SCHOOL OF ARCHITECTURE UNIVERSITY OF SHEFFIELD A Post-structuralist Analysis of the Architectural Education - Technology Relationship Fevzi Ozersay September 2003 THESIS SUBMITTED FOR THE DEGREE OF Doctor of Philosophy (PhD) This study is dedicated to the memory of my father, Huseyin Dildar Ozersay Abstract A Post-structuralist Analysis of the Architectural Education - Technology Relationship Fevzi Ozersay This dissertation investigates how technology and architectural education relate to each other, in the broadest possible sense. What are the internal and external factors affecting our understanding and use of technology in architectural education? The aim of this thesis is to understand and relocate the concept of technology into architectural education ideologically. This relocation does not only handle the understanding of technology in relation to architectural education through a critical analysis, but also the way we understand and locate ourselves and our education in relation to technology, architectural profession and society. The mode of inquiry is a conceptual one. It is a philosophical undertaking / an investigation of the guiding principles, hidden rules of formations, layers of relationships and the fundamental aspects of technology and our knowledge of it. In this regard it provides the reader with a detailed account of the current relationship between architectural education and technology through a post- structural/critical analysis, which can lead to new understandings, new technologies and new educational practices with technologies. In other words it identifies the existing philosophy underlying the varying use of technology in architectural education, in order to be able to enable new ways of relating ourselves to the technologies we'll have in architectural education practice in the future. The main outcome is a revised philosophical understanding of technology in relation to architectural education through expanding, deepening and clarifying the relational space between architectural education and technology. Primary layers of social, secondary layers of architectural education and technological production, and the way disco u rses -practices function between the primary and secondary layers of relationships through discursive layers connecting them are some of the concepts dealt with while trying to define and explain the relationship between architectural education and technology. Acknowledgments There had been a considerable amount of people who either directly or indirectly enhanced the process of this study. Firstly, my thanks goes to my supervisor, Dr. Peter Szalapaj, who not only enriched the process by heated discussions and group meetings but also gave me the freedom to walk the way I wanted. Some of the members of these group meetings who equally contributed the discussions are; Saleh Uddin, David Chang, Yoshitaka Mishima, Khaled Tarazi and Preecha Maneesatid. The support I had from my family at every stage of not only these last four years but for the whole of my life had been invaluable. As PhD students of the school of architecture working in related areas we have discussed shared and commented on each other's work within a group established for architectural education related studies. This group included Sonia DeJesus Estrada, Rachel Sara, Ali Izadi and Ahmed Bakarman. Thank you all. Prof. Jeremy Till gave me the chance to get involved and have an insight of architectural education in the department as the diploma co-ordinator. My practical engagement with what I was studying had been as educational as the theoretical study of this dissertation. I would like to thank J. Till and all members of the department who supported me at every stage of this long walk. And last but not least, Yonca Al and Munevver Ozgur, read and commented on the draft versions. Their comments had been extremely valuable and supportive. My special thanks goes to Munevver for bearing with me at every step of the way and supporting me at all times. Thank you all Table of Contents Table of Contents 1 Introduction 5 .............................................................................. 1.1 Background 5 ........................................................................................ 1.2 Problem Definition 6 ............................................................................. 1.3 Aims Objective the Study 8 and of ...................................................... 1.4 Methodology the Study 8 of .................................................................. 1.5 Limitations the Study 9 of .................................................................... 2 The Philosophy Technology 11 of ............................................. 2.1 What is 'Technology'? 11 ..................................................................... History Philosophy Technology 13 2.2 of the of ...................................... Substantive Theories Philosophy Technology 15 2.3 of the of .............. 2.3.1 Jacque Ellul (1912-1994); 16 ........................................................... 2.3.2 Martin Heidegger (1889-1976); 21 ................................................... 2.3.3 Jurgen Habermas (1929- ); 24 ...................................................... 2.3.4 Herbert Marcuse (1898-1979); 27 ................................................... 2.4 Technological Determinism 33 ............................................................ 2.4.1 Introduction General Characteristics 33 and .................................... 2.4.2 Autonomy Technology 34 of ............................................................ 2.4.3 Technology the Determinant Social 36 as of ................................... 2.4.4 Criticisms Technological Determinism 41 on ................................... Social Constructivist Studies Technology 43 2.5 of ................................ 2.5.1 General Characteristics 43 .............................................................. 2.5.2 Heterogeneous 45 context ............................................................... The Social the Determinant Technological Change 47 2.5.3 as of ........... 2.5.4 Being in Technology 49 control of ................................................... 2.5.5 Critique 51 ....................................................................................... 3 Educational Thought 54 ............................................................. 3.1 Introduction 54 ...................................................................................... 1 Table of Contents 3.2 Definition Educational Theory 55 of .................................................... 3.3 Historical Approaches to Education 58 .............................................. 3.3.1 Beginnings 58 .................................................................................. 3.3.2 Subsections Educational Theory 60 of ............................................ Structuralism in Educational Theory & Curriculum 64 3.4 ...................... 3.4.1 Structuralism 64 ................................................................................ 3.4.2 Structuralism in 65 education .......................................................... 3.4.3 Curriculum 66 .................................................................................. 3.4.4 Structuralism in Traditional to Curriculum 67 approaches ............... 3.4.5 Criticism Structural Approaches to Education 70 of ......................... Post-structuralism I De-constructivism / Postmodernism 73 3.5 ........... 3.5.1 Discourses-practices as the initiator of meaning in 76 poststructuralism ....................................................................................... 3.6 Post-structuralism / De-constructivism / Postmodernism in Educational Theory & the Curriculum 80 ...................................................... 3.6.1 Re-conceptualist Studies Curriculum & Education 80 of .................. 3.6.2 Poststructural Studies Curriculum Education 83 of and ................... 3.6.3 Educational Discourse 84 ................................................................ Critical Educational Discourse & Critical Pragmatism 89 3.6.4 ................. 3.7 Conclusion 95 ....................................................................................... 4 Architectural Education n r- ........................................................ z7v 4.1 Introduction 96 ...................................................................................... Beginning Architectural Education ( to 19th Century).. 98 4.2 of ... mid 4.2.1 Architects from [no/every]-where 99 ................................................ 4.2.2 Informal Formalisation The Pupilage System 102 - ......................... 4.2.3 Royal institute of British Architects (RIBA), the Examination- Registration the Architectural Associates (AA) 105 and ................................. 4.2.4 General the informal 107 characteristics of era ............................... Ecoles in France: The Beaux-Arts & The Politechnique 109 4.3 Two .... 4.3.1 The Ecole des Beaux-Arts 109 ........................................................ 4.3.2 The Ecole Polytechnique 112 .......................................................... 2 Table of Contents 4.3.3 Structure AE in France's Ecoles 113 ' and characteristics of ............ 4.3.4 Reflections of the Beaux-Arts System on British Architectural Education 116 ................................................................................................ 4.4 Bauhaus (1919-28) Modernism 120