Pub Date : 2021-01-02DOI: 10.1080/24751448.2021.1863663
G. Cranz, Lusi Morhayim, G. Lindsay, Johann (Hans) Sagan
Post Occupancy Evaluation (POE) is a research method that examines how buildings function; when the functions include social life, social science methods must be employed. This paper advocates using POE social research both in architectural practice and in architectural education to promote evidence‐based design. Based on four decades of experience teaching POE to undergraduates at the University of California Berkeley, we show how POE can be conducted and taught: gather the research questions, set up teams to collect data using different data collection techniques, and analyze the results by comparing and contrasting the findings of each team. We discuss the importance of POE research to architectural practice, education, and accumulated institutional knowledge.
{"title":"Post Occupancy Evaluation in Architectural Education and Practice","authors":"G. Cranz, Lusi Morhayim, G. Lindsay, Johann (Hans) Sagan","doi":"10.1080/24751448.2021.1863663","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/24751448.2021.1863663","url":null,"abstract":"Post Occupancy Evaluation (POE) is a research method that examines how buildings function; when the functions include social life, social science methods must be employed. This paper advocates using POE social research both in architectural practice and in architectural education to promote evidence‐based design. Based on four decades of experience teaching POE to undergraduates at the University of California Berkeley, we show how POE can be conducted and taught: gather the research questions, set up teams to collect data using different data collection techniques, and analyze the results by comparing and contrasting the findings of each team. We discuss the importance of POE research to architectural practice, education, and accumulated institutional knowledge.","PeriodicalId":36812,"journal":{"name":"Technology Architecture and Design","volume":"25 1","pages":"25 - 30"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"84008771","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-01-02DOI: 10.1080/24751448.2021.1863661
Amy Seif Hattan
{"title":"Validating an Emerging Design Area through Industry‐Academia Research Partnerships","authors":"Amy Seif Hattan","doi":"10.1080/24751448.2021.1863661","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/24751448.2021.1863661","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":36812,"journal":{"name":"Technology Architecture and Design","volume":"254 1","pages":"14 - 18"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"82933494","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-01-02DOI: 10.1080/24751448.2021.1863678
A. Zarzycki
TA D 5 : 1 E D TO R IA L “[O]ur writing tools are also working on our thoughts” summarizes Friedrich Nietzsche’s experience using one of the early typewriters: a Malling-Hansen Writing Ball. His experience speaks directly to the tool-and-thought continuum evident in creative disciplines. It is also mirrored by Marshall McLuhan’s “the medium is the message” claim emphasizing the importance of the mechanism delivering the content. New tools and technologies (methods) often manifest themselves in new outcomes. While general questions remain unchanged, new methods can lead to qualitatively new answers. Thus, the focus of this issue is on how we invent, develop, and deliver new knowledge. Doris Sung advocates for expanding the entrepreneurial mindset within AEC disciplines by broadening architects’ services from exclusively client-oriented to product and building technology development. Sung uses her own experience as an inventor and developer of the InVert passively dynamic self-shading window to draw broader lessons for others following a similar path. This entrepreneurial path allows designers to respond to current and emerging social, technological, and environmental concerns by defining their own research questions and problems to solve—giving them autonomy and agency. In a voice coming from the allied discipline of civil engineering, Amy Seif Hattan demonstrates how collaborative research between an engineering firm and academia helps to validate best sustainable practices and ultimately become a catalyst for firm-wide environmentally focused transformation. The added benefit of this collaboration was the firm’s ability to offer new embodied carbon design services and gain market advantage over its competitors in addition to fostering a mutually beneficial relationship with academic researchers. In a similar way, the evidence-based design method helps practitioners to learn from their past projects and bring greater value to their clients. Galen Cranz, Lusi Morhayim, Georgia Lindsay, and Johann (Hans) Sagan emphasize the necessity of post-occupancy evaluation (POE) research in architecture, both in practice and academia, to address users’ manifest and latent needs. Christopher Pagano, Brian Day, and Leah S. Hartman expand the discussion of human factors in architecture by contextualizing it within a broader ecological psychology framework that sees people and the environment as interdependent. The authors point to affordance as a key characteristic that empirically quantifies this relationship. Precedents, either environmental performance data points or user feedback, are critical components of the architectural design process (method). William Braham in his review of Case Study Strategies for Architects and Designers by Marja Sarvimäki reiterates the importance of case studies as one of the primary architectural research methods and grounds it in a larger interdisciplinary perspective. He also reiterates the importance of research methods, and
{"title":"Methods: How We Invent and Research","authors":"A. Zarzycki","doi":"10.1080/24751448.2021.1863678","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/24751448.2021.1863678","url":null,"abstract":"TA D 5 : 1 E D TO R IA L “[O]ur writing tools are also working on our thoughts” summarizes Friedrich Nietzsche’s experience using one of the early typewriters: a Malling-Hansen Writing Ball. His experience speaks directly to the tool-and-thought continuum evident in creative disciplines. It is also mirrored by Marshall McLuhan’s “the medium is the message” claim emphasizing the importance of the mechanism delivering the content. New tools and technologies (methods) often manifest themselves in new outcomes. While general questions remain unchanged, new methods can lead to qualitatively new answers. Thus, the focus of this issue is on how we invent, develop, and deliver new knowledge. Doris Sung advocates for expanding the entrepreneurial mindset within AEC disciplines by broadening architects’ services from exclusively client-oriented to product and building technology development. Sung uses her own experience as an inventor and developer of the InVert passively dynamic self-shading window to draw broader lessons for others following a similar path. This entrepreneurial path allows designers to respond to current and emerging social, technological, and environmental concerns by defining their own research questions and problems to solve—giving them autonomy and agency. In a voice coming from the allied discipline of civil engineering, Amy Seif Hattan demonstrates how collaborative research between an engineering firm and academia helps to validate best sustainable practices and ultimately become a catalyst for firm-wide environmentally focused transformation. The added benefit of this collaboration was the firm’s ability to offer new embodied carbon design services and gain market advantage over its competitors in addition to fostering a mutually beneficial relationship with academic researchers. In a similar way, the evidence-based design method helps practitioners to learn from their past projects and bring greater value to their clients. Galen Cranz, Lusi Morhayim, Georgia Lindsay, and Johann (Hans) Sagan emphasize the necessity of post-occupancy evaluation (POE) research in architecture, both in practice and academia, to address users’ manifest and latent needs. Christopher Pagano, Brian Day, and Leah S. Hartman expand the discussion of human factors in architecture by contextualizing it within a broader ecological psychology framework that sees people and the environment as interdependent. The authors point to affordance as a key characteristic that empirically quantifies this relationship. Precedents, either environmental performance data points or user feedback, are critical components of the architectural design process (method). William Braham in his review of Case Study Strategies for Architects and Designers by Marja Sarvimäki reiterates the importance of case studies as one of the primary architectural research methods and grounds it in a larger interdisciplinary perspective. He also reiterates the importance of research methods, and ","PeriodicalId":36812,"journal":{"name":"Technology Architecture and Design","volume":"3 1","pages":"110 - 110"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"84480177","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-01-02DOI: 10.1080/24751448.2021.1863675
A. Timmer
This research proposes an integrated building evaporative cooling assembly using pervious concrete acting as a thermally active system. The proof‐of‐concept prototype demonstrates the capacity of the system. The prototype simulates the operation of a wall assembly of pervious concrete that utilizes gravity to drive water through its matrix. The wall assembly lowers the interior surface temperature of the concrete by 9–11°F and the interior air temperature of the insulated box by 7°F. This research demonstrates the capacity of an integrated wall assembly utilizing pervious concrete acting as a non‐technical ceramic evaporative cooling wall assembly.
