Our position paper on education
This paper introduces a methodological framework to integrate circularity in architectural curricula and the building blocks that led to its conceptualization. The first block (Part A) examines how complexity has affected learning and architectural education, in particular. The paper departs from the notion that knowledge produces further uncertainty in conditions of critical complexity. Moreover, the highest levels of complexity require the least scientific of approaches. It then examines the main challenges resulting from this shift: one is that learning identifies with individuals’ ability to make informed decisions and is now conceptualized as actionable knowledge. Second to that, education should opt for a pedagogy that can support learning through decision making. Architectural education, in particular, should be able to foster a new type of professionalism, where individuals assume accountability for their design decisions that extends beyond the aesthetic realm. But what can drive curricula to become more responsive to the current environmental, social, and political realities? The second block (Part B) looks into the issue of circularity. It examines its relevance to architectural education for its potential to function both as an operational scheme as well as a value system. Furthermore, being a concept in the making, circularity can benefit from academic research but can also support a pedagogy that focuses on helping students learn how to learn. The proposed methodological framework (Part C) builds on these two blocks and on the faculty’s research on circularity to develop a scheme of what constitutes content for teaching circularity, how the goals for integrating it into the curricula can be formulated, and what type of pedagogy is suited to support the integration.
Ioannou, O., Geldermans, B., Klein, T. & Wandl A. (2022). Planning for Change: A Methodological Framework for Integrating Circularity at TU Delft’s Faculty of Architecture and the Built Environment’s curricula. In Serbian Journal of Architecture 12(3), 234-269. DOI: 10.5937/saj2003234I