Use of Grammar for Shape Exploration with Novice Students | Experiment 1: against the first impressions

Editor's Notes

• #5: Mohamed’s theory based on looking at existing curriculaComplexity: obserrvation from other schoolsTheme & target thinking: MSI’s theory
• #6: Point 2: decomposition of the problem (geometric elements)
• #7: Later , It will provide them with the proper foundation to gradually implement logic and rational thinking without scarifying Creativity
• #8: This formula has been used as a comprehensive shape grammar exercise in design computation coursesImportant: the proposed model will be loosely based on this process , a less ambitious analytical grammar will depend only on the student’s extraction of the basic compositional elements ( vocabulary , rules or both) and their experimentation with the composition according to these main elementsPaper covers more
• #9: The experiment theme is inspired by the same concept from Stiny’s book “ shape :talking about seeing and doing” 2006Beginning students are more absorbent to new knowledge and experiences in their early design experimentations . Once they have seen something done in a certain way or done it themselves , this reinforces the idea in their fresh minds and may block other alternative . Their eyes should be trained from their first moment on flexibility where there is no correct answer and all possibilities are open . And this is why the early stage workshop is based on ambiguity
• #10: The grammars’ formalism was not introduced separately in the introductory lecture nor was any historical background of the theory, the emphasis was on the processes of visual reasoning, extraction and application while the conceptual grammar framework was tacitly presented through illustrated examples.
• #11: The workshop took place after a couple of months from the beginning of the early stage and was conducted on two groups of students Strath: after 2 months, at beginning of Room with a View (Nov 2009), about 15 groupsAlex: Feb 2010, about 20 groupsStrath: Intro lecture (20 minutes) + 1+ hrs workshop (teams) + 15 minutes presentations + 5 minutes feedbackAlex: intro lecture (20 minutes) + 2+ hrs workshop (teams), no experience model making, presentation 1+ hrs
• #12: The lecture began with a quick lecture about shapes , and how to perceive the components of a composition in 2D or 3D1 element of design (square)
• #13: Afterward students were challenged with indirect and more complex ways of conceiving shapes as possible projections of multi-dimensional elements Figure 2 An example on the presentation of a shape as possible projections of multi-dimensional elements
• #14: They were confronted with another fact of ambiguity that lines in a single shape can fuse or divide in endless ways, meaning that shapes could be regarded as consisting of elements in different relations and limitless length .This certainly opened their imagination for more possibilities and different understandings of the same shape and its basic elements. Figure 3 An example on Ambiguity that shows how to perceive the basic elements of one shape in different way
• #15: a comprehensive example was illustrated in which a 2D shape/design was seen in different 2D and 3D waysFigure 4 Part of the tutorial’s example that shows the process of vocabulary extraction and design modification and extension
• #16: At this point, students began to be more attentive about what they are seeing; they became aware that something different lies behind every simple layout of a shape. They were ready for surprises and some were eager to see.Figure 4 Part of the tutorial’s example that shows the process of vocabulary extraction and design modification and extension
• #17: They were then grouped in groups of fives; each group was given one of the 2D shapesThey were then asked to draw at least 4 different readings for the shape and its basic elements with at least one 3D interpretation of which. To extend and modify the existing design they have to extract its basic elements and work with basic geometric operations to create their new designs.
• #18: most of the group B’s students desired to solve the exercise in a very direct way from the moment it was given; they had the tendency to move directly to finished solutions giving less time for considering different patterns of seeing the shape. They chose the clear and shortest way thus spent more time experiencing design and composition with these elements. This unplanned opportunity of model making and practicing design was what they were waiting for since their first day; they tried therefore to impress their tutors with their-yet limited - design abilities Not much time spent on seeing; they used the tutorial example mostlyAlex
• #19: most of the group B’s students desired to solve the exercise in a very direct way from the moment it was given; they had the tendency to move directly to finished solutions giving less time for considering different patterns of seeing the shape. They chose the clear and shortest way thus spent more time experiencing design and composition with these elements. This unplanned opportunity of model making and practicing design was what they were waiting for since their first day; they tried therefore to impress their tutors with their-yet limited - design abilities Alex
• #20: most of the group B’s students desired to solve the exercise in a very direct way from the moment it was given; they had the tendency to move directly to finished solutions giving less time for considering different patterns of seeing the shape. They chose the clear and shortest way thus spent more time experiencing design and composition with these elements. This unplanned opportunity of model making and practicing design was what they were waiting for since their first day; they tried therefore to impress their tutors with their-yet limited - design abilities Alex
• #21: most of the group B’s students desired to solve the exercise in a very direct way from the moment it was given; they had the tendency to move directly to finished solutions giving less time for considering different patterns of seeing the shape. They chose the clear and shortest way thus spent more time experiencing design and composition with these elements. This unplanned opportunity of model making and practicing design was what they were waiting for since their first day; they tried therefore to impress their tutors with their-yet limited - design abilities Alex
• #22: On the other hand, students of Group A were more stress-free dealing with shapes as this was not their first design experience. They spent more time seeing than doing, trying to find answers for what they see, giving the imaginative process much more time. There final designs were much more interesting yet less in numbers than the other group’s ones.The figure shows innovation in both stages of basic elements recognition and DesignStrath
• #23: Even though Group B concentrated on Making, their perception of the design elements and visual reasoning process was not to be overlooked. They followed even the fine detailed of the given tutorial example, considering its shape interpretations options as models to mimic, thus extracting the design elements following the same typology .This behavior is surely affected by their pre-university educational background where knowledge was often compartmentalized and memorization and recall were the primary aim. Alex
• #24: Unlike Group B, Group A Students were far more creative in their own explorations, though some of them also depended on the tutorial’s example they rarely developed alternatives or propose elements that responds to it .They worked with lesser alternatives but also modified, changed perception several times and enjoyed proposing different ways of seeing. It is within a project based studio where they can develop analytical skill of understanding the composition and a generative one of composing, and this could not be achieved unless an early experience of seeing and making is gained.Strath
• #25: After the workshop, each group was asked to present their final ideas. Although lots of them were not aware about their own designs’ quality or even understood the composition at the beginning, they were able at the final presentation to sum up and describe their concepts in the matter of personal perception, the design process or according to their knowledge of design principles. Their attention was also drawn to the interesting fact that there were no two identical designs presented, even though they all began from the same shape. These points were later stressed in the feedback session, highlighting the process in which the final design was generated; a process of analysis, questioning, exploration and evaluation that occurred during phases of design developments not just in an inspirational moment of creativity as they thought.
