For those invited to submit work for Open House, a few notes:
- All drawings should be arranged on panels that are 30″x60″ portrait format (60″ vertical dimension). Students may have as many portrait panels as you need. (If you followed the suggested layout during the course of the year, the modules can be easily rearranged.)
- Please submit PDFs of your drawings for review. We want to guage the available wall space and total length of presentations before we ask you to print. Upload to the folder on the Drive: https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B52miD6wFwC2LUZUMzZ4ckNTczQ
- Once submitted, you will be cleared to print and assigned a presentation location.
Today’s review will proceed in three parts.
- 1:00-2:30 – Part 1: Set-up
All models and supplemental work to be installed in Center Core (per discussion locations below) not later than 2:30p.
- 2:30-4:30 – Part 2: Nominations
Students have been assigned to discussion groups; each group will:
– Rate models according to the criteria provided.
– Nominate two (2) models to the final round.
– Nominate two (2) Delegates to represent the discussion in the Final round.
- 4:30-5:00 – Relocate models to center for Part 3.
- 5:00-6:00 – Part 3: Final Round
Student Delegates will openly re-evaluate models according to the criteria and deliberate in an open forum to select one winner. Studio Faculty will moderate.
Discussion Groups / Locations: Studio sections will be mixed with a faculty member moderating:
This semester, we will refer to structured criteria to evaluate the quality of Section Models.
Section Model Evaluation
- Composition: Does the spatial organization and experiential quality fulfill the project agenda? Is it strategic? Is it artful?
- Building Language: Does the composition of material assemblies and building systems reflect an understanding of the elements within and between each system? Is the composition sensitive? Does it fulfill the project agenda?
- Scale: Is there a calibrated relationship between the human body and the architectural ‘body’? Does it relate to the project agenda?
- Operative Craft: Is the workmanship of the model sensitive to materiality, the performance of materials, and different kinds of connections? Is it elegant?
- Process Context: Do parallel process documents (link to the deliverables) complement the model in a meaningful way? Do they reflect a parallel exploration of building language? Are they artful?
NOTE: These models are not isolated investigations, they are one of many objects, across a range of complementary scales, each examining an aspect. The size of the building is relatively small, so you can find a scale that satisfies the intent of this investigation. Students should interpret suggestions about the mode’s scale (½”=1’-0”) as an indication of the content that the model is intended to investigate. If the model is too small, students will sabotage their ability to investigate the nuances of assembly. If the scale of the model is too big, spatial composition and quality will disappear.