The taxonomy of concepts in architecture : some applications and developments

Citation for published version (APA): Trum, H. M. G. J., & Bax, M. F. T. (1996). The taxonomy of concepts in architecture : some applications and developments. Open House International, 21(1), 4-14.

Document status and date: Published: 01/01/1996

Document Version: Publisher’s PDF, also known as Version of Record (includes final page, issue and volume numbers)

Please check the document version of this publication:

• A submitted manuscript is the version of the article upon submission and before peer-review. There can be important differences between the submitted version and the official published version of record. People interested in the research are advised to contact the author for the final version of the publication, or visit the DOI to the publisher's website. • The final author version and the galley proof are versions of the publication after peer review. • The final published version features the final layout of the paper including the volume, issue and page numbers. Link to publication

General rights Copyright and moral rights for the publications made accessible in the public portal are retained by the authors and/or other copyright owners and it is a condition of accessing publications that users recognise and abide by the legal requirements associated with these rights.

• Users may download and print one copy of any publication from the public portal for the purpose of private study or research. • You may not further distribute the material or use it for any profit-making activity or commercial gain • You may freely distribute the URL identifying the publication in the public portal.

If the publication is distributed under the terms of Article 25fa of the Dutch Copyright Act, indicated by the “Taverne” license above, please follow below link for the End User Agreement: www.tue.nl/taverne

Take down policy If you believe that this document breaches copyright please contact us at: [email protected] providing details and we will investigate your claim.

Download date: 23. Sep. 2021 'The Taxonomy of Concepts in Architecture some applications and developments

H. M. G. J. Trum and M. E Th. Bax

Introduction: of the ongoing inquiry provide keys for a re-defini­ This paper describes some recent applications and tion of concepts as building stones of the taxonomy, developments of the taxonomy of concepts in archi­ in order to strengthen its contents and coherence. tecture. The taxonomy was developed earlier by the The Taxonomy of Concepts in Architecture: authors. It was published several times (cf. Bax, Fox • and Trum, 1990; Bax and Trum, 1992a, 1992b, 1992c, The taxonomy of concepts in architecture is a 1993a, 1993b; Trum and Bax 1992, 1993) and present­ classification that systematically describes the architec­ ed and discussed on a number of occasions, a.o. at tural field. It is concerned with architecture as a the 1992 and 1994 Design and Decision Support Sys­ trade in which buildings are designed and realised, tems Conference. It will therefore only briefly be de­ as a discipline in which knowledge about building is scribed in this paper. The taxonomy provides a con­ systematically collected, generated and taught, as well ceptual tool for a systematic, consistent and complete as with architecture as a meaningful interpretation of description of the field of architecture. It is based on the building as a symbol, as a work of art. It con­ Domj;l.in Theory, a theory developed in the seventies tains an ordering and interpretation of architectural by Bax (1979) and Trum (1979). phenomena that are observable in reality. These phe­ nomena are described in so-called concepts. Concepts In 1990 the Advisory Committee for Education concern both architectural objects and processes. The and Training in the field of Architecture of the Euro­ taxonomy may be used as an instrument for analysis pean Commission accepted the taxonomy as a refer­ of existing buildings or building designs, but it can ence for its task to harmonise architectural education also be used as a design-aid. It is based on Domain in Europe (EC, 1990). Within this framework the text Theory, which in its turn again rests on General Sys­ of Article 3 of the European Directive on Architecture tems Theory and the notion of structure according to was interpreted and reformulated according to the French Structuralism. taxonomy. Theoretical background, foundation and justifica­ The applications described in this paper mainly tion of· the concepts and the taxonomy were de­ concern the first experiences with a taxonomy-based scribed by Bax and Trum (1993). The theoretical back­ inquiry in order to represent the profile of education­ ground is provided by Domain Theory. It describes al programmes ofschools and faculties of architecture the phenomena of architecture, which constitute the in Europe in qualitative and quantitative terms. This basis of the concepts. Domain theory is an architec­ inquiry is being carried out in order to achieve a ba­ tural design theory in which architectural design is sis for comparison and j"Qdgement, and a basis for considered a complex activity, performed simulta­ future guidelines including quantitative aspects. neously in three interrelated design or decision fields. These fields are defined by dimensions of architectur­ The developments concern the structural form of al design space .: formal (or morphological) levels of the taxonomy comprising basic concepts and level­ specification, functional domains and procedural phas­ bound scale concepts, and the specification of the es. So, concepts have a functional, formal and proce­ content of the fields which these concepts represent. dural dimension. A functional description of a con­ These developments mainly result from comparison cept contains norms, rules and criteria the building with similar endeavours to structure the field of ar­ should meet in order to achieve a desired quality of chitectural design: the work of an ARCUK working performance. A formal description includes images of party, based on the 1985 European Directive and the the building: drawings, sketches, diagrams, etc., de­ accreditation criteria developed by the National Archi­ picting the building as a system of spatial and mate­ tectural Accrediting Board (NAAB) of the United rial parts and the building as a part of an urban sys­ States of America. tem. In a procedural description the concept is repre­ sented by e.g. operating procedures for the design These confrontations and the preliminary results project, methods and strategies.

