论高等建筑教育与创造性人才培养

高等建筑教育是以培养具有创造精神和创造能力的高级建筑人才的专业教育,显然,创造性人才的培养是贯穿整个教育教学过程始终的价值目标之一。目前,在高等建筑教育的宏观和微观层面仍然存在诸多矛盾和问题,创造性人才培养尚存在理论和实践性缺失。     

笔下的生命——用图画讲故事,培养学生创造力

动漫教育提倡培养学生的创造性,动漫的创造性是一种综合素质,需要多方面的积累,"用图画讲故事"的训练,可以让学生增加知识积累,提高各方面的素质,养成创作习惯,增强创造力。     

设计约束条件与创造性思维的强化训练

对学生创造性思维能力的培养，是建筑教育极为关键的任务之一，必须找到具有方法论意义上的手段，本文论证了设计约束条件所具备的这种性能，据此提出了在教学中，将单纯约束强化训练与多约束综合训练结合起来的设想，形成约束递增的训练模块，以此强化创造性思维的训练。     

探究约束与创造在建筑设计中的应用

创造性是衡量一个建筑设计师的主要标准，一部分人认为建筑设计师的创造性是不受外界环境所约束的，另一部分人认为建筑设计师的创造性会受到各种约束的阻碍。在实际的建筑设计中，部分建筑设计师往往会因为不能克服约束而让创造性受到约束，只有突破种种约束才能够设计出美好的建筑作品。因此本文主要研究与探讨了在建筑设计中约束与创造的应用。     

创造性思维的培养

1 培养学生创造性思维 创造性思维培养是近几年我国建筑教育中一个倍受关注的问题。何谓“创造性思维”?如果空泛地就概念论概念,也许不大容易说清楚,但如何把它与建筑设计实践活动联系起来,就能避开广泛的概念讨论而抓住问题的实质。 建筑设计(建筑创作),贵在创新。创新是任何优秀建筑作品必须具备的。我们注重对在校学生的创造性思维培     

基于创客理念培养创造性思维

创客教育是一种秉承"开放创新、探究体验"教育理念的新型教育模式。基于创客理念进行教学,能够有效培养学生的创造性思维。绘本创作能够影响学生的人文品格;创意实践能够增强学生学习的主观能动性;创新漫画能够有效激发学生的创造欲望,进而全面提升学生的创造性思维。     

从再现到创造——试论设计素描教学中创造性思维的培养

本文通过总结以往素描教学对创造性思维培养的不足，提出了“从再现到表现到创造”这一设计素描教学的新思路，并通过教学实例讨论了在本课程中培养创造性思维的问题，提出了具体的教学方法     

关于学生创造性学习能力培养的探讨

创造性教育是高职院校实施全面素质的核心教育之一。本文通过对教与学方法的探讨，论述了如何培养加强学生创造性学习能力培养的改革思路。     

建筑设计教学的创造性思维培养体系

通过建筑创造性思维特质和培养方法、培养过程的研究，旨在探索建筑设计教学中创造性思维开发和训练的科学化体系，以期全面培养建筑人才的综合创造能力。     

建筑艺术创造中的灵感与灵感思维

建筑艺术创造在建筑艺术领域内占据举足轻重的地位,建筑艺术创造的实现关键在于建筑师的艺术创造力。这种创造力是建筑师在创造活动中所表现出来的创造性思维能力和创造性技能。直接决定创造力高下的是创造性思维能力。它可概括为三种能力:建筑师在创作过程中进一     

建筑草图的思维原理

记忆,联想和想象,作为创造性思维的最基本的过程,对于建筑草图创作的产生起着决定性作用.剖析了人脑创造性思维的产生过程,讨论草图作为记忆,联想和想象的辅助工具是如何帮助这三个部分更好地完成其使命,从而达到草图创新的飞跃.     

