Chapter 1

THE PROBLEM AND REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE

Introduction
Architectural education is concerned with providing the students with
comprehensive knowledge, skill and competence in architecture and their total
growth and development within the framework of democratic ideals and values; and
the preservation, conservation, and promotion of the Filipino Architecture heritage
within the global context, thus making the architecture curriculum relevant to the
present needs and latest international trends - CHED MEMORANDUM ORDER
(Series of 2006. NO. 61. Section 1).
According to some study taken in Australia, Understanding Architectural
Education in Australasia (2008) almost half of the architecture curriculum in a typical
school dedicated to design. It is not surprising that both staff and students tend to
identify design as the most important skill for an architect. However, almost all of the
research that has been undertaken into the profession and its operations points to a
misalignment between the focus on design in architectural education, and the focus
on construction and management in architectural practice. The response of
educational researchers is that design is a skill that has to be developed early in an
architects career (because it takes time to mature) and it is ideally taught in a
university environment. While there is evidence that this is true, the dominance of
design within schools can also cause problems.
As it was stated in one article from the National Commission in Culture and
arts entitled In focus: Benchmarking Philippine architecture (2015), both product
and profession faces the danger of deterioration of quality and depth wrought by lack
of intellectual discourse related to pedagogy and practice. Having this issue most

especially in the Philippines are quite challenging more especially in learning more
ideas in designing. Many students nowadays seem to have less idea of what are
they are studying. Graduates are not fully qualified to their course. Students training
must given emphasis before graduation. Learning all principles and be able to apply
these can really help the students in their chosen field.
This scenario enables the students to obtain a deeper understanding of
architectural theory and practice through the application of their architectural
knowledge in real life projects. By obtaining work in architectural offices, the
students experience the economic realities of a building project and through this
work experience the students are given the opportunity to work collaboratively; to
become effective communicators; and to be participants in the analytical and
creative analysis of a building project. Learners may engage in a variety of
metacognitive processes to monitor and control their learningassessing the task at
hand, evaluating their own strengths and weaknesses, planning their approach,
applying and monitoring various strategies, and reflecting on the degree to which
their current approach is working. Unfortunately, students tend not to engage in
these processes naturally. When students develop the skills to engage these
processes, they gain intellectual habits that not only improve their performance but
also their effectiveness as learners.
Significance of the Study
With the related data gathered above, the researchers tends to identify the
importance of the two methods most especially in balancing Design Practice and
principles of Architecture in the University of Mindanao. This study may engage to
other alternative ways and solution to emphasize the learnings and strategic ways of

analyzing its concept to produce competitive students in the field of architecture and
academics.
Review of Related Literature
Presented in this section are the analysis of the research that support the
study Comparative analysis between design practice and principles to provide
ample information on the variables under the effectivity of the two. Included in this
chapter is the overview of a topic to be discussed and the studies conducted in the
University of Mindanao, Matina Campus Davao City.
Architecture Education
According to Aknesil (2001), the ancient Roman practices of architectural
education have parallels to both the Egyptian and Greek traditions. Vitruvius (1914),
the author of the most extensive architectural treatise surviving from that era, offers
a list of knowledge that an architect should possess, but he is less clear on how that
knowledge should be developed.
According to some analysis, as architects, the concept of balancing between
two masters; the search for beauty, and the reality of construction; is not a new one.
Vitruvius explained the importance of maintaining equal aspects of both in saying,
Architects who have aimed at acquiring manual skill without scholarship have never
been able to reach a position of authority to correspond to their pains, while those
who relied only upon theories and scholarship were obviously hunting the shadow,
not the substance. Too much practical knowledge and one could never hope to rise
above the status of a laborer; too much theory and nothing solid would be built.
Paper Architecture is a recent term for the latter case, in which buildings are
developed in drawings but are never built. This type of theoretical focus has been a
part of the profession since Etienne-Louis Boulee and Piranesi, and continues in

