A critical evaluation of mathematics courses in architectural education and practice

Classification of the functions of mathematics courses are realized by the evaluation of the curricula and course contents of the following 19th century architectural schools: École Polytechnique, École Central in Paris, École des Beaux-Arts.

See Thomas (1960), as a typical example of a general mathematic course book. This book is still one of the most common source books on the field of basic and applied sciences.

See, for example, course descriptions at the University of Illinois at Urbana Champain, School of Architecture (http://​courses.​uiuc.​edu/​cis/​catalog/​urbana/​2007/​Spring/​MATH/​index.​html). Calculus courses are limited to the subjects of functions, pre-calculus, derivative and integral.

See, for example, the list of the regular course descriptions at Czech Technical University, Faculty of Architecture (http://​web.​cvut.​cz/​en/​fa/​regular_​courses.​html). Mathematics (applied) course covers the use of mathematical methods in the subjects of building physics, statistics and planning. On the other hand, descriptive geometry courses focus on spatial imagination and graphic abilities, and deals with theory and practice.

See Paré et al. (1977), as a typical course book in engineering departments.

See Egbert (1980), for the further information about the educational and pedagogical approaches of the Beaux-Arts School.

Today, design oriented mathematics courses are mostly in elective courses. For example, a course entitled Mathematics in Architecture, which is given at Middle East Technical University Department of Architecture is designed to teach the basics of mathematical concepts and principles in architecture provided together with several examples to students in order to cope with design problems in architecture. (http://​www.​archweb.​metu.​edu.​tr/​programs/​index_​undergraduate.​htm).

See Kappraff (1991), one of the most popular books exemplifying canonic approaches in between mathematics and architecture, which also includes 19th century approaches.

The EAAE counts more than 100 Active Member Schools in Europe from the Canary Islands to the Urals, representing almost 5,000 tenured faculty members and more than 100,000 students of architecture from the undergraduate to the doctoral level. The association is building up associate memberships every year. That is why the number of associate membership is taken according to numbers of the year of 2006, when the research was conducted.

The school membership in ACSA has grown from 10 charter members to over 250 schools in several membership categories. These include full membership for all accredited programs in the United States and government-sanctioned schools in Canada. Through these schools, over 5,000 architecture faculty are represented. ACSA currently has 125 full members: 115 in the United States and 10 in Canada. The number of associate membership was taken according to the numbers of the year 2006, when this research was conducted.

List of the selected schools: ACSA MEMBERS: University of Illinois at Urbana Champaign (School of Architecture), University of Miami (School of Architecture), Illinois Institute of Technology (College of Architecture), Georgia Institute of Technology (College of Architecture), Kansas State University (Department of Architecture), University of Washington (College of Architecture and Urban Planning), Texas Tech University (College of Architecture), Cornell University (Department of Architecture), Iowa State University (College of Design), California State Polytechnic University (Architecture Department), Clemson University (School of Architecture), Pratt Institute (Architecture Department), Hampton University (Department of Architecture), New Jersey Institute of Technology (School of Architecture), Carnegie Melon University (School of Architecture), Arizona State University (School of Architecture and Landscape Architecture), University of Houston (College of Architecture), Kent State University (College of Architecture and Environmental Design), University of Florida (School of Architecture), New York Institute of Technology (School of Architecture and Design), Washington State University (College of Engineering and Architecture), University of Nevada (School of Architecture) EAAE MEMBERS: Ecole d’Architecture de Paris la Villette (France), University of Dundee (UK), Brno University (Czech Republic), Sofia University of Architecture, Civil Engineering and Geodosy (Bulgeria), Institut Superieur d’Architecture de St-Luc (Belgium), Ecole d’Architecture de Paris Val-de-Seine (France), Moscow Architectural Institute (Russia), Universitat Politecnica de Catalunia (Spain), Liverpool John Moores University (UK), University Prishtine, Czech Technical University in Prague (Czech Republic), Szczecin University of Technology in Gliwice (Poland), Fachhochschule Darmstadt (Germany), ETH Zurich (Switzerland), Universitat Kaiserlautern (Germany), Technische Universitat Dresden (Germany), Universitat Karlsruhe (Germany), Technischen Universitat Graz (Austria), Hogeschool Antwerpen (Belgium), Universidade Moderna Setubal (Portugal), Ecole d’Architecture de Grenoble (France), Cluj Napoca Technical University (Romania), Helsinki University of Technology (Finland), Universidad Europea de Madrid (Spain), Middle East Technical University (Turkey), Universite Catholique de Louvain (Belgium).

See Larson (1977). According to Larson, the knowledge that is required for performing any profession has two different dimensions as cognitive and normative. The cognitive dimension is centered on the body of knowledge and techniques, that the professional applies in their works. The normative dimension covers the service orientation of professionals and their distinctive ethics, beliefs and manners that justify the privilege of self regulation granted to them by society. In the profession of architecture, the normative dimension of professional knowledge is very important since design activities cannot be reduced to rationalised processes.

Hubbard describes conventional and inevitable as follows: there are those things we accept as being the way they are because we have no choice but to do so, and there are those things we accept as being the way they are because we want them to be that way. The first category of things are inevitable and the second conventional.

See Baydar (2000), for an alternative historiography of architecture.

See Perez-Gomez (1999), for an alternative use of mathematics in architecture.