The Taxonomy of Concepts in Architecture 4 Open House International Vol. 21 No. I, 1996 Concepts are the building stones of the taxonomy. party game may even take place in the head of a Such concepts are interpretations of architectural phe­ solitary working designer. nomena resulting from the various functions that ar­ chitecture fulfills in several fields in society. In design The· concepts are arranged in a taxonomy. This these fields are integrated simultaneously into an ar­ taxonomy is a hierarchical system of concepts, based chitectural object. on a functional definition of concepts, and on their structural properties to define the various levels. Concepts are notional, imaginary and - especial­ Though the field of architecture is extensive, complex ly - visual representations of a building that arise in and has an apparently unlimited number of appear­ the designer's mind as soon as he is confronted with ances, it appears to be possible to systematically and a design task. They may guide his design thinking completely describe the whole field of architectural and action. Concepts may be used as a means to call design by means of twelve concepts. The complete up those images, to develop, elaborate and combine architectural field can be described through such a them and in this way using all available creativity limited number of concepts because of their structural and imagination in favour of the quality of design. If properties, enabling the generation of variant solutions during design such an image would not come up in when confronted with a context, comparable to geno­ a designer's phantasy, he simply would not be able types and phenotypes in biology. to go on, because he hasn't the faintest idea how to proceed. Everyone who has ever made a design, will Fig. 1 shows a representation - or rather, a table recognise this problem. Especially in such a situation of contents - of the taxonomy. It consists of twelve the taxonomy is a suitable instrument : as this ap­ concepts, arranged in six levels. Three types of con­ proach does not impose any prescribed working se­ cepts may be discerned: basic concepts correspond­ quence, one can simply go on with another concept. ing to architectural phenomena (numbered arabic), The designer is not submitted to a prescribed work­ scale concepts resulting from integration of basic con­ ing sequence : at wish he can jump from one con­ cepts on each level of the taxomony (numbered ro­ cept to another. Nevertheless there is a clear way of man), and hybrid concepts which can be random working. combinations of basic' and/ or scale concepts. A basic concept always is an integrated scale concept on the So, a concept has characteristics both of a notion, next lower level. The two italic typed unnumbered being an abstract idea with a general nature, and of concepts are 'empty' concepts, finding their contents an image, having a concrete form with a specific na­ completely on lower levels in the taxonomy. ture. Its general properties make the concept specifi­ able and applicable to a range of situations; its spe­ The architectural phenomena described in Domain cific properties make the concept legible and under­ Theory can be arranged in hierarchically ordered lev­ standable to people sharing the same culture. els which constitute the framework for the taxonomy of concepts. There are six relevant levels, arranged in A concept is also considered a thematic architec­ order of increasing generality: tural typology. The Concept of Makeability for in­ Domains of design: usability, stability and stance, is the heading of a typology comprising vari­ makability; . ous types of construction methods, building tech­ niques, types of work (brickwork, plumbing, Orders of planning: physical, social and economic; carpenting), etc., which can be used as an aid in the Dimensions of design space: functional, formal and design of a building. temporal.

Concepts define partial design fields, in which VI. Architectural concept partial designs can be made, which eventually should be integrated into an architectural concept or over-all V. Cultural Concept deSign. This feature of concepts enables a concurrent IV. Mental Concept or parallel organisation of tasks to be performed in a design project (Bax and Trum, 1995). With regard to Functional Ill. Spatial Concept ) 1 5. ~~;al 11 6. Temporal all the concepts together, the design process could be compared to a round table conference in which all 11. Planning Concept [ Physical I [ 7~~1 ) [ 8. Economic parties, represented by the concepts bring in their re­ ~~~~===~ sponsibilities and interests, while they all have - in I. Design Concept 1 9. Usability 11 10. Stability ) [ 11. Makability 1 principle - equal positions. During the process all Fig. 1 : The Taxonomy of Concepts in Architecture parties and thus all concepts are considered. This

Open House International Vo!. 21 No. 1, 1996 5 The Taxonomy of Concepts in Architecture The manipulation of these fields and their respec­ generalised, theoretical concepts. The theoretical con­ tive environments are described on three higher lev­ cepts were found in the educational taxonomy of els : Bloom (1968) and in the taxonomy of architectural Approaches of reality: professional, scientific and concepts. Bloom's taxonomy is a 'Taxonomy of Edu­ aesthetic; cational Objectives, The Classification of Educational Goals', and refers primarily to the cognitive domain. Cultural orientation: cultural (llistorical and ecolog­ It distinguishes six hierarchically ordered levels : ical), Knowledge, Comprehension, Application, Analysis, The world of artifacts: the architectural level. Synthesis and Evaluation. These levels form the basis of the educational categories in the reformulation of Thus, from the architectural phenomena as de­ Article 3. Bloom's taxonomy was condensed in such a scribed in Domain Theory, basic concepts, scale con­ way that the six levels corresponded to the ~three no­ cepts as well as hybrid concepts in the taxonomy are tions used in the original text of Article 3; Knowl­ derived. edge corresponds to knowledge, Understanding to comprehension and application, and Skill to analysis, Application on Architectural Education: synthesis and evaluation. It may be noticed that the Reformulation of Article 3 of the EC-Directive on result looks very much the same as in the original Architecture: text, but its contents can better be defined and inter­ The first application of the taxonomy was a con­ preted with more precision now. tribution to the Working Group of the Advisory Committee for Education and Training in the field of The taxonomy of architectural concepts articulates Architecture of the European Commission in its task the complete field of design into more or less auton­ to reformulate Article 3 of the European Directive on omous design fields in which partial designs contrib­ Architecture of 10 June 1985 (EC, 1985). Article 3 ute to the overall architectural design. These design enumerates the demands to be met by European ed­ ucation and training programmes in the field of ar­ chitecture. The article had been effective to draw up a European register of architectural schools and facul­ ties. But for the further harmonisation and develop­ ment of educational programmes on a European level as a condition for mutual recognition of diplomas and certificates in the EC Member States, it was nec­ essary to make the article more operational. It was therefore tried to find an interpretation of the article based on the taxonomy, that would facilitate commu­ nication, comparison and development, without jeop­ ardising the future European architectural richness and cultural variety.