todays architectural discourse in the work of Zaha Hadid or Daniel Libeskind who,
though building some projects, have a well-known body of drawn work. Regardless
of the influence of these theoretical works to the field, architecture is, a bimodal
profession, and it requires its practitioners to have a feel for both good design and
the infrastructure required to bring these to life.
Design Practice
Design practice is an introductory architectural design studio through which
students develop critical, analytical and speculative design abilities in architecture.
Students develop representational techniques for the analysis of social and cultural
constructs, and formulate propositions for situating built form in the arena of the
urban and suburban environment. The studio initiates innovation through a
sequence of projects, spatial models and rule sets that introduce each student to
rule-based design processes-- in which a reversal of expectations leads to the
creation of novel spaces and structures. It introduces computation, geometric
techniques, and digital fabrication. Projects explore the formation of space in relation
to the body, and the developments of small scale public programs.
In Summer Preparatory Studio (2015), the studio establishes a fundamental
understanding of representation and abstraction to which more of your own thoughts
and ideas about spatial thinking can be added. This will involve, by means of the
architectural studio, a reiterative investigation into the relationship of technique,
form, and meaning through study, invention, testing, and evaluation. This expose
students to complexities of visual communication and the design act; to develop
skills of spatial manipulation; to give you the self-confidence in making valid
decisions within set time limits; to develop the skills of graphic presentation

necessary for interpreting and communicating your architectural intentions; and

above all, to instill the ability to combine insight with the rigorous analytical study in a
design process that is efficient, personally effective, and which becomes second
nature to you as a working process.
The American Institute of Architecture Students (2006) 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.
Principles
Academics are interested in developing, testing and propagating knowledge;
an approach that involves research and scholarship. Practitioners are concerned
with short-term or rapid responses to situations and, while working on conventional
projects, are unlikely to develop a substantial new knowledge base or share this
knowledge freely. This approach is about the strategic deployment of knowledge.
The profession has a longer-term perspective centered on refining and defining
knowledge. The limits of knowledge, and the determination of competences, are
important for this last category.
In addition to the above reasons for a division between the profession and
the academy, there is a difference of opinion about the purpose of architectural
education. In some countries (like Italy) an undergraduate education in architecture
is considered an excellent generalist degree for people who wish to work in a wide
range of fields. In other countries (including Australia) the curriculum is largely
constrained by the needs and expectations of the architectural profession. Many

researchers argue that it is in everyones interests to open architectural education to

as broad a range of students as possible; to educate people in the value of
architecture and of architects.
Cook and Hawley (2004) disagree with what they see as the dumbing
down of architectural education that has occurred because of the rise of
bureaucracy in universities; what Tom Heneghan describes as the university sector
standardizing mediocrity. Cook and Hawley strongly reject the new emphasis on
journal publications, rather than experience in design or professional practice, as a
criteria for academic appointment. Cook goes further when he condemns career
academics and calls for practicing architects to teach architecture once more. Cook
is especially critical of people earning PhDs who intend to practice architecture; he
sees the two as mutually exclusive.
A complicating factor in all of these points of view is that the schools are not
static; the education environment is evolving. Boyer and Mitgang (1996) noted that
architecture programs are typically expensive in terms of space and staffing levels
and that these programs provide little research revenue for universities. This is a
commercial reality of architectural education; it demands a substantial financial
investment. Boyer and Mitgang note that if more architectural research was
produced in the schools, which is exactly what is expected of academics, then
universities may be more willing to invest in them and in turn employ more
academics to support students.
According to Summer Preparatory Studio, Physics for Architects or History of
Architecture the first of three required courses is the history and theory of
architecture, this is a lecture course with discussion groups that meet weekly with

teaching assistants. The course explores fundamental ideas and models of

architecture that have emerged over the past three hundred years. The history and
theory of architecture is a lecture course that examines selected topics, figures,
projects, and theories from the history of architecture and related design fields
during the 20th century. The course also draws on related and parallel historical
material from other disciplines and arts, placing architecture into a broader sociocultural-political

technological

context.