{"title":"Building Integrated Evaporative Cooling Utilizing Pervious Concrete","authors":"A. Timmer","doi":"10.1080/24751448.2021.1863675","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/24751448.2021.1863675","url":null,"abstract":"This research proposes an integrated building evaporative cooling assembly using pervious concrete acting as a thermally active system. The proof‐of‐concept prototype demonstrates the capacity of the system. The prototype simulates the operation of a wall assembly of pervious concrete that utilizes gravity to drive water through its matrix. The wall assembly lowers the interior surface temperature of the concrete by 9–11°F and the interior air temperature of the insulated box by 7°F. This research demonstrates the capacity of an integrated wall assembly utilizing pervious concrete acting as a non‐technical ceramic evaporative cooling wall assembly.","PeriodicalId":36812,"journal":{"name":"Technology Architecture and Design","volume":"41 1","pages":"73 - 81"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"84662015","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-01-02DOI: 10.1080/24751448.2021.1863665
C. Pagano, Brian J. Day, Leah S. Hartman
Integral to the scientific process are theoretical frameworks that motivate specific research questions and empirical methodologies. This paper introduces ecological psychology and argues that it can serve as a new theoretical framework for architecture and design. Ecological psychology holds that people and their environments must be defined relative to each other, with this relationship being empirically quantified by affordances, and that the perception of affordances does not require mental representations or cognitive deliberations. This theory has driven the expansion of human factors, which applies basic research in perception, cognition, and motor function to the design of artifacts in the real world. Ecological psychology provides an empirically testable theory that can inform design choices and assess proposed designs’ functionality.
{"title":"An Argument Framework for Ecological Psychology and Architecture Design","authors":"C. Pagano, Brian J. Day, Leah S. Hartman","doi":"10.1080/24751448.2021.1863665","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/24751448.2021.1863665","url":null,"abstract":"Integral to the scientific process are theoretical frameworks that motivate specific research questions and empirical methodologies. This paper introduces ecological psychology and argues that it can serve as a new theoretical framework for architecture and design. Ecological psychology holds that people and their environments must be defined relative to each other, with this relationship being empirically quantified by affordances, and that the perception of affordances does not require mental representations or cognitive deliberations. This theory has driven the expansion of human factors, which applies basic research in perception, cognition, and motor function to the design of artifacts in the real world. Ecological psychology provides an empirically testable theory that can inform design choices and assess proposed designs’ functionality.","PeriodicalId":36812,"journal":{"name":"Technology Architecture and Design","volume":"39 1","pages":"31 - 36"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"90069096","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-01-02DOI: 10.1080/24751448.2021.1863677
N. Emami
With bespoke fabrication on one end, and mass production on the other end of the fabrication spectrum, this study investigates custom repetitive manufacturing through molding concrete by using 3D printed formwork. The process demonstrates a proof‐of‐concept for 3D printing elastic resin as a formwork for repeated casting of interlocking concrete blocks. Among the challenges are the method of digitally generating the block geometry and designing the molds to accommodate complex curvatures on four sides of a block while operating within the material limitations of 3D printing with an elastic material. The overall process investigates the limitations of such a system in order to identify future potential for mass customized fabrication employing casting techniques.
{"title":"Molding Liquid Stone: A Computational and Experimental Mixed‐Method Study of 3D Print Formwork for Interlocking Concrete Modules","authors":"N. Emami","doi":"10.1080/24751448.2021.1863677","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/24751448.2021.1863677","url":null,"abstract":"With bespoke fabrication on one end, and mass production on the other end of the fabrication spectrum, this study investigates custom repetitive manufacturing through molding concrete by using 3D printed formwork. The process demonstrates a proof‐of‐concept for 3D printing elastic resin as a formwork for repeated casting of interlocking concrete blocks. Among the challenges are the method of digitally generating the block geometry and designing the molds to accommodate complex curvatures on four sides of a block while operating within the material limitations of 3D printing with an elastic material. The overall process investigates the limitations of such a system in order to identify future potential for mass customized fabrication employing casting techniques.","PeriodicalId":36812,"journal":{"name":"Technology Architecture and Design","volume":"7 1","pages":"96 - 108"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"88573341","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-01-02DOI: 10.1080/24751448.2021.1863660
