A Comparative Study on (Interior) Architectural Education

The pedagogies of schools that play a significant role in design education cannot be read independently of the political and cultural events of their time. The design schools examined in this study have not remained confined to their geographies but have developed other schools as well. A chronological analysis of the historical and periodical relationships of the countries where these schools were established reveals numerous common interactions. The primary aim of this study is to analyze the pedagogies of major design schools through a comparative analysis method and to identify their traces in contemporary design education to understand the contemporary architectural pedagogies better. In this context, the interior architecture departments at Hasselt University’s (UHasselt) Faculty of Architecture and Design and Mimar Sinan Fine Arts University’s (MSGSU’s) Faculty of Architecture are compared based on the pedagogical approaches of these significant design schools. In this study, the methodologies of important design schools in different countries—namely École des Beaux-Arts, École Polytechnique, Bauhaus, and Vkhutemas—and their effects on contemporary interior architecture education at UHasselt and MSGSU were analyzed using Bereday’s four-step comparative education model. First, in the description phase, the curricula of all four schools were examined separately. In the interpretation phase, the pedagogical approaches and course structures embedded in these architectural curricula were analyzed. The juxtaposition and comparison phases revealed that constructivism constitutes the dominant pedagogical orientation in both universities, particularly within studio-based and project-oriented courses. However, UHasselt demonstrates a more technically and digitally integrated pedagogical structure influenced by Bauhaus, Vkhutemas, and École Polytechnique traditions, whereas MSGSU reflects a stronger experiential and Beaux-Arts-oriented approach. The findings further indicate that contemporary interior architecture education increasingly emphasizes collaborative, interdisciplinary, digitally mediated, and practice-oriented learning environments.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
The International Journal of Design Education
Published
2026-08-25
DOI
https://doi.org/10.18848/2325-128x/cgp/a345
Primary Topic
Architecture, Design, and Social History
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

A Comparative Study on (Interior) Architectural Education

Nisa Nur Göksel, Ruth Stevens, Burçin Cem Arabacioğlu
The International Journal of Design Education
Architecture, Design, and Social History
article

A Comparative Study on (Interior) Architectural Education

Nisa Nur Göksel, Ruth Stevens, Burçin Cem Arabacioğlu
article en

Abstract

The pedagogies of schools that play a significant role in design education cannot be read independently of the political and cultural events of their time. The design schools examined in this study have not remained confined to their geographies but have developed other schools as well. A chronological analysis of the historical and periodical relationships of the countries where these schools were established reveals numerous common interactions. The primary aim of this study is to analyze the pedagogies of major design schools through a comparative analysis method and to identify their traces in contemporary design education to understand the contemporary architectural pedagogies better. In this context, the interior architecture departments at Hasselt University’s (UHasselt) Faculty of Architecture and Design and Mimar Sinan Fine Arts University’s (MSGSU’s) Faculty of Architecture are compared based on the pedagogical approaches of these significant design schools. In this study, the methodologies of important design schools in different countries—namely École des Beaux-Arts, École Polytechnique, Bauhaus, and Vkhutemas—and their effects on contemporary interior architecture education at UHasselt and MSGSU were analyzed using Bereday’s four-step comparative education model. First, in the description phase, the curricula of all four schools were examined separately. In the interpretation phase, the pedagogical approaches and course structures embedded in these architectural curricula were analyzed. The juxtaposition and comparison phases revealed that constructivism constitutes the dominant pedagogical orientation in both universities, particularly within studio-based and project-oriented courses. However, UHasselt demonstrates a more technically and digitally integrated pedagogical structure influenced by Bauhaus, Vkhutemas, and École Polytechnique traditions, whereas MSGSU reflects a stronger experiential and Beaux-Arts-oriented approach. The findings further indicate that contemporary interior architecture education increasingly emphasizes collaborative, interdisciplinary, digitally mediated, and practice-oriented learning environments.

The International Journal of Design Education
Mimar Sinan Güzel Sanatlar Üniversitesi (TR), Hasselt University (BE)
Sustainable cities and communities
Openalex Percentile: Top 4%
Architecture, Design, and Social History
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.