The original 1985 text of Article 3 is shown in Fig. 2. The text seems complete (it is hard to find anything that is not covered), but there is a lack of consistency: some paragraphs deal with two or more different subjects and also the reverse is true. All the paragraphs have the same structure, involving the in­ tegration of two types of categories: educational categories: skill, adequate knowledge, understanding, and architectural categories: fine arts, technology, so­ cial factors, human needs, etc.

The new text should contain the integration of an educational and an architectural taxonomy, cover the Fig. 2 complete field of' Article 3, with about the same Text of Article 3 of the European Directive on Architecture number of paragraphs, but with a structure related to (EC document 85/384/EEG, 10 June 1985)

The Taxonomy of Concepts in Architecture 6 Open House International Vol. 21 No. I, 1996 fields formed the basis of the categories of architec­ Committee is to ensure a comparable high level of tural subjects for the reformulation of Article 3. architectural education within the EC, eventually en­ abling the free movement of architects, students and The reformulation of Article 3 implied integration teachers between the Member States. If and when of the taxonomies of Bloom and of the architectural such a situation would be established, it is the Advi­ concepts. The result of the integration was published sory Committee's intention to allow students to collect in EC document III/D/9125/1/89-EN of 12 January their study points all over Europe. In every Member 1990. Each paragraph again has the same structure : State two to four schools, institutions and faculties, an educational category based on Bloom's taxonomy representative for the education of architects in their and an architectural phenomenon derived from our country; were sent a questionnaire with instructions architectural taxonomy, followed by a short explana­ and explanations, concerning information about the tion. distribution of hours of the study programme over

Fig. 3 shows the text of the 1990 Article 3 inter­ pretation according to both taxonomies. In Fig. 4 (see next page) an impression is given of the complexity of the relations of the corresponding subjects in both texts. The reformulated text containing the architectur­ al phenomena described by the concepts is in the left column, the 1985 text is on the right.

The taxonomy of concepts can be used as a tool for the description of the contents of these education­ al objectives, just because of the fact that architectural design is in the core of the curriculum. We supposed that next step of the EC Committee - a quantitative approach - could be set by describing the architec­ tural content in terms of the architectural taxonomy, the educational levels in terms of Bloom's taxonomy, their duration in study time and their position in the study programme.

At the 1990 Seminar of the Societe Europeenne pour la Formation des Ingenieurs (SEFI) the first at­ tempt to represent course programmes based on this assumption was presented (Trum, 1992). Fig. 5 (see page 9) is a three-dimensional representation of a hy­ pothetical architectural education programme. On the left vertical axis are the educational levels of Bloom's taxonomy, the horizontal axis represents the architec­ tural contents of the curriculum in terms of the tax­ onomy of architectural concepts and the third axis depicts the phases in the educational process. In prin­ ciple, this approach allows quantification of the edu­ cational programme, provided that adequate measur­ ing instruments can be developed.

An EC inquiry based on the Taxonomy of Concepts in Architecture: In 1993 the Advisory EC Committee decided to organise an inquiry in order to obtain data on the ar­ chitectural study programmes in all EC Member States, so as to achieve a basis for comparison and Fig. 3 judgement, and' a basis for future guidelines including Reformulated text of Article 3 of the European Directive on Architecture according to the taxonomy quantitative aspects (EC, 1993). The goal of the EC (EC document III/D/9125/1/89-EN, 12 January 1990)

Open House International Vol. 21 No. 1, 1996 7 The Taxonomy of Concepts in Architecture I the subjects concerning EC document III/D/9125/1/S9-EN, 12 January 1990 ARTICLE 3, EC document S5J384JEEG, 10 June 1985 the concepts of Article Preamble Preamble 3. References given by Article 3provide acomm?" persp~v~ for the Ed.ucation and training I.e.ad~g to diplomas, ?ertifi?Btes and other lines of study which come together in arecognised qualification. The eVidence of formal qualifICations :eferred ~o In ~rticle 2shall be . lines are qute familiar to schools of archnecture. Across the provided through courses of studies at unIVersity level concerned For obtainrng com- Community, however, the taxonomy and terminology vary. As an aid to principal~ with architecture. Such.studies shall be ba~anced parable and reliable re- acommon approach, it is helpful to perceive architecture as fulfilling a between the theoretical and practICal aspects of ~r~~ltectural suIts, extensive informa- number of functions, identifiable as phenomena in society. Following education and training and shall ensure the acquIsition of: tion and counselling from the terms of Article 3, these phenomena and the objects of study with respect to interpre- appear as follows: tation and classification O. Skill to create architecture a&..~i~rifnrffi~~ns~liiMf-(jfie~T!i1~.eJ1~onf of educational elements having regard to the building's I" myin terms is indispensible. of the taxono- In context.1. Knowledge of architecture ~CulfuiraiiiliieiiOiiien~~m.ard~~~t;~~~~~~~~~~Dll this respect, educational historical, geographical (both conditions. programmeelements of had a studyto be regard to management, and ~ decomposed into so- 3.2.KnoWledgeOfarchitecture~;'~~i;~~I~liil~i~;~~~~~i~~~~~' Knowledge of architecture called educational units, regard to sources, relevance, methods and techniques in the corresponding with the technological sciences, methods and techniques of archlit~d\fI. i~v concepts of the tax ono- urban design. my. These units are measured in study-time. 4.KnowledgeOfarchitecturea~~~::~~~~~~~~~~~;~~~~~~~~to architecture as afine art, and to

