This course is incredibly engaging because it emphasizes the meanings of words and how crucial it is to use them correctly, especially in the field of architecture. In architecture, precise terminology is vital for clear communication. It allows architects, designers, and clients to share ideas, concepts, and visions effectively. By understanding the meanings of words, we can avoid confusion and ensure that our discussions are based on a solid foundation of shared knowledge. One of the key skills we learn in this course is how to make meaningful comparisons, whether it's between two paintings, buildings, or architectural styles. For example, when comparing two buildings, it’s not just about their size or aesthetic appeal; it’s about understanding and describing their form, function, materials, and historical context. The correct terms help in communicating these complex ideas clearly. Learning the right terminology also helps in creating constructive discussions. Whether in a classroom, a professional setting, or a design critique, using the appropriate language is crucial for engaging in productive dialogue. For instance, terms like “modernist,” “brutalism,” or “postmodernism” convey specific architectural movements and their underlying philosophies. Using such terms accurately allows us to dive deeper into discussions, leading to better insights and a more meaningful exchange of ideas. In essence, this course is important because it goes beyond simply teaching vocabulary; it teaches us how to communicate thoughtfully and purposefully. The ability to use the right words in architecture not only enhances our understanding of the built environment but also allows us to participate more effectively in shaping it. This is a valuable skill, both in academic and professional settings.

After becoming somewhat more accustomed to the relationships between the plans, our instructors must have decided that it was time for us to start exploring linear elements. This time, we tried to discover relationships and references using five squares and two linear elements in two different dimensions. When I realized that I hadn’t fully utilized the potential of the plans at the corners in my initial attempt, I created a model where I aimed to establish relationships between all the elements without creating any corners. Later on, we transitioned from squares to rectangles at a 1/3 ratio and tried to position the linear elements in reference to the rectangles, aiming to create a three-dimensional structure. Afterward, they asked us to create a structure with more elements to use the linear elements more effectively. Of course, they also wanted us to continue applying the references and relationships we had previously learned. Subsequently, we combined everything we had done so far and attempted to create a three-dimensional structure using squares, rectangles, and linear elements, with the dimensions determined by our own arrangement.

Although I had visited METU many times before, this time, the different perspective I learned about led me to view it from a completely different angle. I really enjoyed noticing the raw materials and how the design elements were placed. Our small but very exhausting tour mainly focused on the Faculty of Architecture, the Faculty of Physics, and the library area. Being able to notice the hinges and thresholds integrated into the buildings, observing the repetition of different elements, and beginning to understand why certain things were designed in certain ways truly felt amazing. At the same time, we drew the buildings around us and some of their parts in our notebooks, using the techniques we learned in class.

At the beginning of this course, where we tried to learn the fundamental rules of design through trial and error, we started by combining the ready-made pieces we had to understand certain principles. We were surprised to see how the same pieces could create very different forms. Additionally, we combined our pieces with those of our classmates to create larger and more complex structures. Finally, we used parts of these structures to build something even bigger, trying to grasp the concept of 'base.' Throughout this process, we observed how these planes connected and how they formed different relationships. Afterward, as two people, we tried to analyze the relationships between a total of 23 plans across four different templates on a broader scale.

We could all guess that the Architectural Communication Techniques course would be related to drawing techniques. However, I never expected it to be this abstract, nor did I realize how challenging abstract thinking could be. Creating a visual composition by drawing straight lines with different intensities and angles was so enjoyable."First, we practiced drawing these straight lines at school. Then, using this technique, we tried to abstract boxes and some important buildings. I especially loved this photo of Atakule and wanted to recreate it using this technique.