D. M. Addington
TA D 5 : 1 Research Redux I was about three years into my doctoral studies at Harvard’s GSD when three questions, or more accurately, three challenges to my work, were posed. For context, I was part of the initial wave of academic researchers and practitioners who were enamored with all things “smart,” particularly walls in whatever nominative designation rendered them as technologically advanced and functionally, if not formally novel: smart skins, intelligent facades, performative glazing, interactive surfaces, adaptive envelopes. Inspired by the cover of James Marston Fitch’s seminal text, American Building: The Environmental Forces That Shape It, depicting a building envelope as mediating the full sweep of environmental phenomena, I planned to develop a wall system to control all scales of heat transfer, thereby covering thermal, luminous, and acoustic behaviors—the ultimate smart wall. The first challenge came from one of my doctoral advisors in Mechanical Engineering who kept asking me what my hypothesis was. I thought he simply didn’t understand; in Architecture, we dealt with big ideas. The second challenge came from my doctoral advisor in Environmental Health, who kept pressing me on method. How was I going to determine the value of what I produced? What were my criteria? I thought he didn’t understand that true innovation lay beyond the bounds of the known and should not be constrained by the limits of measurable criteria. The third challenge lit the proverbial light bulb when I took an undergraduate course on Plato and the Socratic Elenchus and discovered my writing less than enthusiastically received. I expected to excel as I had in all of my previous classes in Architecture, but I was instead roundly criticized for my overly personal reinterpretation of Socrates’ argument. It was at that point I began to realize the argument I put forward as a thesis was but an empty vessel, a diversion to obscure that there was indeed no thesis. My entire approach was predicated on what I wanted to do, to make, and I justified the project by self-determining both the criteria for measuring the results and the ultimate value of the results. I was completely trapped in the closed circularity of my personal view. So I inverted my thesis: instead of technologically advanced smart walls, I shifted the smartness directly to the atmospheric physical phenomena that we had heretofore attributed to the walls. It was enough of a shift that the hypothesis and method were deemed acceptable by my circumspect advisors. While I am proud of the resulting thesis, it was only a first step toward a lifelong rethinking and reassessment of how our profession develops research questions, brings objectivity to its methods, and, most importantly, frames meaningful contribution. There have been many missteps and retrenchments along the way, and I am grateful to the intrepid doctoral students who hung in there with me as I tested and retreated from different methodological pa
{"title":"Research Redux","authors":"D. M. Addington","doi":"10.1080/24751448.2021.1863660","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/24751448.2021.1863660","url":null,"abstract":"TA D 5 : 1 Research Redux I was about three years into my doctoral studies at Harvard’s GSD when three questions, or more accurately, three challenges to my work, were posed. For context, I was part of the initial wave of academic researchers and practitioners who were enamored with all things “smart,” particularly walls in whatever nominative designation rendered them as technologically advanced and functionally, if not formally novel: smart skins, intelligent facades, performative glazing, interactive surfaces, adaptive envelopes. Inspired by the cover of James Marston Fitch’s seminal text, American Building: The Environmental Forces That Shape It, depicting a building envelope as mediating the full sweep of environmental phenomena, I planned to develop a wall system to control all scales of heat transfer, thereby covering thermal, luminous, and acoustic behaviors—the ultimate smart wall. The first challenge came from one of my doctoral advisors in Mechanical Engineering who kept asking me what my hypothesis was. I thought he simply didn’t understand; in Architecture, we dealt with big ideas. The second challenge came from my doctoral advisor in Environmental