5. Understanding of architecture beSome split elements up into hadtwo orto havingand the regardfine arts. to hierarchically ~~~i::;~I~~~il~il;~iii~~ even more units. It was environment, building, interior and;'~=:rl=~~~~~ requestedstudy programme to analyse in the 6.regard Understanding to the life cycle of architecture;~ of a I I ~~~~;i~;~~i~~~~: lowest possible level of 7.in aUnderstandingcontrolled proce""ss~WI;;i·;th~i;t:s;~. of ~n ~~ixiiT~~~~~ the taxonomy. The re- regard to the meeting of social thesult profileof the of analysis the study is 8.social Understanding and human ofbehavil~ou:~r'~:~~sd~~:~:;~~~I~~~~~~~~~~~:s~nd architecture as Programme. The inquiry regard to the meeting of is still going on in sev- 9. Understanding of architecture eral EC member states. regardexploitation. to the (dynamic) state of For this reason we only physiological and psychological '~~::~!~'i';i;~~~a;~;~;~~~needs 01 human can show now, as an and organizations. 10. Understanding of arch~ecILlre~ra'Slanc;:ifieii(mMj~'fI/[ example, the results of regard to the (steady) state of the fbl.'l"nnsll!ll'lf~ the Faculty of Architec- meeting mechanical and physical ture, Building and Plan- 11. Understanding of architecture ~~~~i!:~~~~~~~~~~~~~:~~~~ems-""':> ning of EUT, which having regard to the realization of the i i meeting demands of production and construction and management. • served as a test case for L=:======~~ __ =-_--=:::::=::::======::::======-__ J the EC inquiry (Fig. 6). Fig. 4 Relations between corresponding subjects in the reformulated text of Article 3 (1990) and the Confrontation of the original text of 1985. Taxonomy with similar Endeavours to Structure the field of Architectural interpretations start to increase. If the explanations Design : would have been omitted, it would no longer have been possible to use the article without a separate If the taxonomy is used for regulation and legis­ explanatory statement (which is, as a matter of fact, lation, it should only contain what necessarily should not unusual in legislation). The shortest explanation be fixed and laid down. Everything mentioned that is possible on which political consensus could be not necessary, could unintentionally and superfluously reached, is formulated in Article 3. However, for ar­ restrict possibilities in education and design. Therefore chitectural schools and institutions, that want to com­ the formulation should be as cleru:, as straight and as pose or revise their educational programme and wish short as possible, up to the point that comprehensibil­ to use the taxonomy as a source for ideas and inspi­ ity begins to decrease and the possible numbers of ration (so, for the purpose of design), a wide, rich

The Taxonomy of Concepts in Architecture 8 Open House International Vol. 21 No. 1, 1996 list however, there is much more emphasis on sub­ jects like team work and multidisciplinary cooperation than in Article 3 of the European Directive on Archi­ Ie tecture, so in terms of the architectural taxonomy, the emphasis is on elements of the professional concept. At the same conference the applicability of Domain Theory on other fields of technological design besides ] architecture, was established (Trum and Bax, 1990). At com,orellension-- ~ =--,-,,-,-__ ._. attainment the 1994 DOS5-Vaals Conference a hypertext database ~ on floppy disk containing a.o. all the contents of the concepts available at that time, was presented (Trum architectural categories (contents) and Bax, 1994).

Fig. 5 Representation ofa hypothetical architectural education But of course our interpretations and elaborations programme according to the taxonomy of architectural concepts alone are insufficient. In every EC Member State and and Bloom's taxonomy. in numerous other countries criteria, regulations, pol­ icies and documents exist concerning this subject. and versatile description of as many as possible con­ tents of the concepts should be available. It was decided to analyse a number of such doc­ uments for three main reasons: As a start, concepts were described in various publications, for instance in the Dutch Vademecum 1. To test the content, completeness and consistency for Architects (Bax and Trum, 1992a) and in a docu~ of the taxonomy (and as a consequence of the ment published by the EC Advisory Conu.ni.ttee (Bax revised formulation of Article 3); and Trum, 1992b). At the 1990 SEFI-Conference al­ 2. As a means to enrich the contents of the con­ ready a reference was made to the FEANI-criteria cepts. (Bax, Fox and Trum, 1990). Though these criteria 3. To find subjects that are common in all these principally cover all the fields of engineering, both descriptions. Article 3 and the FEANI-criteria concern the field of design using comparaJ:?le articulations. In the FEANI Especially for the first goal it was necessary that all remarks from the documents could be PROFILE OF THE STUDY PROGRAMME Faculty of Architecture, Building and Planning, connected to at least one of the concepts; not Eindhoven University of Technology, Eindhoven, The Netherlartds, eVen one remark should be left out, because ev- ery subject that could not be given a connection, might be an indication of incompleteness of the taxonomy. Considering its hierarchical character, every subject from the documents had to be as­ signed to the lowest appropriate concept in the taxonomy. If a subject was related to more than one concept, it was reported more than once in the analysis.

