TEACHING DESIGN IN LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE PROGRAMS

This study conducts an in-depth analysis of the content and context of the Design courses descriptions that could identify word networks and communities of terms to help define this area of knowledge in Landscape Architecture education in the United States. The study uses a visual network analysis to graphically identify word frequency, cluster themes, families of terms, and the strengths and weaknesses of their connections could shed light on the structure and content of design studios.

Using publicly available programs of study of 43 undergraduate degree programs in Landscape Architecture, a list of 150 terms is produced from the analysis of more than 300 design course descriptions. These terms are used as the building blocks to create a series of networks describing the relative weight of the frequency of use of each term and the strength of the connection to other terms. Form this sequential series of networks, descriptions of patterns of associated terms allows to configure a collective description of what design means to the collective body of landscape education in the United States undergraduate courses. Visual mapping of networks helps to understand the content of design courses and how they may relate to other topics. The results indicate that design education consists predominantly of three dominant clusters: courses related to developmental/foundational attributes of design, a second cluster of process oriented topics and a third group of topics related to the physical/spatial aspects of the discipline. These three main groups of terms describe teaching in Landscape Architecture as a cluster of principles, processes and spatial terms that are supported by different layers of depth and strength depicted in the visualization of the network. There is limited indication that technology or socio-cultural topics are explicitly included in design courses. This new way of looking at the collective effect of design education in Landscape Architecture provides a benchmark and a reference for individual program assessment, curriculum revisions and changes, as well a map of possible trends, changes over time, emerging concepts, as well as gaps in the field not covered which may be converted into opportunities for innovative educational strategies and pedagogical approaches.