Difference between revisions of "Lymer2013"
PaultenHave (talk | contribs) (Created page with "{{BibEntry |BibType=ARTICLE |Author(s)=Gustav Lymer; |Title=Assessing the realization of intention: the case of architectural education |Tag(s)=EMCA; Education; |Key=Lymer20...") |
AndreiKorbut (talk | contribs) m |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{BibEntry | {{BibEntry | ||
|BibType=ARTICLE | |BibType=ARTICLE | ||
| − | |Author(s)=Gustav Lymer; | + | |Author(s)=Gustav Lymer; |
|Title=Assessing the realization of intention: the case of architectural education | |Title=Assessing the realization of intention: the case of architectural education | ||
| − | |Tag(s)=EMCA; Education; | + | |Tag(s)=EMCA; Education; |
|Key=Lymer2013 | |Key=Lymer2013 | ||
|Year=2013 | |Year=2013 | ||
|Journal=Human Studies | |Journal=Human Studies | ||
|Volume=36 | |Volume=36 | ||
| + | |Number=4 | ||
|Pages=533–563 | |Pages=533–563 | ||
| + | |URL=http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs10746-013-9295-8 | ||
| + | |DOI=10.1007/s10746-013-9295-8 | ||
| + | |Abstract=The present study provides an ethnomethodologically informed respecification of intention in the context of architectural education. The analyses focus on the ways in which participants deal with the relation between formulations of intention and designed objects. Claimed mismatches between stated intention and design make relevant instructional sequences elaborating alternative ways of understanding the design and possible routes by which articulated intentions could have been realized. The practice of topicalizing intentions appears to be a technique by which aspects of architectural competence are made visible and instructed. In particular, the practice makes otherwise unattended aspects of the design process accountably available for assessment and remark. Furthermore, the complexities of architectural consequence in relation to individual design decisions are addressed as an instructional matter. The study expands existing work on intention ascription and avowal by examining a setting where participants deal with the intentional status of designed objects. It is argued that the analyzed assessment sequences are shaped and organized with reference to the particularities of architectural knowledge as well as to the educational character of the activity. Their basic logic, however, is grounded in ordinary understandings of action and intentionality. | ||
}} | }} | ||
Latest revision as of 13:20, 1 March 2016
| Lymer2013 | |
|---|---|
| BibType | ARTICLE |
| Key | Lymer2013 |
| Author(s) | Gustav Lymer |
| Title | Assessing the realization of intention: the case of architectural education |
| Editor(s) | |
| Tag(s) | EMCA, Education |
| Publisher | |
| Year | 2013 |
| Language | |
| City | |
| Month | |
| Journal | Human Studies |
| Volume | 36 |
| Number | 4 |
| Pages | 533–563 |
| URL | Link |
| DOI | 10.1007/s10746-013-9295-8 |
| ISBN | |
| Organization | |
| Institution | |
| School | |
| Type | |
| Edition | |
| Series | |
| Howpublished | |
| Book title | |
| Chapter | |
Abstract
The present study provides an ethnomethodologically informed respecification of intention in the context of architectural education. The analyses focus on the ways in which participants deal with the relation between formulations of intention and designed objects. Claimed mismatches between stated intention and design make relevant instructional sequences elaborating alternative ways of understanding the design and possible routes by which articulated intentions could have been realized. The practice of topicalizing intentions appears to be a technique by which aspects of architectural competence are made visible and instructed. In particular, the practice makes otherwise unattended aspects of the design process accountably available for assessment and remark. Furthermore, the complexities of architectural consequence in relation to individual design decisions are addressed as an instructional matter. The study expands existing work on intention ascription and avowal by examining a setting where participants deal with the intentional status of designed objects. It is argued that the analyzed assessment sequences are shaped and organized with reference to the particularities of architectural knowledge as well as to the educational character of the activity. Their basic logic, however, is grounded in ordinary understandings of action and intentionality.
Notes
