지원사업
학술연구/단체지원/교육 등 연구자 활동을 지속하도록 DBpia가 지원하고 있어요.
커뮤니티
연구자들이 자신의 연구와 전문성을 널리 알리고, 새로운 협력의 기회를 만들 수 있는 네트워킹 공간이에요.
논문 기본 정보
- 자료유형
- 학술저널
- 저자정보
- 발행연도
- 2008.7
- 수록면
- 73 - 84 (12page)
이용수
초록· 키워드
오류제보하기
This study proposes to investigate ways of managing and evaluating studio projects particularly in the foundation and core programs of top professional schools of architecture in U.S.A and U.K. Based on results of analyzing studio projects actually delivered on the 2005/6 academic year, conceptual process models for project management and evaluation are developed respectively as an analytical tool for the study. It is the study’s proposition that both project management and evaluation are essential in improving learners’ professional ability to architecturally think and solve design problems.
Data and information on studio project management and evaluation are gathered by off-line and on-line contacts with instructors and Korean students enrolled in each school. Focused interviews with these personnels are successfully performed between Summer and Fall 2006. The results are summarized as follows. First, learning objectives based project management and evaluation are pretty effective in promoting learners’ professional ability in performing works, as each objective is practically realized throughout the learning process. Second, a set of small size projects and partial projects are developed and hierarchically ordered based on program levels and attributes of learning objectives as well. Third, a normal process of delivering studio projects exists that leads to successful performance of learners’ works. Understanding problems, observation/analysis, research/investigation, basic design development are its individual components. Particularly, research activities are common and highly valued in the both foundation and core programs. Both concepts as well as practical principles need to be deeply investigated in the overall process of project delivery, regardless of program levels. This implies that increasing learners’ ability of architecturally thinking is more important rather than simply completing their works. Fourth, project delivery is stimulated and governed by a set of core concepts provided by instructors for learners. Fifth, a basic tool for delivering projects is used for both foundation and core program. Finally, portfolio-based evaluation of projects is essential to effectively mange learners’ work process, satisfying learning objectives as a whole.
Data and information on studio project management and evaluation are gathered by off-line and on-line contacts with instructors and Korean students enrolled in each school. Focused interviews with these personnels are successfully performed between Summer and Fall 2006. The results are summarized as follows. First, learning objectives based project management and evaluation are pretty effective in promoting learners’ professional ability in performing works, as each objective is practically realized throughout the learning process. Second, a set of small size projects and partial projects are developed and hierarchically ordered based on program levels and attributes of learning objectives as well. Third, a normal process of delivering studio projects exists that leads to successful performance of learners’ works. Understanding problems, observation/analysis, research/investigation, basic design development are its individual components. Particularly, research activities are common and highly valued in the both foundation and core programs. Both concepts as well as practical principles need to be deeply investigated in the overall process of project delivery, regardless of program levels. This implies that increasing learners’ ability of architecturally thinking is more important rather than simply completing their works. Fourth, project delivery is stimulated and governed by a set of core concepts provided by instructors for learners. Fifth, a basic tool for delivering projects is used for both foundation and core program. Finally, portfolio-based evaluation of projects is essential to effectively mange learners’ work process, satisfying learning objectives as a whole.
목차
Abstract
1. 연구목적 및 배경
2. 방법론적 고찰
3. 분석모형
4. 분석결과
5. 결론
참고문헌
참고문헌 (0)
참고문헌 신청함께 읽어보면 좋을 논문
논문 유사도에 따라 DBpia 가 추천하는 논문입니다. 함께 보면 좋을 연관 논문을 확인해보세요!
-
국내 건설사업 현장소장(PM)의 핵심 사업관리기술 분석 연구
대한건축학회 논문집 - 구조계
2003 .08
-
제품개발 프로젝트관리 프로세스 개발
산업경영시스템학회지
2010 .01
-
국외 우수 건축학과들의 통합설계수업 사례연구 : 미국과 영국의 공통기초 및 핵심교육과정을 중심으로
대한건축학회 논문집 - 계획계
2008 .05
-
설계과제의 설계 ( Design of Design Studio Project )
건축
2002 .04
-
프로젝트 관리를 위한 P³(Project, Program, Portfolio)기반의 어플리케이션 개발에 관한 연구
한국컴퓨터정보학회 학술발표논문집
2010 .07
-
국방 연구개발 사업의 Project Management 개선 연구
대한산업공학회 춘계공동학술대회 논문집
2016 .04
-
[프로젝트 리포트] 어라운드
건축
2017 .11
-
시스템 엔지니어링 프로세스를 적용한 철도 프로젝트 관리
한국철도학회 학술발표대회논문집
2009 .11
-
파이로 프로젝트에 프로젝트 관리 적용 방안
시스템엔지니어링학술지
2017 .01
-
프로젝트 위험요인 인식에 관한 비교 연구 - 정보시스템 구현 프로젝트에서 소프트웨어 패키지 적용과 순수 개발하는 경우 -
정보시스템연구
2007 .01
-
[프로젝트 리포트] 북하우스(연지동 주택) 프로젝트
건축
2017 .10
-
프로젝트를 위한 프로젝트 관리의 역할
산업경영시스템학회지
2014 .01
-
SI프로젝트 관리 프로세스 개발
산업경영시스템학회지
2012 .01
-
Probabilistic Graphical Framework for Predicting Software Project Risk
Industrial Engineering & Management Systems
2018 .03
-
Action to Improve the Reliability of Production Planning
한국건설관리학회논문집
2002 .01
-
Quantification Model for Applying Construction Management Practices in Consideration of Project Characteristic Factors
Journal of construction engineering and project management
2013 .01
-
부동산 프로젝트금융 적용 사업에 대한 사업성 연구
국토계획
2004 .11
-
중소기업을 위한 일정 기반의 프로젝트 진도 관리 방안
산업공학 (IE interfaces)
2012 .06
-
공공건설사업의 발주방식 선정 및 성과평가 모델
한국건설관리학회 학술대회
2007 .01
-
[프로젝트 리포트] 프로젝트 블랭크
건축
2019 .11
이 논문의 저자 정보
이 논문과 함께 이용한 논문
국내 대학 사례 조사를 통한 디자인 융합 프로그램을 위한 제언
이상원
,
조혜현
,
홍유미
외 4명
Archives of Design Research
2013
.08
디자인분야의 캡스톤디자인 적용사례 및 성과 고찰
윤명한
한국콘텐츠학회논문지
2012
.12
대학 졸업생의 직업선택과 임금 수준
박재민
기술혁신학회지
2011
.03
영국의 초등학교 디자인교육 프로그램에 관한 연구 : 국가교육과정 학습프로그램 분석을 중심으로
손연석
Archives of Design Research
2005
.05
DCI (Disciplined Civic Inquiry)를 활용한 세계시민교육의 이론과 실제: 미국 교실 수업 사례
송애리
도덕윤리과교육
2019
.05
최근 본 자료
댓글(0)
0
UCI(KEPA) : I410-ECN-0101-2009-540-014922225