Arcuk Report Analysis: To start with, the Final Report of an ARCUK working party, based on the European Directive of 1985 (ARCUK, 1992), was analysed. ARCUK is the Architects Registration Council of the United Kingdom. The ARCUK Working Group Report Educational categories comments on the (original) 1985 version of Article o skill o understanding 3, which, belonging to a European Directive forms iilknowledge part of the UK legislation. The comments and rec- '------______...1 ommendations in the report are restricted to the Fig. 6 curricular base of an architectural education policy Test results of the EC inquiry showing the profile of the study for the UK. programme of the Faculty of Architecture, Building and Planning of Eindhoven University of Technology.

Open House International Vol. 21 No. I, 1996 9 The Taxonomy of Concepts in Architecture The Working Group pleads for a UK education cultural concept. This concept is important among policy that emphasises: other things because of the ARCUK's interest for the the public good: a central position of the direct position and role of developing countries, energy and needs of users as well as their perspectives on environmental questions and world material supplies. technical standards and aesthetic qualities; The relatively small attention for the stability and the makability concept may be explained by the assurance for the public with regard to the archi­ ARCUK's observation of a strong division between tects' competence (which is the ARCUK's main architecture and engineering. It is obvious that the criterion for admission to the Regist~r); ARCUK policy endorses a science-based architectural an increase of the working relationships between education: 41 remarks and recommendations related architects and others in the building industry; to the scientific concept, were found. t an explicit concern for ecological issues, energy, " world material supplies and the role of develop­ Not one item was found that turned out not to ing countries; be connectable to one or more concepts of the taxon­ omy. This may be considered an important indicator design to remain the central discipline of archi­ in favour of the completeness of the taxonomy. But tects; therefore design projects should form the its scientific validity is limited : in fact it only indi­ core of their education; cates that the British ARCUK Working Group did not the aesthetic, technological, economic and social raise any issue that is not comprised in the taxono­ issues of Article 3, demanding both theoretical my. It is noticeable, however that a number of sub­ knowledge and practical skills and the develop­ jects could only be fitted into the so-called scale con­ ment and application of judgement. cepts, as they were concerned with matters of inte­ gration of basic concepts. These scale concepts provid­ Analysis of all the subjects raised, the remarks, ed a much better fit to the concerning ARCUK re­ comments and recommendations in the eleven sec­ marks than the paragraphs of Article 3, in which tions of the report yielded up to about 300 items. only basic concepts occur. A quantitative summary of Some 100 could be allocated to two or more con­ the results is given in Fig. 7. cepts, either by their complexity (more than one sub­ ject simultaneously) or through lack of a sharp defini­ The enrichment of the content of the concepts tion (e.g. some 'social' issues also concern economic was considerable. A lot of new viewpoints and sub­ or financial problems). The emphasis in the number jects could be added to the further elaboration of the of remarks lies evidently on the professional concept : concepts. With regard to the consistency of the taxon­ 81 remarks and recommendations concerned manage­ omy a number of imperfections became apparent. ment subjects of the design of buildings, the organi­ Some had to do with the nomenclature of the con­ sational aspects of design projects and the architect's cepts. For instance, the "procedural concept" showed foIe and responsibilities in society. This number is al­ interference with the process and project-related as­ most twice as high as the next highest score : the pects of the professional concept. As the procedural concept particularly is intended to deal with issues of •

Fig. 7 Summary of the ARCH CULT PROF SCIE AEST MORF TEMF SOC! ECON UTIL STAB MAKA analysis of the '---'-______B_as_ic_Co_n_ce~p_ts ______..J ARCUK report.

