Enhancing student’s creativity in architectural design by learning from the design cognitive process of a prominent architect
List of Authors
  • Abdul Rahman Khamaruzaman , Ahmad Faiz Hassan Naziri , Ismail Samsuddin , Salahuddin Abdul Hakeem Abas

Keyword
  • Cognitive process, creativity, education, designing, experience

Abstract
  • Architecture is a professional discipline that integrates art and science to build attractive, practical and safe structures for human activities. In architecture, design is a core subject where students are taught the main skills to produce drawings and models of building design. Furthermore, architectural design involves a cognitive process that generates higher level of creativity in producing noble design solution. Such process is also fundamental to students who are learning architecture in the higher education. It helps student to develop their level of creativity and competency in design. This intellectual capability is an important aspect for architectural students to practice as professional architect when they graduated. Malaysia has many talented and internationally well-known professional architects. Their works represent high level of creativity that can be beneficial sources of practical knowledge to the students. Unfortunately, these respectable architects’ creative cognitive processes are not properly documented for references to others within the architectural community. Therefore, this paper aims at exploring and identifying the cognitive process characteristics of a local prominent, visionary architect, Dato’ Dr Ken Yeang who is well known for his creative, masterpiece architectural works. A semi-structured interview was conducted to gather insights on his cognitive process while designing to produce creative solution for complex architectural problems. The study found that this professional architect has a distinct formulation of knowledge, skills, attributes and principles that he utilises while designing and looking for creative solutions. This dynamic, integrated process involves imagination (intrinsic) and modelling(extrinsic) capabilities that produce renowned local architectural buildings. Such significant cognitive attributes will be useful guides to improve creativity in design among the young architectural students.

Reference
  • 1. Billett, S. (2013). Learning through practice: beyond informal and towards a framework for learning through practice. UNESCO-UNEVOC. Revisiting Global Trends in TVET, 123–163.
    2. Crinson, M., & Lubbock, J. (1994). Architecture-Art or Profession? 300 Years of Architectural Education. Manchester University Press.
    3. Cross, N. (1990). The nature and nurture of design ability. Design Studies, 11(3), 127–140. https://doi.org/10.1016/0142-694X(90)90002-T
    4. Farghaly, Y. A. (2006). Student’s creativity between traditional and digital methods in design Studio. In Changing Trends in architectural design education (pp. 333–343). Csaar.
    5. Hoffman, R. R. (1998). How Can Expertise be Defined? Implications of Research from Cognitive Psychology. In Exploring Expertise (pp. 81–100). Palgrave Macmillan.
    6. Krch, D. (2011). Cognitive Processing. In Encyclopedia of Clinical Neuropsychology (pp. 627–627). Springer New York. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-79948-3_1443
    7. Lackney, J. (1999). A history of the studio-based learning model. Retrieved March.
    8. Lawson, B. (1993). Parallel Lines of Thought. LANG DES, 321–331.
    9. Lawson, B. (2006). How Designers Think: he design process demystified (4th ed.). Routledge.
    10. Lawson, B. (2012). What Designers Know. Routledge.
    11. Lin, Z. (2007). Urban structure for the expanding metropolis: Kenzo Tange’s 1960 plan for Tokyo. Journal of Architectural and Planning Research, 24(2), 109–124.
    12. Maranzano, J. F., Rozsypal, S. A., Zimmerman, G. H., Warnken, G. W., Wirth, P. E., & Weiss, D. M. (2005). Architecture Reviews: Practice and Experience. IEEE Software, 22(2), 34–43. https://doi.org/10.1109/MS.2005.28
    13. Merriam-Webster. (2020). Dictionary by Merriam-Webster. Merriam-Webster.
    14. Nassaji, H. (2020). Good qualitative research. Language Teaching Research, 24(4), 427–431. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168820941288
    15. Philip N, J.-L. (1988). Freedom and constraint in creativity. In The Nature of Creativity: Contemporary Psychological Perspectives (pp. 1–202). Cambridge University Press.
    16. Pressman, A. (2018). Design Thinking:Design Thinking: A Guide To Creative Problem Solving For Everyone. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315561936
    17. Runco, M. A., & Acar, S. (2012). Divergent Thinking as an Indicator of Creative Potential. Creativity Research Journal, 24(1), 66–75. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400419.2012.652929
    18. Sarkar, P., & Chakrabarti, A. (2011). Assessing design creativity. Design Studies, 32(4), 348–383. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2011.01.002
    19. Schön, D. A. (1992). Designing as reflective conversation with the materials of a design situation. Knowledge-Based Systems, 5(1), 3–14. https://doi.org/10.1016/0950-7051(92)90020-G
    20. Schwartz, M. (2012). Best practices in experiential learning. Learning and teaching office. Ryerson University, 1–18.
    21. Shendurnikar, S. (2019). KNOW YOUR ARCHITECTS: Understanding the design philosophy of Santiago Calatrava.
    22. The Edge. (2011). Ken Yeang is Merdeka Award recipient. Merdeka Award. https://www.merdekaaward.my/news-events/news/ken-yeang-is-merdeka-award-recipient.
    23. Toker, F. (2007). Fallingwater Rising: Frank Lloyd Wright, E. J. Kaufmann, and America’s Most Extraordinary House. Knopf Doubleday Publishing Group, 2007.
    24. Tovey, M. (1984). Designing with both halves of the brain. Design Studies, 5(4), 219–228. https://doi.org/10.1016/0142-694X(84)90057-7
    25. Wang, Y., & Ruhe, G. (2007). The Cognitive Process of Decision Making. International Journal of Cognitive Informatics and Natural Intelligence, 1(2), 73–85. https://doi.org/10.4018/jcini.2007040105
    26. Wolf, R. (2014). Defining the concept of creativity. University of Twente Student Thesis, 1–60.
    27. Xue, C. Q. L., & Xiao, J. (2014). Japanese modernity deviated: Its importation and legacy in the Southeast Asian architecture since the 1970s. Habitat International, 44, 227–236. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.habitatint.2014.06.011
    28. Zainal, R., & Hashim, F. (2019). Initiation Economic Information for Decision. International Journal of Supply Chain Management, 8(6), 939–943.
    29. Zbašnik-Senegačnik, M., & Kuzman, M. K. (2014). Interpretations of Organic Architecture. Postor, 22(2), 291–301.