Seminars

with

teaching

assistants

complement the lectures. In the system of architecture design, theory helps in

providing useful guidelines However, the broad principles employed in the final
outcome provide a general way of thinking about such large complex engineering
systems.
Elger and Russell (2006) suggest that history, geometry, mathematics,
construction, logistics and economics are all of equal importance to design in
architectural education. Yet, by emphasizing design, architecture schools mislead
students both about the reality of architectural practice and the wider values of
society. Nicol and Pilling (2000) argue that the focus on design is unhealthy in
schools because it venerates the product, not the process. Many different
knowledge domains are involved in design and play an equal role in this process,
but because the focus is on the final product, only design is valued. Aldrich (2005)
reinforces this view with his criticism of design teaching that it remains concerned
with the finished object, but not the impact of that design on the user or inhabitant.
Aldrich calls for architecture students to develop self-awareness and empowerment

from a participatory approach that encourages them to imagine the actual impact of
their designs.
Probably the greatest tension recorded in research on this topic is between
design and construction. Paul Segal argues that architects have lost their historic
position of primacy in the built environment because they have placed design ahead
of construction in their system of values. Boyer and Mitgang together with Unay and
Ozmen (2006) separately express their concern about the dominance of design over
construction and technology in the curriculum. Murray (2002) records that
architecture students themselves often call for more emphasis on construction and
architectural science in the curriculum. Crinson and Lubbock (1991) agree that the
focus on design often leads to the production of graduates with little or no
awareness of construction methods, or the trades that support the construction
process.
In addition, after graduation, architecture students typically express a low
level of satisfaction with their educational experience. Cuff (1991) argues that
graduates become frustrated when they first enter architectural practice because of
the uncertainty this step entails. Duffy and Hutton (1998) claim that the problem isnt
uncertainty, but lack of preparedness. They argue that architecture schools fixation
with the Star system and design is the root cause of so many graduates
unrealistic expectations and this results in widespread disappointment. Nicol and
Pilling are less specific in defining the problem, but they are clear that it results from
the gap between the student experience in the academy and the graduate
experience in commercial practice. The former is largely unable to replicate a

practice environment and the latter is unable to simulate an educational

environment.
An additional explanation for graduates unhappiness with their educational
experience relates to workload. Architecture students complain of exhaustion,
isolation and stress. Bachman and Bachman (2006) analysis of students workload
identified that excessive loss of sleep, poor diet, lack of exercise and marginal family
and social activity are all common characteristics of the life of architecture students.
However, Bachman and Bachman also found that only one activity, design,
accounted for the majority of workload pressures. The design process also caused a
range of anxieties that lead directly to students feelings of dissatisfaction and
depression.
In connection with these there are also study that it is a curiosity, which is
noted in some historical research, that the atelier model, which was once seen as a
radical approach to teaching and learning, is now ubiquitous in architecture. Indeed,
such is the importance of the design studio, that schools, which do not possess
anything resembling a studio space or system, still label their curriculum structures
to clearly identify a studio component.
Vesely (2004) argues that, in architecture, the key place for all educational
activities is the studio. Furthermore, any exploration, investigation or research into
the program and content of a project should be based on a visual hypothesis of the
project that is developed in the studio. Wigley (2004) also offers an educational
model for architecture wherein Everything is organized around the design studio as
it should be. Potts (2000) similarly accepts that Studio teaching is central to the
pedagogy of architectural education. Cuff agrees that the design studio is the heart

of architectural education but she also adds that the studio is potentially its greatest
flaw.
While the studio ostensibly provides a social context for practice, in reality it
can generate an unhealthy clannishness between students. Clarke (1994)
proposes that the problem of the design studio is precisely that it encourages
professional isolation; it separates architecture students from other disciplines. Nicol
and Pilling support this point of view when they observe that the design studio is so
internally focused that it separates the student from the world in which architecture is
produced and inhabited. Stevens is also critical of the way the design studio
promotes a singular form of enculturation often at the expense of education. On a
more pragmatic level, university administrators and academics see the studio as the
most expensive and least understood component of architectural education. They
ask: what does it achieve that cannot be achieved in other ways and do we fully
understand it, can we explain it and can we quantify its benefits?
The primary characteristics of the Beaux-Arts atelier were that it promoted
long working hours, deliberately isolated architecture students from other disciplines,
encouraged them to bond with each other and develop appropriate cultural values,
and it promoted design as the pre-eminent skill of the architect. Fundamentally, the
strengths of the design studio are also its flaws.
On the side of a proper theoretical education, there is the belief that preparing
students with the ability to think in a critical fashion allows for graduates to apply
their minds towards a variety of careers, offices and roles. There is an
acknowledgment that there is a big difference between training and education, and
that architecture schools are located in universities for a reason; students are

