Study aim. In this paper I will argue and discuss a teaching process of fundamental design. When discussing initial instruction of basic tools for design thinking, I find it most appropriate to begin with a method that belongs to the world of art [1]. Method. In my experience, when studies are launched with planning-oriented thinking as their basis, it is far more difficult to subsequently adopt conceptual thinking. By contrast, when storytelling, poetics, and conceptualizations are introduced at the outset as the foundation of design work, the result is a stable infrastructure for subsequent development of planning-oriented thinking. These observations encouraged me to develop a joint freshman program for all design departments when I served as Dean of the Faculty of Design at the Holon Institute of Technology. Until then, departments conducted separate programs that began emphasizing their particular respective professional principles as early as the first year of each program. By contrast, the joint first-year program established students’ common foundation of theoretical conceptual thinking and initial design language tools of expression concerning line, composition, and form.
| Published in | Science Journal of Education (Volume 6, Issue 2) |
| DOI | 10.11648/j.sjedu.20180602.14 |
| Page(s) | 71-75 |
| Creative Commons |
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, provided the original work is properly cited. |
| Copyright |
Copyright © The Author(s), 2018. Published by Science Publishing Group |
2D, Metaphor, Material, 3D, Composition, Imagery, Line
| [1] | D. Pink, A whole new mind, Riverhead Books, 2005. |
| [2] | V. Papanek, The Green Imperative, Thames & Hudson, London, 1995. |
| [3] | E. Umberto, Architecture Semiotic Function and Sign, Indiana University Press, 1976. |
| [4] | G. Duvshani, Foundation Design Studio, Wasmuth, Berlin, 2010. |
| [5] | V. Papanek, Design for the Real World, Pantheon Books, New York, 1971. |
| [6] | G. Duvshani, Foundation Design Studio, Wasmuth, Berlin, 2010. |
| [7] | E. Kieran, Learning in Depth, University of Chicago Press, 2005. |
| [8] | E. Umberto, Architecture Semiotic Function and Sign, Indiana University Press, 1976. |
| [9] | S. Kracauer, The Hotel Lobby, Mass Ornament, Cambridge, Harvard Press, 1995. |
| [10] | G. Duvshani, Foundation Design Studio, Wasmuth, Berlin, 2010. |
APA Style
Gilead Duvshani. (2018). A New Innovative Method of Teaching Foundation Design. Science Journal of Education, 6(2), 71-75. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.sjedu.20180602.14
ACS Style
Gilead Duvshani. A New Innovative Method of Teaching Foundation Design. Sci. J. Educ. 2018, 6(2), 71-75. doi: 10.11648/j.sjedu.20180602.14
AMA Style
Gilead Duvshani. A New Innovative Method of Teaching Foundation Design. Sci J Educ. 2018;6(2):71-75. doi: 10.11648/j.sjedu.20180602.14
Share This Article
Twitter
Linked In
Facebook
Copy
Download@article{10.11648/j.sjedu.20180602.14,
author = {Gilead Duvshani},
title = {A New Innovative Method of Teaching Foundation Design},
journal = {Science Journal of Education},
volume = {6},
number = {2},
pages = {71-75},
doi = {10.11648/j.sjedu.20180602.14},
url = {https://doi.org/10.11648/j.sjedu.20180602.14},
eprint = {https://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.sjedu.20180602.14},
abstract = {Study aim. In this paper I will argue and discuss a teaching process of fundamental design. When discussing initial instruction of basic tools for design thinking, I find it most appropriate to begin with a method that belongs to the world of art [1]. Method. In my experience, when studies are launched with planning-oriented thinking as their basis, it is far more difficult to subsequently adopt conceptual thinking. By contrast, when storytelling, poetics, and conceptualizations are introduced at the outset as the foundation of design work, the result is a stable infrastructure for subsequent development of planning-oriented thinking. These observations encouraged me to develop a joint freshman program for all design departments when I served as Dean of the Faculty of Design at the Holon Institute of Technology. Until then, departments conducted separate programs that began emphasizing their particular respective professional principles as early as the first year of each program. By contrast, the joint first-year program established students’ common foundation of theoretical conceptual thinking and initial design language tools of expression concerning line, composition, and form.},
year = {2018}
}
TY - JOUR T1 - A New Innovative Method of Teaching Foundation Design AU - Gilead Duvshani Y1 - 2018/05/23 PY - 2018 N1 - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.sjedu.20180602.14 DO - 10.11648/j.sjedu.20180602.14 T2 - Science Journal of Education JF - Science Journal of Education JO - Science Journal of Education SP - 71 EP - 75 PB - Science Publishing Group SN - 2329-0897 UR - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.sjedu.20180602.14 AB - Study aim. In this paper I will argue and discuss a teaching process of fundamental design. When discussing initial instruction of basic tools for design thinking, I find it most appropriate to begin with a method that belongs to the world of art [1]. Method. In my experience, when studies are launched with planning-oriented thinking as their basis, it is far more difficult to subsequently adopt conceptual thinking. By contrast, when storytelling, poetics, and conceptualizations are introduced at the outset as the foundation of design work, the result is a stable infrastructure for subsequent development of planning-oriented thinking. These observations encouraged me to develop a joint freshman program for all design departments when I served as Dean of the Faculty of Design at the Holon Institute of Technology. Until then, departments conducted separate programs that began emphasizing their particular respective professional principles as early as the first year of each program. By contrast, the joint first-year program established students’ common foundation of theoretical conceptual thinking and initial design language tools of expression concerning line, composition, and form. VL - 6 IS - 2 ER -
Email: