“Design Studio” is acknowledged as the core course for “spatial design” in both architecture and interior architecture education. The main idea of the design studio is based on uniting all the gathered information from other classes in a context of an architectural project. The key expectation from the studio is to teach ‘how to think creatively’. This paper, particularly concentrates on interior architecture education. Design studios in Turkey, mostly use what is referred as the “contextual model” which starts with a given problem/ situation and proceeds from that given context. During the process of this approach, the instructor guides the student, discusses space generation and corrects technical mistakes.  Taking “creative thinking” into consideration, it is important to constitute another model, which is referred as the “conceptual model”. This process starts with student’s thoughts triggered by chosen materials, and the instructor communicates through abstract and intellectual thinking, discusses idea generation and, corrects technical mistakes. In this paper, the method of comparative analysis is used to examine the advantages and disadvantages of each above mentioned design studio model. The comparison of models is done by criteria derived from Salama’s (1995) survey about the current situation in design studios. As a result of the study it is observed that, both models have some advantages and disadvantages regarding seven excogitated design studio criteria.Keywords: design education, design studio, creative thinking, ınterior architecture.

"Design Studio" is acknowledged as the core course for "spatial design" in both architecture and interior architecture education. The main idea of the design studio is based on uniting all the gathered information from other classes in a context of an architectural project. The key expectation from the studio is to teach 'how to think creatively'. This paper, particularly concentrates on interior architecture education. Design studios in Turkey, mostly use what is referred as the "contextual model" which starts with a given problem/ situation and proceeds from that given context. During the process of this approach, the instructor guides the student, discusses space generation and corrects technical mistakes. Taking "creative thinking" into consideration, it is important to constitute another model, which is referred as the "conceptual model". This process starts with student's thoughts triggered by chosen materials, and the instructor communicates through abstract and intellectual thinking, discusses idea generation and, corrects technical mistakes. In this paper, the method of comparative analysis is used to examine the advantages and disadvantages of each above mentioned design studio model. The comparison of models is done by criteria derived from Salama's (1995) survey about the current situation in design studios. As a result of the study it is observed that, both models have some advantages and disadvantages regarding seven excogitated design studio criteria.

“Design Studio” is acknowledged as the core course for “spatial design” in both architecture and interior architecture education. The main idea of the design studio is based on uniting all the gathered information from other classes in a context of an architectural project. The key expectation from the studio is to teach ‘how to think creatively’. This paper, particularly concentrates on interior architecture education. Design studios in Turkey, mostly use what is referred as the “contextual model” which starts with a given problem/ situation and proceeds from that given context. During the process of this approach, the instructor guides the student, discusses space generation and corrects technical mistakes.  Taking “creative thinking” into consideration, it is important to constitute another model, which is referred as the “conceptual model”. This process starts with student’s thoughts triggered by chosen materials, and the instructor communicates through abstract and intellectual thinking, discusses idea generation and, corrects technical mistakes. In this paper, the method of comparative analysis is used to examine the advantages and disadvantages of each above mentioned design studio model. The comparison of models is done by criteria derived from Salama’s (1995) survey about the current situation in design studios. As a result of the study it is observed that, both models have some advantages and disadvantages regarding seven excogitated design studio criteria.Keywords: design education, design studio, creative thinking, ınterior architecture.

Cultural sustainability, as an important part of sustainability, is considered one of the key remarks of spatial design. The variable structure of culture provides different environmental values for different periods. For this reason, it is thought that the values of the built environment will provide a significant data to question cultural sustainability. The aim of this study is to investigate the effects of the dwelling options produced in Turkey after 2000s' on the 'value' parameter in spatial design discipline, by compiling indications made in different disciplines. The value of design, which are described by Madea as social goals and qualitative characteristics (2006), was chosen as a criteria for evaluating space and dwelling notions. The sub criteria of social value is defined as 'culture -society' and the sub criteria of qualitative value is defined as 'identity -individual' by means of semiotics. The study, in which theoretical structure is based on literature survey, evaluate the dwelling samples presented after 2000, in the light of the dwelling development process of Anatolia and Turkey, in the context of space and dwelling notions. As a result of this evaluation, possible suggestions are given for the spatial design.