Health, who kept pressing me on method. How was I going to determine the value of what I produced? What were my criteria? I thought he didn’t understand that true innovation lay beyond the bounds of the known and should not be constrained by the limits of measurable criteria. The third challenge lit the proverbial light bulb when I took an undergraduate course on Plato and the Socratic Elenchus and discovered my writing less than enthusiastically received. I expected to excel as I had in all of my previous classes in Architecture, but I was instead roundly criticized for my overly personal reinterpretation of Socrates’ argument. It was at that point I began to realize the argument I put forward as a thesis was but an empty vessel, a diversion to obscure that there was indeed no thesis. My entire approach was predicated on what I wanted to do, to make, and I justified the project by self-determining both the criteria for measuring the results and the ultimate value of the results. I was completely trapped in the closed circularity of my personal view. So I inverted my thesis: instead of technologically advanced smart walls, I shifted the smartness directly to the atmospheric physical phenomena that we had heretofore attributed to the walls. It was enough of a shift that the hypothesis and method were deemed acceptable by my circumspect advisors. While I am proud of the resulting thesis, it was only a first step toward a lifelong rethinking and reassessment of how our profession develops research questions, brings objectivity to its methods, and, most importantly, frames meaningful contribution. There have been many missteps and retrenchments along the way, and I am grateful to the intrepid doctoral students who hung in there with me as I tested and retreated from different methodological pa","PeriodicalId":36812,"journal":{"name":"Technology Architecture and Design","volume":"14 1","pages":"10 - 13"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"82119517","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-01-02DOI: 10.1080/24751448.2021.1863679
W. Braham
slightly modified version of Yin’s original definition of a case study to highlight architecture’s focus on the built environment: “A case study is an empirical inquiry that investigates a phenomenon or setting within its real-life context, especially when the boundaries between phenomenon and context are not clearly evident.” It is not difficult to see that buildings and cities exemplify that kind of complexly embedded phenomenon, and both Yin and Groat and Wang used Jane Jacobs’ seminal work Death and Life of Great American Cities (1961) to illustrate the use of multiple forms of documentation and data in a specific case study to develop and support a general thesis about the city. The most recent contribution to the literature on case study research in architecture is a somewhat uneven book by Marja Sarvimäki, Case Study Strategies for Architects and Designers (2018), which synthesizes material from Yin, Groat and Wang, and others. The book is organized in three main sections. The first section addresses the history and theory of case studies; the second, types of case studies; and the third, methods for evaluating them. The first two sections follow much of the material in Groat and Wang, though they draw more widely on the case study literature from other fields and expand the treatment of methods for evaluating and establishing the validity of case studies. The unevenness of the book appears in the introduction of a confusing argument for Actor Network Theory (ANT) as a theoretical basis for the treatment of nonWestern cultures in Critical Regionalism, with which the book concludes. Not only is ANT mistakenly attributed to Michel Foucault, but the well-known catalogue of animals Foucault cited in his preface to The Order of Things (1971) is presented as an authentic Chinese account and not as a fictional construction by Jorge Luis Borges from his 1942 essay “The Analytical Language of John Wilkins,” itself meant to reveal the cultural specificity of language and other descriptions of the world. Sarvimäki has clearly immersed herself in the case study literature, so the book serves as a useful introduction and commentary on those methods for design educators. That literature was explicitly developed to distinguish qualitative methods from the powerful quantitative methods used in the sciences. The explanations in the originals are often clearer than Sarvimäki’s, though she translates them into terms familiar to designers. A great deal of the original literature is devoted to categorical distinctions meant to help researchers determine what a particular case study will reveal, which methods are appropriate, and how to judge and present the results. There is much in the work useful for architectural research. The most fundamental category is the general paradigm or system of inquiry within which the researcher operates. Sarvimäki largely adopts the three categories used by Groat and Wang: “(1) positivist/post-positivist, (2) intersubjective, a