建筑设计教学的创造教育理论与实践

就建筑设计数学中如何倡导创造教育阐述了相关理论，并从实践中提出若干开发学生创造力，培养创造型人才的方法。     

现代建筑设计中的感性思想与理性思维

建筑设计中的感性思想与理性思维是一对互相矛盾而又互相依托的统一体。本文以建筑设计中的感性思想与理性思维的分析与实例举证,探讨了优秀的建筑师在创作建筑作品过程中,怎样正确处理感性体验与理性思想的辩证关系。     

建筑设计基础教学空间观的培养

在建筑院校建筑教育深刻变革的今天,苏州科技大学也进行着较为深入的教学改革和研究。本文提出了建筑设计基础教学中空间观培养的重要性,并以空间认知、空间想象和空间创造能力的培养为切入点,探讨了教学体系中相对应的调整和革新。     

试论建筑学人才素质型教育观念的内涵

素质教育是面向21世纪建筑教育改革的方向。本文通过对建筑学人才素质及素质型教育观念的分析，着重研讨建筑人才素质型教育的四个构成部分。     

创意与城市

文章从创意城市的基本含义入手,着重分析在当前城市发展战略中文化创意越来越处于核心地位的原因,以及文化创意与城市空间存在着的一种互动关系,进而解释创意城市建设中的重要环节。     

Reflections on architectural design education: The return of rationalism in the studio

The design studio environment has remained the same throughout the past century. As the Studio Culture Task Force of the American Institute of Architecture Students (AIAS) (Koch et al., 2006) noted, the ongoing changes in architecture education are not aligned with today's fastchanging world, especially in the context of architectural practice. The AIAS analyzed the design studio problem and expressed doubts on the effectiveness of current studio practices in providing adequate design-thinking education. The report indicates that studio culture values project appearance instead of the actual design process. In recent years, similar problems have been the topic of debates in Khartoum. Criticisms are mostly centered on the observation that students show no interest in the design process and tend to focus on form making. As a result, efforts to teach design methods and to restore the balance between creativity and rationality in the design process have failed. The reason is related to the difficulties associated with the implicit nature of conventional design methods. These difficulties, which are common in architecture schools, include the lack of a clearly defined design methodology and the misunderstood role of the systematic approach to design in the studio. Nevertheless, signs of change are gradually emerging, as demonstrated by the global call for change in the studio environment. This call for change indicates a general agreement on the need for the reorientation of architectural design education toward an engaging policy that considers the social responsibility of architects. This study proposes that the route for change is through the return of rationalism in the studio. Since the 1960 s, many writers have recognized the importance of balancing rationality and creativity, which are mutually interdependent, in the design process. From this perspective, the research question is drawn: how can we bridge the gap between the rational and the creative design activities in the design process? A theory that conceptualizes the idea of knowledge interdependence does not exist. The available design theories, such as rational problem solving and reflective-in-action theory, deal with different aspects of design activity. Both theories fail to describe the integration of the rational and the creative aspects of the design process. Therefore, we propose the integration of the two theories into a new theory called the integrated design paradigm. The proposed theory serves as a theoretical base upon which the interdependence of the rational and the creative phases of the design process can be conceptualized. We aim to bridge the gap between the two design phases by considering research knowledge interdependency as a unifying activity. The first phase is a systematic method involving research, the use of positive theory, and the production of basic principles. The creative practice phase also involves research and focuses on understanding the rational knowledge developed in the systematic phase, including the basic principles and design strategy, as well as on the application of these concepts to the design problem. The Department of Architecture and Urban Planning at the Ethiopian Institute of Technology EiT of Mekelle University (MU) is currently developing a research program in which the development of and reflection on design methods is a key research area. Within this framework, the present study is intends to be an introductory effort to guide future empirical research. The present study aims to describe the design process of architects, and introduces theoretical and technical frameworks. The integrated design paradigm as a system of inquiry within the spatial relationship strategy is framed.     

游走在城市设计与建筑设计之间——阿里巴巴深圳大厦建筑设计概念方案

城市设计为建筑提供了城市维度的背景框架和由外向内的约束条件。该文通过阿里巴巴深圳大厦设计项目来探讨建筑师如何在城市设计的限制之下变限制为建筑创作的诱导,进而探讨了建筑师在当今城市设计控制下的建筑创作思路,设计出既可以符合城市设计要求,又富有创作精神且有个性的建筑作品。