Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) As an Assessment Approach for Architectural Design: Case Study of Architectural Design Studio

Abstract

Architectural design is an effective decision-making activity based on problem solving. Within this context, assessment of architectural design is complex. This complexity is not based on content and volume of problems, but also heterogeneity and uncertainty of information provided for assessment, subjective approaches, and a large number of the criterion for assessment. To solve the problems stated, within the content of this article, assessment methodology based on Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) – a Multi Criteria Decision Making(MCDM) methodology- supporting an effective comparative analysis among the alternative projects based on determined criterion is applied. The methodology is implemented with a case study of one of the design studios of Çankaya University with observation, research and assessment of the whole education term. The outcomes of the AHP-based approach suggested by the research are consistent with those obtained by traditional assessment methods, since it has been seen that this approach can provide numerical results that are comparable, measurable, gradable, consistent and can be reported separately for each assessor. However, it has also been found that the AHP-based method is suitable for evaluating only a limited number of projects. There is a possibility that the evaluation period can be longer, and the process may be somewhat tedious if the number of projects increases. With the research, and by setting thresholds levels for evaluation, it has become clear that successful and unsuccessful projects can be separated for achievement/competence. Consequently, it has been observed that the approach has considerable potentials to be further developed to evaluate architectural projects comparatively, especially for architectural students projects, and other architectural projects such as architectural design competitions.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 34 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.