fait qu'un niveau de conscience plus lev dtruirait l'inspiration. Comment ce que la communaut des chercheurs acadmiques en gnral considre comme recherche, mthodologie rigoureusement applique, et analyse sans prjudice pourraient affecter les projets prsents? Est-il utile que de la conception soit classe dans la recherche? Existe-t-il une troisime catgorie manquante, un flux de financement pour rassembler les travaux de conception novateurs et les ajouter aux travaux d'enseignement, d'apprentissage et de recherche? Ce nouveau courant pourrait-il stimuler davantage que l'autorflexion, un programme de conception novateur trs ncessaire en dehors des pratiques classiques, mais au sein d'institutions universitaires collaborant troitement avec les praticiens? Mots cls: pratique architecturale, recherche conceptuelle, politique publique, pratique rflchie, programme de recherche, stratgie de recherche.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | architectural practice; design research; public policy; reflective practice; research agenda; research strategy |
| Index terms: | methodology, architect, research agenda, reflective practice, stream, architectural practice, programme, practitioner, strategy, dimension, public policy, designer, Royal Institute of British Architects, funding, reflection, architectural design, consciousness |
| Subjects: | design practice, health monitoring assessment and metrics, business, professional development, profession, professional institution, management, water management, human factors and perception, project controls, public policy, research management, economic analysis, practitioner, research methods |
| Topics: | Sustainability, Research Practice, Health and Safety, Design Practice, Roles and Professions, Business Strategy, Information Management, Governance, Time Control |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCT |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here