The Taxonomy of Concepts in Architecture 10 Open House International Vol. 21 No. 1, 1996 buildings related to time, it is now indicated as 'tem­ man behaviour. This category includes issues emanat­ poral concept'. ing from the consideration of human nature and so­ cial interaction. Understanding and acting responsibly Analysis of NAAB criteria: on these issues is considered essential to the practice The NAAB report entitled '1990 Conditions and of architecture in the contemporary world. Procedures' (NAAB,1991) differs essentially from the ARCUK Working Group report. NAAB is the Nation­ Environmental: The environmental context is de­ al Architectural Accrediting Board of the USA. In this fined by the NAAB as climate, geography, and other report no subjects or questions are raised, discussed natural phenomena and characteristics that affect the or presented for discussion. The report contains pro­ setting for architecture. cedures and criteria for accreditation of professional education programmes in the field of Architecture. In Aesthetic: The aesthetic context is defined by the this respect it shows a strong resemblance to the EC­ NAAB as the visual and emotional components of Directive. NAAB-accreditation is awarded if a the architectural experience. programme meets an established standard of educa­ tional achievement. This achievement is ascertained Technical: The technical context is defined as the by an evaluation process carried out by an accredit­ physical systems necessary to create a beneficial envi­ ing agency. ronment that responds to both human behaviour and the laws of nature. According to NAAB criteria "education in an ac­ credited program should ensure that the graduates DESIGN: have competence in architectural design, including The process and product that result from the technical systems & requirements and considerations synthesis of social, environmental, aesthetic, and tech­ of health & safety, that they understand historical, nical considerations into a cohesive and unified archi­ human and environmental context for architecture, tectural entity. and that they comprehend architects' roles & respon­ sibilities in society". The NAAB considers the criteria COMMUNICATION : and procedures described, the specific means by Those skills that architects use to study, illustrate, which education is evaluated towards a professional and document their work, as well as to exchange in­ degree in architecture. Next to procedural prescrip­ formation and ideas with others throughout the de­ tions of the accreditation process, the report gives a sign process. minute description of all kinds of necessary features of the educational programme, the administrative, fi­ PRACTICE: nancial and material support facilities and so on. Practice includes the relation of the profession to The analysis carried out was limited to Chapter society, as well as the organisation, management, and 3.8, titled: 'Satisfying Achievement-Oriented Perfor­ documentation of the process of providing profession­ mance Criteria'. al services. This category is subdivided into :

The occurring NAAB educational categories are: Project process and economics : Project process and economics refers to typical and atypical activities in­ Awareness, comparable to Bloom's 'knowledge'; cluded in a representative architectural project from Understanding; and inception through completion of construction. This in­ Ability, which is defined in the same way as cludes practical aspects of building and the economics 'skill'. of development, as well as the different types of con­ tractual arrangements and procedures for their admin­ The NAAB architectural categories are arranged istration, and the architects' responsibilities in these as follows: efforts.

FUNDAMENTAL KNOWLEOCE: Business practice and management : Business prac­ tice and management refers to the concepts, ethical Those areas of study that provide the background principles, procedures, and techniques related to the for and the basis of study and practice in the profes­ different forms of organisation for architectural prac­ sion of architecture. This category is subdivided into: tice, including private and corporate offices, public Social: The social context for architecture includes sector agencies, and nonprofit organisations. liberal studies, architectural history, culture, and hu-

Open House International Vol. 21 No. 1, 1996 11 The Taxonomy of Concepts in Architecture Laws and regulations : Laws and regulations, as further development of the concepts as building related to both building and architectural practice, stones of the taxonomy, in order to strengthen its form a complex body of common law, legislation, contents and coherence. It is obvious that for some and regulation. applications (e.g legislation, regulation) short and sharp definitions will be favourable, while in other Within this system of headings 54 different crite­ cases (for design) a rich and wide variety of different ria are formulated. As no one-to-one relationship ex­ contents will be preferable. The definitions should ists with regard to the concepts of the taxonomy, the contain the minimum that can be agreed upon, analysis contains a total of 102 formulations. In the sources for inspiration can never be sufficiently filled. analysis the criteria were not split up so as to allo­ We will continue to work in both directions. Anyway cate the subjects to the different concepts. If a criteri­ we will carry on with analysis of relevant documents on contains more than one subject, relevant for more about architectural design, so as to enrich the con­ concepts, then the text of that criterion is connected tents of the concepts. to all concepts concerned. A quantitative summary of the analysis is shown in Fig. 8. It has also become obvious that terminology and nomenclature of the elements of the taxonomy might

t

Fig. 8 Summary of the ARCH CULT PROF SCIE AEST MORF TEMP sac! ECON UTIL STAB MAKA analysis of the

L-______Basic Concepts~~ ______~ NAAB criteria.

In these American criteria too, the emphasis clear­ be adapted and improved. There is some doubt and ly is on the professional concept, which also may be criticism about the two upper concepts, the Architec­ expected, as NAAB Accreditation results in the per­ tural and the Cultural concept, which are now basic mission of educational institutions to award a profes­ and scale concepts simultaneously. The architectural • sional degree to young architects. The scientific basis concept might be considered the heading for the of the architect's education here too is an important whole taxonomy. The cultural concept, sometimes in­ criterion. In comparison, there is more attention for terpreted as the total environment of architectural ar­ the stability concept than in the ARCUK report, but tifacts, could be worked out further. It now consists surprisingly little for matters concerning makability. of two partial concepts : an ecological and a histori­ cal orientation (concerning space and time). A detailed description of the results of the com­ parison of the concepts of the taxonomy and the text As far as the reformulation of Article 3 of the of Article 3 with the ARCUK comments and recom­ EC Directive is concerned, it became clear, especially mendations and the NAAB criteria is available from from the ARCUK analysis, that. in a new revision the the first author in the hypertext database on DOS scale concepts should be inserted. It would take a floppy disk, mentioned before (Trum and Bax, 1994). form as proposed here :

Conclusion - Further developments of the Proposal for reformulation of Article 3 - 1995 taxonomy: (including the notions of scale and basic concepts according to the taxonomy) These applications, comparisons and the prelimi­ nary results of the ongoing inquiry provide keys for Education and training leading to diplomas, cer-

