°ÇÃ൵½Ã°ø°£¿¬±¸¼Ò

Architecture & Urban Research Institute

pdf¿ø¹®º¸±â ¿¡·¯ ÇØ°á¹æ¹ý ¹Ù·Î°¡±â



¹®ÇåȨ > ¿¬±¸³í¹® > »ó¼¼

[¿ø¹®º¸±â½Ã ¼ÒºñµÇ´Â Æ÷ÀÎÆ® : 100 Æ÷ÀÎÆ®] ¹Ì¸®º¸±â Àοë

Çѱ¹¹®È­°ø°£°ÇÃàÇÐȸ|³í¹®Áý 2024³â 2¿ù

³í¹®¸í ÀÏÁ¦°­Á¡±â Çѱ¹ °ÇÃà±³À°ÀÇ Àü°³¿Í ÇѰè / The Progression and Limitations of Architectural Education in Korea during the Japanese Colonial Era
ÀúÀÚ¸í ¼­µ¿Ãµ;³²¿ëÇù½Äº°ÀúÀÚ
¹ßÇà»ç Çѱ¹¹®È­°ø°£°ÇÃàÇÐȸ
¼ö·Ï»çÇ× Çѱ¹¹®È­°ø°£°ÇÃàÇÐȸ ³í¹®Áý, Åë±Ç Á¦85È£ (2024-02)
ÆäÀÌÁö ½ÃÀÛÆäÀÌÁö(187) ÃÑÆäÀÌÁö(10)
ISSN 1738-818X
ÁÖÁ¦ºÐ·ù °èȹ¹×¼³°è / µµ½Ã
ÁÖÁ¦¾î °ÇÃà±³À°; ÀÏÁ¦°­Á¡±â; °æ¼º°íµî°ø¾÷Çб³; °ÇÃàÀü¹®°¡ ; Architectural education; Japanese colonial era; Keijo institute of engineering; Architectural expert
¿ä¾à2 This study is dedicated to comprehending the landscape of architectural education in Korea during the distinctJapanese colonial period. It undertook a comparative analysis between Korea and Japan, examining both the number ofeducational institutions in architecture and their graduate outputs at that time, along with the variances in their respectivecurricula. Contrasting sharply with Japan, which boasted 15 higher education institutions including universities, Korea had merelyone such institution, Keijo Institute of Engineering, and lacked any universities. The disparity was markedly pronounced in thevolume of graduates, with Japan's figure being approximately 100 times greater?a gap that further intensified when consideringonly Japanese nationals. The curriculum at Keijo Institute of Engineering leaned more towards a pedagogical approach ratherthan research, with a deficit in independent learning opportunities. This comparative analysis not only highlights the differinglevels of architectural education between Korea and Japan but also underscores the significant gap in the number of trainedarchitectural professionals, a trend that was prevalent in most Japanese colonial territories.
¼ÒÀåó Çѱ¹¹®È­°ø°£°ÇÃàÇÐȸ
¾ð¾î Çѱ¹¾î