略为修改了尹对案例研究的原始定义，以突出建筑对建成环境的关注:“案例研究是一种实证调查，在其现实环境中调查一种现象或设置，特别是当现象和环境之间的界限并不明显时。”不难看出，建筑和城市是这种复杂嵌入现象的例证，尹、格罗特和王都使用了简·雅各布斯(Jane Jacobs)的开创性作品《美国大城市的死与生》(1961)，在一个具体的案例研究中说明了多种形式的文献和数据的使用，以发展和支持一个关于城市的一般性论点。最近对建筑案例研究文献的贡献是Marja Sarvimäki的一本有点不均衡的书，《建筑师和设计师的案例研究策略》(2018)，它综合了Yin, Groat和Wang等人的材料。这本书分为三个主要部分。第一部分介绍了案例研究的历史和理论;第二，案例研究的类型;第三，评价方法。前两部分遵循Groat和Wang的大部分材料，尽管他们更广泛地借鉴了其他领域的案例研究文献，并扩展了评估和建立案例研究有效性的方法。本书的不平衡性体现在前言中，前言中将演员网络理论(ANT)作为批判地域主义中对待非西方文化的理论基础，这一论点令人困惑。ANT不仅被错误地归因于米歇尔·福柯，而且福柯在《事物秩序》(the Order of Things, 1971)的序言中引用的著名的动物目录被视为真实的中国描述，而不是豪尔赫·路易斯·博尔赫斯(Jorge Luis Borges)在他1942年的文章《约翰·威尔金斯的分析语言》(the Analytical Language of John Wilkins)中虚构的构建。博尔赫斯的目的是揭示语言和其他对世界的描述的文化特异性。Sarvimäki显然已经沉浸在案例研究文献中，所以这本书可以作为设计教育者对这些方法的有用介绍和评论。这些文献的发展明确地将定性方法与科学中使用的强大的定量方法区分开来。原文中的解释往往比Sarvimäki的解释更清晰，尽管她把它们翻译成设计师熟悉的术语。大量的原始文献致力于分类区分，旨在帮助研究人员确定一个特定的案例研究将揭示什么，哪种方法是合适的，以及如何判断和呈现结果。这本书中有许多对建筑研究有用的东西。最基本的范畴是研究人员在其中进行研究的一般范式或系统。Sarvimäki在很大程度上采用了Groat和Wang使用的三个类别:“(1)实证主义/后实证主义，(2)主体间性，(3)从客观到主观的连续体中的建构主义范式。”尹称其为现实主义和相对主义的连续统一体，但所有作者都小心翼翼地将这些范式的范围与定量和定性之间的简单对立区分开来。这个连续体通常用来区分软科学和硬科学，但实际上只描述了数据收集方法。在建筑领域，这些方法上的区别经常与我们的分支学科相一致，这些分支学科的研究集中在技术、设计或历史和理论上，但是对它们的研究明确地揭示了这种惯例的许多例外。在每个研究范式或系统中，仍然可以选择使用的案例研究类型和调查特定研究问题的方法。文献中描述的两种经典类型是嵌入式和整体性，术语“嵌入式”用于描述关注“现象或背景”与其上下文之间相互作用的一般研究类别，使用各种方法-定量和/或定性-而术语“整体性”借鉴了解释学和现象学的哲学方法，“在整体或位置上理解现象，其中整体大于部分的总和”(61)。在任何一种情况下，案例研究的结构都受到其目的的限制——它是解释性的、描述性的还是探索性的。案例研究的最后一步是评估、解释和展示:如何为建筑师和设计师使用案例研究策略
{"title":"On: Case Study Strategies for Architects and Designers","authors":"W. Braham","doi":"10.1080/24751448.2021.1863679","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/24751448.2021.1863679","url":null,"abstract":"slightly modified version of Yin’s original definition of a case study to highlight architecture’s focus on the built environment: “A case study is an empirical inquiry that investigates a phenomenon or setting within its real-life context, especially when the boundaries between phenomenon and context are not clearly evident.” It is not difficult to see that buildings and cities exemplify that kind of complexly embedded phenomenon, and both Yin and Groat and Wang used Jane Jacobs’ seminal work Death and Life of Great American Cities (1961) to illustrate the use of multiple forms of documentation and data in a specific case study to develop and support a general thesis about the city. The most recent contribution to the literature on case study research in architecture is a somewhat uneven book by Marja Sarvimäki, Case Study Strategies for Architects and Designers (2018), which synthesizes material from Yin, Groat and Wang, and others. The book is organized in three main sections. The first section addresses the history and theory of case studies; the second, types of case studies; and the third, methods for evaluating them. The first two sections follow much of the material in Groat and Wang, though they draw more widely on the case study literature from other fields and expand the treatment of methods for evaluating and establishing the validity of case studies. The unevenness of the book appears in the introduction of a confusing argument for Actor Network Theory (ANT) as a theoretical basis for the treatment of nonWestern cultures in Critical Regionalism, with which the book concludes. Not only is ANT mistakenly attributed to Michel Foucault, but the well-known catalogue of animals Foucault cited in his preface to The Order of Things (1971) is presented as an authentic Chinese account and not as a fictional construction by Jorge Luis Borges from his 1942 essay “The Analytical Language of John Wilkins,” itself meant to reveal the cultural specificity of language and other descriptions of the world. Sarvimäki has clearly immersed herself in the case study literature, so the book serves as a useful introduction and commentary on those methods for design educators. That literature was explicitly developed to distinguish qualitative methods from the powerful quantitative methods used in the sciences. The explanations in the originals are often clearer than Sarvimäki’s, though she translates them into terms familiar to designers. A great deal of the original literature is devoted to categorical distinctions meant to help researchers determine what a particular case study will reveal, which methods are appropriate, and how to judge and present the results. There is much in the work useful for architectural research. The most fundamental category is the general paradigm or system of inquiry within which the researcher operates. Sarvimäki largely adopts the three categories used by Groat and Wang: “(1) positivist/post-positivist, (2) intersubjective, a","PeriodicalId":36812,"journal":{"name":"Technology Architecture and Design","volume":"5 2","pages":"111 - 112"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"72579265","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：