10

expected to learn to explore a variety of solutions, not simply how to do something

right instead of wrong.
Statement of the Problem
1.) How important is the Design in architecture?
2.) How important are the principles of architecture?
3.) How principles of architecture does affects the students in analyzing the
Designs?
4.) Can design practice affect the learning of architecture principles?
5.) How confident are the student with their architectural knowledge to become a
good architect?

CHAPTER 2
METHODOLOGY

11

This chapter presents the descriptive research use in the procedure study.
The research design and the respondents of the study as well as the data gathering
procedure, the research instrument and the statistical of data will be discussed.
Research Design
The research design used the qualitative method which is used to describe
the contemporary events. Which aims to know the importance of the two individual
techniques in dealing of their profession using the two alternative ways of learning:
design practice and learning principles.
Thus, the researcher aims to know the difference and the effectivity
between two alternative ways of learning and to determine which method of learning
must be given emphasis and to prioritize according to the needs of the students
especially the Architecture students of the University of Mindanao.
Research Subjects
The respondents of this study were the students of the University of
Mindanao from College of Architecture and Fine Arts Education specially the
Architecture students who were enrolled for School Year 2015-2016. The
researchers randomly selected 30 students. The study were conducted inside the
University of Mindanao, Matina Campus.
Research Instrument
The researcher developed a structured questionnaire to be answered by the
students, which was constructed based on the readings and findings of different
literatures from books, internet, and also from the researcher questions itself base
on the respondents proficiency. The questionnaire has attached the description of
the purpose and importance of the study covers the topic of the learning between

12

Design practice and Architectural principles in the students of Architect in University

of Mindanao.
Data Gathering Procedure
The researcher study included analysis of all the research and articles that
support the study of the learning between Design practice and Architectural
principles to provide information on the variables under this study.
The following were the steps undergone by the researchers in conducting the
study:
1. Administration and Retrieval of the Questionnaire.
The researchers personally distribute the questionnaire and were thoroughly
given instruction. Questions and clarification were entertained and after each
respondent was done answering the questionnaire the researchers immediately
retrieved.
2. Retrieval of the Instrument.
The gathered data through the questionnaire were collated, tallied, and was
subjected to statistical analysis and carefully encode and presented.
Statistical Data
The responses of the participants through questionnaire were tested using
the following statistical tools:
Mean. This was used to determine the difference and the learning between
Design practice and Architectural principles preparing by the Architecture students of
University of Mindanao.
Person-r. This is a measure of relationship between the two alternative ways.
This was used to determine the significance of the learning between the Design
practice and Architectural principles that exerted by the students of Architecture.
T-test. Was used to assess whether the difference and the learning between
Design practice and Architectural principles are statistically different from each other.

13

Chapter 3
RESULTS AND DISCUSION

This chapter deals with the discussion of the specific problem that shown
earlier in the chapter 1 of this paper.
The respondents were mostly male that results to 43% with 57% by female.
Most of the students are in 1 st year level with 37%, with among 2 nd year (47%), 3rd
year and 4th year (6.67%) and 5th year (3.33%). It can be seen in the tables below.

Table 1
Year Level

1st year

2nd year

3rd year

4th year

5TH year

Total

Total with
Percentage

11

14

30

(37%)

(47%)

(6.67%)

(6.67%)

(3.33%)

(100%)

Table 2
Gender

Female

Male

Total with

17

13

Percentage

(57%)

(43%)

14

Table 3
School Year
Level
1st Year
2nd Year
3rd Year
4th Year
5th Year
TOTAL

Design Practice
Yes
No
94
6
118
22
18
2
20
0
10
0
260
30
(86.6%)
(10%)

Principles
Yes
62
103
17
20
10
212
(70.6%)

No
38
37
3
0
0
78
(26%)

The table above shows the result that the respondents are more
knowledgeable in terms of design practice than learning principles. However there
are factors that the students cannot be applied especially in design practice. This
may appear in contrast to the first statement but the results also explain that design
principle is still what the students prefer. But both factors show importance because
the respondents respond positively.
It may be by the opinions of the students that probably both design practice
and design principle would help them to become better designers. In addition, there
is moderate agreement between design practice and design principle would help
them to become a better architect in the future.

