This paper, which is based upon a talk given to the Martin Centre Research Society at the Department of Architecture at Cambridge in October 1994, examines the continuing relevance of the model of architectural research which was proposed at the Oxford Conference on architectural education in 1958. It suggests that the Oxford model, with its roots in the procedures of the sciences, in which ‘fundamental’ research precedes ‘development’, before leading into practical application, fails to account for the role of the designer in the evolution of the state of architecture. It also proposes that developments in architectural education, in particular the growth of the unit system of studio instruction, have added a further element to the productive and investigative potential of the schools of architecture, and that this must be accounted for in any valid model of research.

As funding for research in British universities is now dependent upon an assessment of research productivity (made every four years), departments of architecture are finding that design, which used to be considered as the equivalent of research for architectural teachers, may not be regarded as such for the purposes of this assessment. The arguments both for and against considering design as a research activity are discussed, as is the need for a recognised way of grading the quality of work. Suggestions are made for the direction in which design as research in schools of architecture might take.

An account is given of the recently completed Wealden poolhouse, and an argument is made for embracing indeterminacy in language and architecture

A concise report about the landform, architectural, and detail design concepts for the recently completed modernisation of the Bishopsfield Housing Estate in Harlow, Essex. The objective was to develop proposals for new interventions which are directly based on, and give emphasis and new life in a contemporary way to the architectural and urban design conceptions of the original architects and town planner.

In February of this year an exhibition of the work of Hans Scharoun devised by Nasser Golzari and Peter Blundell Jones was put on at the RIBA in London, in connection with which was held a Scharoun Symposium on 17 February. This included two German speakers sponsored by the Goethe Institute. Günter Behnisch spoke as the leading practitioner in what could be called a Scharounian direction. Also invited was Alfred Schinz, one of the most articulate of Scharoun's assistants from the rich period of the early 1950s, when Scharoun devised the prototypes for all his later work. Schinz's health unfortunately let him down, and he suggested that his place be taken by Friedrich Mebes, an architect friend from Essen who had been a student of Scharoun in Berlin in the 1940s and who still practises rather well in a Scharounian direction. With some help from Schinz, Mebes prepared what turned out to be an inspiring and informative paper, and it is printed below slightly shortened and with some tidying of the translation. Peter Blundell Jones

This paper is based largely on a document presented at a conference celebrating the 25th anniversary of the Martin Centre, held at the University of Cambridge in October 1992. It takes as its point of departure Sir Leslie Martin's essay, ‘Architects’ approach to architecture' (Martin, 1967). Commencing with his argument that ‘intentions and processes’ in architecture are more fundamental than form, this paper questions past attempts at relating history to architectural process, and outlines the potential offered by more recent advances in technology – especially, photogrammetry and the computer – for achieving a more objective and broader base for architectural criticism and consensus.

The study of metaphor provides valuable insights into the workings of technology and how technology brings about change. This paper considers some current influential thinking about metaphor and how this impinges on understandings of technology and design.

This paper investigates Gottfried Semper's use of comparative science as a basis for a theory of architecture. It traces Semper's reliance on the works of Jean-Nicholas-Louis Durand and the zoologist Georges Cuvier. Following Michel Foucault's argument that the emergence of comparative science entails a decisive transition in modern thought, the paper explores the origins and implications of Semper's comparative theory of architecture. Through this focus, the paper attempts to identify and explore an essential tension inherent in Semper's work between, on the one hand, his sensitive recognition of the symbolic significance of architecture, and on the other, the proto-positivism implied in his ‘science of invention’. This dilemma still conditions our contemporary architectural culture, making the study of Semper's complex and conflicting ideas more relevant than ever.

The purpose of the research project described in part here was to inform strategic environmental and architectural issues in the design of three buildings for Potsdamer Platz, Berlin. The design team consists of Richard Rogers Partnership (architects), the Martin Centre (research consultants), RP+K Sozietät (environmental engineers), debis Immobilienmanagement mbH (client), and Drees & Sommer AG (project manager). The research element of the project was funded by the European Union's JOULE II Solar House Programme (JOU2-CT93-0436) and the Mitsubishi Corporation Fund for Europe and Africa. Our role in the design development was as daylighting and sunlighting research consultants with the aim of informing building form, façade design and the interior to improve environmental performance. This paper focuses particularly on the research and development of the façade, briefly describing the role of research activities in design. The purpose of this paper is thus not to describe new or pure research, but rather to investigate the architectural potential of environmental issues and analysis techniques.

Interactive rendering combines the geometrical precision of classical computer graphics with the representational freedom of a paint program. It is more sympathetic to the ways in which designers use images, and overcomes many of the frustrations experienced in rendering from CAD models. The scene is generated in a standard viewing application, but saved as a specially enhanced raster image. The extra information allows the interactive renderer to apply brushed-on rendering effects which are sensitive to the perspective of the image. Effects can be applied locally or overall, and may be overlaid, blended and erased to create complex combinations. A huge range of treatments is obtainable, both photorealistic and not.