The Taxonomy of Concepts in Architecture 12 Open House International Vo!. 21 No. 1, 1996 tificates and other evidence of formal qualifications (b) architecture as an economic phenomenon: the referred to in Article 2 shall be provided through marketability of the building; the building as courses of studies at university level concerned prin­ an economic good, the building on the mar­ cipally with architecture. Such studies shall be bal­ ket. anced between the theoretical and practical aspects of (c) architecture as a physical phenomenon, meeting architectural education and training and shall ensure usability, stability and makability require­ the acquisition of skill to create architecture as a ments. multi-dimensional phenomenon. This phenomenon and the objects of study appear as follows : 5. Understanding of the domains of architectural de­ sign : 1. Knowledge of architecture as a cultural phenome­ non: the historic, ideological and ecological envi­ (a) architecture as a usability phenomenon: the ronment of the building; the building as 'milieu', employability Iworkability of the building; the with shared value and meaning. building as a utilitarian system accommodat­ ing an organisation. 2. Knowledge of the modalities of reality, articulated by distinguishable expert approaches towards ar­ (b) architecture as a stability phenomenon: the maintainability of the building; the building chitecture : as a structure or installation, directed at the (a) as a professional phenomenon with respect to preservation of a desired situation. the praxis of everyday'S reality : the ability to organise the planning and design of the (c) architecture as a makability phenomenon: the building; the professional's responsibility to­ technical realisability of the building; the wards society; the management of the archi­ building as a building system, as work. tect's office; the design of a building as work­ manship. So far, the taxonomy seems to be suitable too for the description and ordering of in principle all tech­ (b) as a scientific phenomenon with respect to un­ nological design fields (Trum and Bax, 1990). This is derlaying foundations of reality: knowledge confirmed by the first applications in the postgradu­ based models as the foundations of the ate technological design programme of Eindhoven building, the building as a hypothesis, the School for Technological Design at our university building as a representation of knowledge. (Trum, 1995). It will be obvious that for application (c) as an artistic phenomenon with respect to tran­ in such a variety of design fields the terminology, scendence of reality : the embedding of which is strictly architectural now, should be adapted buildings with (symbolic) meaning; the fundamentally. It would be a great challenge to see artisticity of the building, the building as a whether a confrontation with and application on work of art. these areas would yield new visions regarding the 3. Understanding of the dimensions of architectural anatomy of the taxonomy or even the establishment design space: formal, temporal and functional di­ of new concepts, or bring new elements or insights mensions of architecture: into architectural design and vice versa. (a) as a formal phenomenon: the discernibility of From some first, provisional orientations it might the building; the building as a form (appear­ be possible that the phenomenological, but vast and ance, shape); the building as a system of complex work of Charles Benjamin Peirce, in which parts; the building as a part of an: urban sys­ ideas and notions can be found concerning process tem. and change with respect to substance and structure, (b) as a temporal phenomenon : the inconstancy might be relevant for the further development of the and changeability of the building; the build­ taxonomy. His notions of Firstness, Secondness and ing as a mo(nu)ment. Thirdness seem to correspond quite well with the (c) as a functional phenomenon, meeting physical, notions of Form, Function and Process which appear social and economic requirements. to have a similar triarchic relationship. Though this study is only at its very beginning, it looks as if 4. Understanding of the orders of architectural (and there are 'intriguing' similarities and connections in a urban) planning: development towards an 'open' design theory, which (a) architecture as a social phenomenon: the terri­ stands apart from the specific artifact that is de­ toriality of the building; the building as a so­ signed, a theory that would apply to any particular cial good, a habitat, a private property, as a design context. territory.

