傳統的建築設計訓練往往從一塊明確的基地開始，再試著由這塊基地的立地條件與設計的機能需求去建立空間發展的programming。拿到一塊基地之後，透過site analysis, case studies等盡其可能地找尋可以形成設計concept的線索，並試圖建立可以自圓其說的合理性。對於高年級、甚至已經修畢建築系課程的碩士班學生，這套訓練是大家再也熟悉不過的專業養成過程。
這一套大家熟悉並經歷過的訓練後面，事實上存在著一套面對「專業」能力的基本的假設：相信若每一塊基地的設計發展都能夠具有一定的專業程度，認真設計並在營造過程仔細地照顧每一項細節，大家共同生活的市街空間是有機會被營造出來並有一定程度的好品質；從單元進一步擴大，集體的生活空間也可以透過一個又一個有效地單元形式的積累，最終獲致一個完整且機能不會出大問題的整體。這一套假設，讓大家相信城市開始必須被「規劃」，藉著提前的介入讓形式的積累有一套大家共享的默契與規範；個別的開發單位必須透過申請建築執照的過程確認符合默契與規範。專業的科系開始並且必須擴大設立，透過專業執照的考核制度來「確認」每一塊基地都在「適切且合格」的專業者的手裡被處理。
對於一個素以嚴格的專業訓練自豪的建築系，我們的確可以繼續順著前述的脈絡深化「專業」訓練，但我們也永遠躲不開大眾對於我們專業者的質疑：有這麼多建築系、這麼多合格的建築師與有著多年專業訓練的專業者，我們的城市空間還是有這麼多的問題？
或許，我們可以試著倒過來思考：如果還有一種專業訓練的可能性，我們是否可以不從一塊「基地」要被開發使用的角度，透過「設計」去建立「專業」的內涵？跳脫一塊基地、一個可以被執行的空間計劃，我們在還不確定我們要如何發揮我們的專業能力，進行專業實踐之前，我們先找到具體的研究對象（而不是一塊基地），從這個要被研究分析的object的「整體」，重新找到專業可以介入的角度，並由其中發展建構我們的專業思維。
學會發問，且對著空間發問，是這一個學期的訓練的重點：我們嘗試著從理解什麼力量形構了我們的生活市街去開始我們的課程。但我們也試圖跳脫大家熟悉的日常生活領域(everyday life worlds)，我們要從有議題(topics)的研究對象開始：

Traditional architectural design training often starts with a clear site, and then attempts to establish spatial development programming based on the site conditions and design functional requirements of the site. After getting a site, we try our best to find clues that can form a design concept through site analysis, case studies, etc., and try to establish a rationality that can be justified. For senior students, or even master's students who have completed courses in the Department of Architecture, this training is a professional development process that everyone is familiar with.
Behind this set of training that everyone is familiar with and has experienced, there is actually a set of basic assumptions about "professional" abilities: I believe that if the design and development of each site can have a certain degree of professionalism, be carefully designed, and carefully take care of every detail during the construction process, the street space where everyone lives together will have the opportunity to be created and have a certain degree of good quality; further expanding from the unit, the collective living space can also be accumulated one effective unit form after another, and finally a complete whole without major functional problems will be obtained. This set of assumptions leads everyone to believe that the city must be "planned" from the beginning, and that through early intervention, the accumulation of forms will have a set of tacit understanding and standards shared by everyone; individual development units must confirm that they comply with the tacit understanding and standards through the process of applying for a building license. Professional departments began to be established and must be expanded, and through the assessment system of professional licenses to "confirm" that each base is handled by "appropriate and qualified" professionals.
For an architecture department that prides itself on rigorous professional training, we can indeed continue to deepen "professional" training along the lines mentioned above, but we can never avoid the public's doubts about our professionals: With so many architecture departments, so many qualified architects, and professionals with many years of professional training, our urban space still has so many problems?
Perhaps, we can try to think about it the other way round: If there is still a possibility of professional training, can we establish the connotation of "professional" through "design" rather than from the perspective of a "base" to be developed and used? Breaking away from a base and a space plan that can be executed, before we are not sure how to exert our professional abilities and carry out professional practice, we first find a specific research object (rather than a base). From the "whole" of the object to be studied and analyzed, we can re-find the angle from which the profession can intervene, and develop and construct our professional thinking from it.
Learning to ask questions, and asking questions about space, is the focus of this semester's training: we try to start our course by understanding what forces shape the streets of our lives. But we are also trying to break away from the familiar everyday life worlds. We want to start with research objects with topics:

透過對國內城鄉或島嶼聚落實際案例之歷史回顧、現況踏堪、居民訪查、社區參與、空間分析、議題討論、綜合診斷、發展定位、計畫目標、發展策略、綱要計劃、規劃配置、細部設計等，研擬研究案例再發展之最佳方案，供地方相關主政者從事城鄉空間改造建設之發展藍圖。經由建教合作之實例操作，讓學生得以更真實的體驗城鄉地域性之社會結構與空間結構特質，更投入的構思城鄉永續發展與社區總體營造之實踐模式。

Through the historical review of actual cases of urban and rural or island settlements in China, current situation visits, resident interviews, community participation, spatial analysis, issue discussions, comprehensive diagnosis, development positioning, planning goals, development strategies, outline plans, planning configurations, detailed designs, etc., the best plan for the redevelopment of the research case will be formulated to provide a development blueprint for local authorities to engage in urban and rural space transformation and construction. Through the practical operation of construction-education cooperation, students can more truly experience the social structure and spatial structure characteristics of urban and rural areas, and become more immersed in conceiving practical models for sustainable urban and rural development and overall community construction.

隨堂發放

Distributed in class