• #26: Unlike Group B, Group A Students were far more creative in their own explorations, though some of them also depended on the tutorial’s example they rarely developed alternatives or propose elements that responds to it .They worked with lesser alternatives but also modified, changed perception several times and enjoyed proposing different ways of seeing. It is within a project based studio where they can develop analytical skill of understanding the composition and a generative one of composing, and this could not be achieved unless an early experience of seeing and making is gained.
• #27: Unlike Group B, Group A Students were far more creative in their own explorations, though some of them also depended on the tutorial’s example they rarely developed alternatives or propose elements that responds to it .They worked with lesser alternatives but also modified, changed perception several times and enjoyed proposing different ways of seeing. It is within a project based studio where they can develop analytical skill of understanding the composition and a generative one of composing, and this could not be achieved unless an early experience of seeing and making is gained.
• #28: considering the available circumstances, another feedback was given for the Group A students reflecting the workshop’s outcomes and skills on their ongoing project “A room with a View”. Their progress was later tested and monitored throughout the project phases and again at the final presentation. The evaluation of their progress came up with satisfactory results, showing that students were more flexible in developing further alternatives for every stage and most of all they tend to analytically consider the problem in different ways, in most of which, the ambiguity of the “View frame” in the previously mentioned project was the motivator for the design layout
• #29: considering the available circumstances, another feedback was given for the Group A students reflecting the workshop’s outcomes and skills on their ongoing project “A room with a View”. Their progress was later tested and monitored throughout the project phases and again at the final presentation. The evaluation of their progress came up with satisfactory results, showing that students were more flexible in developing further alternatives for every stage and most of all they tend to analytically consider the problem in different ways, in most of which, the ambiguity of the “View frame” in the previously mentioned project was the motivator for the design layout
• #30: considering the available circumstances, another feedback was given for the Group A students reflecting the workshop’s outcomes and skills on their ongoing project “A room with a View”. Their progress was later tested and monitored throughout the project phases and again at the final presentation. The evaluation of their progress came up with satisfactory results, showing that students were more flexible in developing further alternatives for every stage and most of all they tend to analytically consider the problem in different ways, in most of which, the ambiguity of the “View frame” in the previously mentioned project was the motivator for the design layout
• #31: considering the available circumstances, another feedback was given for the Group A students reflecting the workshop’s outcomes and skills on their ongoing project “A room with a View”. Their progress was later tested and monitored throughout the project phases and again at the final presentation. The evaluation of their progress came up with satisfactory results, showing that students were more flexible in developing further alternatives for every stage and most of all they tend to analytically consider the problem in different ways, in most of which, the ambiguity of the “View frame” in the previously mentioned project was the motivator for the design layout
• #32: considering the available circumstances, another feedback was given for the Group A students reflecting the workshop’s outcomes and skills on their ongoing project “A room with a View”. Their progress was later tested and monitored throughout the project phases and again at the final presentation. The evaluation of their progress came up with satisfactory results, showing that students were more flexible in developing further alternatives for every stage and most of all they tend to analytically consider the problem in different ways, in most of which, the ambiguity of the “View frame” in the previously mentioned project was the motivator for the design layout
• #33: considering the available circumstances, another feedback was given for the Group A students reflecting the workshop’s outcomes and skills on their ongoing project “A room with a View”. Their progress was later tested and monitored throughout the project phases and again at the final presentation. The evaluation of their progress came up with satisfactory results, showing that students were more flexible in developing further alternatives for every stage and most of all they tend to analytically consider the problem in different ways, in most of which, the ambiguity of the “View frame” in the previously mentioned project was the motivator for the design layout
• #34: Strath model from Room With a View
• #35: Strath: Feb (problems), home assignment, redone w/8 students (May) 2 days (1-1/2 hrs each day)Some application in Edinburgh project2 rules given: subdivision horizontal & vertical
• #36: February: Alex (2 days)Strathclyde: 3rd workshop: 2nd year students (D. Macritchie), 1st year projects, shape grammars, analyse previous designs to find commonality, generating statements & preferences, pass his vocabulary to friend w/a given design brief, change vocabulary to their own preferencesPlanned for October, a small group, 1 day workshopTo Evaluate
• #37: February: Alex (2 days)Strathclyde: 3rd workshop: 2nd year students (D. Macritchie), 1st year projects, shape grammars, analyse previous designs to find commonality, generating statements & preferences, pass his vocabulary to friend w/a given design brief, change vocabulary to their own preferencesPlanned for October, a small group, 1 day workshopTo EvaluateNo feedback