Open House International VoL 21 No. 1, 1996 13 The Taxonomy of Concepts in Architecture REFERENCES : EC (1985), Europese Richtlijn inzake de onderlinge erkenning van de diploma's, certificaten en andere titels op het gebied van de ARCUK (1992), Architects Registration Council of The United architectuur, tevens houdende maatregelen tot vergemakkelijking Kingdom, Working Group of the ARCUK Board of Archi­ van de daadwerkelijke uitoefening van het recht van vestiging en tectural Education, An ARCUK Education Polictj, Final report, vrij verricl1ten van diensten, EC Document 85/384/EEG, Brus­ London, pp. 24. sels. Bax, M. F. Th. (1979), Domain Theory, the Scope and Structure of EC (1990), Raadgevend Comite voor de Opleiding op het Gebied Building Science, Open House, 3, p. 30-43. van de Architectuur, Overwegingen en Aanbevelingen met Bax, M. F. Th., Fox, K. and Trum, H. M. G. J. (1990), Design of betrekking tot Artikel 3, EC document III/F/9125/31/89-NL a Taxonomy for Architectural Education Programmes, In: (Orig.: EN), Brussels, 7, p. McCabe, V. J. (ed.) : Design in Engineering Education, Proc. EC (1993), Advisory Committee on Education and Training in SEFI Conference, Dublin, pp. 25-31 the field of Architecture, Working Group: 'Training of Ar­ Bax, M. F. Th. en Trum, H. M. G. J. (1992a), Architectonisch con­ chitects', The Profile of a Study Programme acco~ding to Article cept als ontwerpfilosofie, Vademecum voor Architecten, 117 3, EC document III/F/5283/1/93-EN, Brussel;, 11, p. VA, Samsom, Alphen aid Rijn, pag. 1-40. NAAB (1991), National Architectural Accrediting Board, 1991 Bax, M. F. Th. en Trum, H. M. G. J. (1992b), Het Architectonisch Conditions & Procedures, Washington, 70 p. Concept: een uitwerking van Artikel 3, Raadgevend Comite Trum, H. M. G. J. (1979), Over het normbegrip in de bouwkunde, voor Opleidingen op het gebied van de Architectuur, dissertation, Eindhoven University of Technology, Commissie van de Europese Gemeenschappen, Directoraat Eindhoven, 229, p. Generaal interne markt en industrie, EG-document III/F/ 5175/1/92-NL, Brussel, p. 22; also published as: Trum, H. M. G. J. (1992), Aspects of Quality in Continuing Engi­ neering Education, Int. J. Cont. Engin. Education, 2, 1, pp. 1- Bax, M. F. Th. et Trum, H. M. G. L Le concept architec­ 13. tural: developpement de l'article 3, Comite consultatif pour la formation dans le domaine de l'architecture, de la Trum, Henk M. G. J. (1995), The Eindhoven School for Technological Commission europeenne, EG-doc. III/F /5175/92-FR, Design !VO, in: Oxman, R, Bax, M. F. Th., and Achten, H. Brussel, 1992, 41 p. H., (eds.), Design Research in The Netherlands, Symposiumbundel, Groep Ontwerp Methoden Bax, M. F. Th. and Trum, H. M. G. J., The architectural Bouwinformatica, Department of Architecture, Planning and concept: expanding on Article 3. A contribution to the work Building Science, Eindhoven University of Technology, of the European Commission's Advisonj Committee for Edu­ Eindhoven, pp. 134-143 cation and Training in the Field of Architecture, EG-doc. III/5175/92-EN, Brussel, 1992, 16 p. Trum, H. M. G. J. and Bax, M. F. Th. (1990), The Applicability of Domain Theory in Technological Design, In: McCabe, V. J. Bax, M. F. Th. und Trum, H. M. G. J., Das (ed.): Design in Engineering Education, Proc. 1990 SEFI architektonische Konzept: eine Ausarbeitung von Artikel 3 im Conference, Dublin, pp. 397-402 Hinblick aUf die Tiitigkeiten des Beratenden Ausschusses for die Ausbildung auf dem Gebiet der Architektur, EG-doc. Trum, H. M. G. J. en Bax, M. F. Th. (1992), De architectuur­ Ill/5175/92-DE, Brussel, 1992, 44, p. taxonomie, een proeve van communicatie, in: Bax, M. F. Th. en Trum, H. M. G. J. (red.), Concepten van de Bouwkunde, Bax, M. F. Th. en Trum, H. M. G. J., eds. (1992c), Concepten van Bouwstenenreeks nr. 25, Faculteit Bouwkunde, Technische de Bouwkunde, Bouwstenenreeks nr. 25, Faculteit Bouwkunde, Universiteit Eindhoven, Eindhoven, pp. 11-33 Technische Universiteit Eindhoven, Eindhoven, 376, p. Trum, H. M. G. J. and Bax, M. F. Th.(1993), On contents, mean- Bax, M. F. Th. and Trum, H. M. G. (1993a), A Taxonomy of J. ing and interpretation of the Concepts of Architecture in an in­ concepts in Architecture: A new tool for analysis and synthesis ternational context, as a prerequisite for the development and ap­ in architectural design processes according to Domain Theonj, in: plication of advanced technologies, Position Paper, in : Behesthi, • Behesthi, M. Rand Zreik, K. (eds.): Advanced Technolo­ M.R and Zreik, K. (eds.), EuropIA '93, Proe. Supp!., Design gies; Proc. Fourth EuropIA International Conference on the Research Foundation, DeIft, pp. 117-118. application of Artificial Intelligence, Robotics and Image Pro­ cessing to Architecture, Building Engineering, Urban Design Trum, Henk and Thijs Bax (1994), The Taxonomy of Architecture, a and Urban Planning, Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp. 53-64. hypertext database of the 1990 European Communillj Directive on Architecture, Eindhoven University of Technology, Eindhoven, Bax, M. F. Th. and Trum, H. M. G. J. (1993b), A Taxonomy of Hypertext computer programme, presented and made avail­ Concepts in Architecture, in: Nicholson, M. P., and Prins, M., able at the 2nd Design & Decision Support Systems Confer­ (eds.), Architectural Management, Practice and Research; ence, Vaals, The Netherlands, 3.5" FD DOS, 608 Kb. Proc. CIB W96 Architectural Management Workshop, TUE, Eindhoven, pp. 59-72 Authors' Address : Bax, M. F. Th., and H. M. G. J Trum (1995), Concurrent Engineer­ ing and Architectural Design, to be published. Faculty of Architecture, Building and Planning, Bloom, B. S., ed. (1968), Taxonomy of Educational Objectives, The Classification of Educational Goals, Handbook I, Cognitive Do­ Eindhoven University of Technology, main, New York. Den Dolech 2, Eindhoven, The Netherlands.

----... ~ : ~... -.----

The Taxonomy of Concepts in Architecture 14 Open House International Vo!. 21 No. 1, 1996