15

CHAPTER 4
SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION
Presented in this chapter are the summary, conclusion and recommendation
drawn by the researchers that based from the result of the investigation.
Summary
The researcher surveyed to the 30 architecture students in the University of
Mindanao. They answered a Yes or No type of questionnaire and they studied,
analysed and interpreted the results of the gathered data.
The purpose of this study is to know if design practice and design principle
are balance.
Conclusion
Based on the findings of the study, the following conclusions are drawn:
1. Based on the result of the study and data gathered, we conclude that Design
is very important in terms of propagating new ideas and creating new
solutions to formulate creative strategies in designing.

16

2. Principles of Architecture helps students to engage analytical concepts and

knowledge in planning most especially in the awareness of relevant codes,
regulations and standards of planning, design, construction, health, safety
and use of built environments.
3. Design Practice is dependent to the principles of architecture in such way that
these principles serve as the foundation of knowledge and understanding the
concept of designing.
4. Design Practice absolutely affects the learning of principles of architecture; by
focusing design other important areas of study may be undermined and
students might graduate without an appropriate breadth and depth of
architectural knowledge.
5. The result shows that the architecture students are confident that their
knowledge in both methods could lead them to become a good architect in
the future.
Recommendation
Based on the finding and conclusions of the study, the following
recommendations are given:
1. The school administrator shall treat both factors equally and cater the
needs of the students that would help them accomplish those activities in both
factors.
2 .The professor of architecture should give a clear instructions, competent
and open to the students on their teaching ways in order to students understand the
lessons and to prevent pressure and failure to the students academic performance.

17

3. The architecture students should focus and concentrate on their lessons

and activities on both factors, and they must be open on suggestions, questions or
any matter that bothered their understanding in their lessons.
4. The future researchers may conduct another study that helps to the future
architecture students to help and understand those things that hesitate and bother
their understanding as well they obtain values knowledge and comprehensions to
improve and help to architecture students study.

18

References
ACSA. ACSA Reports from the ACSA Topic Groups Preparing for the October 2008
NAAB Accreditation Review Conference. Washington, D.C.( 2008).
Jones, J.C. (1980).Describing Design: A Comparison of Paradigms, PhD thesis,
Delft: Delft University of Technology.
Schn, D. (1985).The Design Studio: An Exploration of its Traditions and Potentials.
London: RIBA Publications Limited.
Vitruvius M. (1914).The Ten Books on Architecture, translated by Morris Hickey
Morgan, New York: Dover
Wiley. Dorst, C.H. (1997).Literature references Cross, N. (1984) Developments in
Design Methodology.
Wiley Interscience. Rittel, W.J. and Webber, M.M. (1973).Design Methods: Seeds of
Human Futures, London.
Wiley. Rowe, P. (1987).Planning Problems are Wicked Problems, In Cross, N.
Developments in Design Methodology.
Simon, H. (1969).Design Thinking, London.
Rhowbotham, K. Problems in the British Architecture School regime. Balancing
Architectural Theory with Practical Education, Architecture's Mythos /Culture, As an
Architect or Intern, At School

19

APPENDIX

20

NAME: ________________________________
______________

GENDER:

SCHOOL YEAR: ___________

INSTRUCTION: Put a check on the blank that best describe your answer.
DESIGN

YE
S

N
O

YE
S

N
O

1.
2.
3.
4.
5.

