Teaching Beyond the Curriculum
Abstract
In architectural discourse, education has always been based on the application of practical work components, while the true meaning remains in the realms of abstraction. That’s why architecture is read about in art history, while most architectural schools are technically oriented or direct derivatives of technical schools. Seen from the point of view of profession‘s time, whose breaking points took place along with those of its civilization, one can trace the continuity of this ambiguity. The constant shifting and reversibility of positions between internal and external, base and upgrade, synthesis and aberration, constructive and transgressive, takes place as a particular domain of disciplinary experience. And as the rules of discourse dictate, we set aside the question of absolute accuracy that characterizes natural sciences and bases the results on numbers and measurement, encountering universal values detached from the particularity of its appearance.Interdisciplinary reflections, which yield various modalities, from changes in shape to motion, involve the mobility of architectural forms from their initial conception. This approach accelerates the fusion of creativity with criticism, which doesn’t presume a final outcome but, rather, in the very process of thought, distinguishes value categories from prior educational experiences: the result is called a document that confirms spatial and aesthetic harmony, while the functionality of the sequence is translated into trust in the architectural form. It appears simultaneously unjustified and sufficiently operational for the methodological aspect of such a situation, which should leave the question of form untouched. In relation to the curriculum as an abstract synopsis of what the time will direct, or of what is already expected to be, the proposed condition presumably opens, within the geometry of difference, as Nouvel claims, ‘ a whole world of inner possibilities’, both on the academic and any other way.
Mila Mojsilović, PhD Arch, Teaching Assistant at the Department of Architecture – University of Belgrade, Faculty of Architecture. She is educated in Belgrade (Faculty of Architecture) and Paris (Ecole d’Architecture de Paris-Val-de-Seine). She received her PhD from the University of Belgrade in 2020. She is involved in scientific research in the field of architectural philosophy and aesthetic. The main framework of her theoretical research is contemporary design, theory of form and the aesthetics of fragmentation. She has participated in the organization of the Balkan Architecture Biennale.
Jelena Mitrović, PhD Arch, architect, currently lectures as a Assistant Professor at the University “Union – Nikola Tesla” – Faculty of Civil Engineering (Architecture and Urbanism). She is educated in educated in Belgrade (Faculty of Architecture). The main framework of her theoretical research is the theory of the architectural practice including topics based on her thesis -Inconsistency of Modernist Architect Position in the XXI Century Practice. She participated in international conferences and published several papers in international journals and publications. Employed with Blakstad Haffner Arkitekter – Belgrade office from (2016-2018); currently working as external associate at MITArh; co-founder of the Studio Poligon (2008).
Vladimir Milenković, PhD Arch, architect and music pedagogue, lectures as a Associate Professor at the UBFA Department of Architecture (Design Methodology, Methodical Practicum, Design Studio, Master Project). He is educated in Belgrade (Faculty of Architecture, Faculty of Music Arts). His field of interest includes theory of project and architectural design and he is also active in practice. He is the author of two books: Architectural Form and Multi-Function (2004) and Form Follows Theme (2015); currently working on the kinetic structure Sixteen, RTS Tašmajdan Memorial; co-founder of the Studio NEOARHITEKTI (2000) and THETA Bureau (2020) based in Belgrade.
2:30 pm - 4:00 pm
Friday 17th November, 2023