It enables me to design buildings that fit to the global needs

It enables me to solve problems in planning
It enhances my ability to engage conceptualization
I am confident with my drawing skills
It enhances my ability to apply skills in the creation of a design
solution
6. It enhances my ability to design future
7. It helps me understand design procedures and process
8. I have the knowledge of design precedents and architectural
criticism
9. It helps my ability to analyze and formulate planning
10.It improves my ability to communicate through drafting
PRINCIPLES
1. It enhances my ability to act with knowledge of historical and
cultural precedent in local and world architecture.
2. I am aware of the relevant codes, regulations and standards for
planning, design, construction, health, safety and use of built
environments.
3. I have enough knowledge of structure, materials, and
construction.
4. I am aware of philosophy, politics, and ethics as
related
to architecture.
5. I have the knowledge of the history and practice of architecture.
6. It enables me to understand the life cycle of materials, issues of
ecological sustainability, environmental impact, and design for
reduced use of energy, as well as passive systems and their
management.
7. I have the idea in Technical knowledge of structure, materials, and
construction.
8. It enhances my ability to act with knowledge of the fine arts as an
influence on the quality of architectural design.
9. It enhances my ability about understanding of services systems
as well as systems of transportation, communication,
maintenance and safety.
10.I am aware of the management of natural systems taking into

21

account natural disaster risks.

CURRICULUM
VITAE

22

CHRISTIAN RENN L. GARDOSE

TRENTO, AGUSAN DEL SUR
__________________________________
PERSONAL DATA
BIRTH DATE: September 30, 1995
NATIONALITY: Filipino
__________________________________
EDUCATIONAL ATTAINMENT

23

ELEMENTARY: Trento Central Elem. School

Trento, Agusan Del Sur
HIGH SCHOOL:Trento National High School
Trento, Agusan Del Sur
COLLEGE: University Of Mindanao
COURSE: Bachelor in Science in Architecture

MARK JEFF V. CALLANTA

MANDAY, COTABATO CITY
09363367038
__________________________________
PERSONAL DATA
BIRTH DATE: April 12, 1991
NATIONALITY: Filipino
__________________________________
EDUCATIONAL ATTAINMENT
ELEMENTARY: Cotabato City Central Pilot School
Cotabato City
HIGH SCHOOL:Notre Dame Village National High School
Cotabato City
COLLEGE&COURSE: Notre Dame University (BS in Electronics and
Communication Engineering)
University Of Mindanao(Bachelor in Science in Architecture)

24

JEDD DARYL D. MANULAT

BUCANA, DAVAO CITY
09499280793
__________________________________
PERSONAL DATA
BIRTH DATE: April 03, 1997
NATIONALITY: Filipino
__________________________________
EDUCATIONAL ATTAINMENT
ELEMENTARY: Cesario Villa Abrile Elem. School
Bucana, Davao City
HIGH SCHOOL: Davao City National High School
F. Torres St., Davao City
COLLEGE: University Of Mindanao
COURSE: Bachelor in Science in Architecture

25

JESSA ROSE B. MOLE

TORIL, DAVAO CITY
09301472810
__________________________________
PERSONAL DATA
BIRTH DATE: November 13, 1997
NATIONALITY: Filipino
__________________________________
EDUCATIONAL ATTAINMENT
ELEMENTARY: Don Juan dela Cruz Central Elem. School
Toril, Davao City
HIGH SCHOOL:Davao Central College
Toril, Davao City
COLLEGE: University Of Mindanao
COURSE: Bachelor in Science in Architecture

26

MAY JOY B. VISTAL

TORIL, DAVAO CITY
09153407489
__________________________________
PERSONAL DATA
BIRTH DATE: August 15, 1996
NATIONALITY: Filipino
__________________________________
EDUCATIONAL ATTAINMENT
ELEMENTARY: Don Juan dela Cruz Central Elem. School
Toril, Davao City
HIGH SCHOOL: Davao Central College
Toril, Davao City
COLLEGE: University Of Mindanao
COURSE: Bachelor in Science in Architecture

27

YVONNE R. MARZADO
IGACOS, SAMAL CITY
09127201257
PERSONAL DATA
BIRTH DATE: October 02, 1997
NATIONALITY: Filipino
__________________________________
EDUCATIONAL ATTAINMENT
ELEMENTARY: Tambo Elem. School
Igalos, Samal City
HIGH SCHOOL: Nieves Villarica National High School
Igalos, Samal City
COLLEGE: University Of Mindanao
COURSE: Bachelor in Science in Architecture

28