Practice of Teaching | Teaching of Practice: The Teacher’s Hunch最新文献

{"title":"Learning Frontiers: Concourse for Ideas","authors":"Patrick Macasaet","doi":"10.35483/acsa.teach.2019.13","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.35483/acsa.teach.2019.13","url":null,"abstract":"Design studios are concourses for ideas. They are spatial arenas for learning and discovery that assemble and allow the formation of new knowledge and transcend existing comprehension. To enable it, students should be encouraged to constantly experiment, speculate, reimagine, critique and contribute within the agendas of the design studio whilst consistently engaged with the wider world of ideas, issues and concerns beyond studio walls. As educators and practitioner- academics, how can we curate learning environments that perform as design studio ‘think-tanks’ that simultaneously addresses the speculative ambitions of the studio (and studio leader) whilst engaging with the practicalities of the real-world brief of the client and as well as the aspirations of various partners, collaborators and stakeholders? The ‘Learning Frontiers: RMIT Urban High School’ project is a series of research-led industry partnered studios – is used here as a point of reflection to unpack specific design studio pedagogical attributes and behaviours that developed whilst leading the project. The studios simultaneously explored two primary threads of investigations; ‘typological procedural experiments’ as a design practice and experimental propositions for high school learning environments.","PeriodicalId":216118,"journal":{"name":"Practice of Teaching | Teaching of Practice: The Teacher’s Hunch","volume":"28 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"115694163","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"The Death of the Desk Crit","authors":"Malini Srivastava, J. Barton, M. Christenson","doi":"10.35483/acsa.teach.2019.27","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.35483/acsa.teach.2019.27","url":null,"abstract":"This paper describes three alternative architectural studio teaching models taught by the authors at the University of Minnesota and at Stanford University. The three models attempt to build independent and collaborative capacity in students and to emphasize iterative components of the design process. Collectively, the models reflect the authors’ shared conviction that studio education is quite pliable and available to a wide variety of changes in approach and methods.The three models discussed in this paper are the Harkness model, the Exchanges in the Thick Middle and Shifting Allegiances. The Harkness model was implemented and tested in early undergraduate studios at Stanford University. Exchanges in the Thick Middle and the Shifting Allegiances studios, studio pedagogy based in play frameworks of “movement, change, alternation, succession, association and separations” (Srivastava and Christenson 2018), have been tested at the University of Minnesota and North Dakota State University in both undergraduate and graduate studios. All three models are briefly introduced in this paper, followed by a description of the typical day and a typical review in the studios. The conclusions section briefly outlines the overlaps and differences in the three models.","PeriodicalId":216118,"journal":{"name":"Practice of Teaching | Teaching of Practice: The Teacher’s Hunch","volume":"106 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"127324181","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Design of Sound and Place - Recent Studios","authors":"Marie-Paul MacDonald","doi":"10.35483/acsa.teach.2019.29","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.35483/acsa.teach.2019.29","url":null,"abstract":"Urban public spaces and their associated architecture should be capable of eliciting responses from all of the human senses, yet traditionally urban and architectural designers rely primarily on visual display to persuade the public of the qualities of new proposals. As it becomes more common to use a variety of media to depict and simulate proposed urban spaces, designers and teachers of design look for ways to sensitize emerging designers to the full spectrum of sensations that inform potential users of a public space. The design studios discussed in this paper bring together the issues of the design of the experience of visual and aural settings, in an era of podcasts and ear-buds.In order to address issues of sound and public space, the author selected examples from two architectural design studios that took place in 2016 and 2018. Undergraduate students composed their own programs and projects to take into account the aural as well as visual qualities associated with their design intentions and ambitions. The process began with a programming phase to designate performing and listening as interactions that constitute primary activities happening in the context of the proposed public built form and related urban space. The research continued with an exploration of the tectonics and materials of the projects. Preliminary field research located and mapped small centralized urban organizations related to the sonic: collectives and small businesses working, for example, in the areas of sound recording, radio and musical performance.","PeriodicalId":216118,"journal":{"name":"Practice of Teaching | Teaching of Practice: The Teacher’s Hunch","volume":"358 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"124890961","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"All Access: Better Fits for Architecture","authors":"Julia McMorrough","doi":"10.35483/acsa.teach.2019.70","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.35483/acsa.teach.2019.70","url":null,"abstract":"In 1975, disability activist Victor Finkelstein modestly but pointedly proposed an “imaginary example which turns the world upside down,” where wheelchair users lived together in a village no longer obliged to accommodate the able-bodied, who found themselves comparatively disabled by their ill fit into their surroundings. That same year, Peter Eisenman’s pointedly disorienting House VI was completed, intentionally confounding inhabitation by even the most robust physical specimens. Nearly two decades earlier, in 1956, Selwyn Goldsmith contracted polio in the same year he earned his degree from the Bartlett School of Architecture. With his drawing hand paralyzed, his life and career had to adjust themselves accordingly. His life’s work would engage his insights into both realms –architecture and disability – and in his seminal work, Designing for the Disabled, he upended established views on ‘medical disability,’exposing instead the idea that architecture was responsible for the creation of disabling environments, and, further, that “the architect can prevent people from being disabled when they use buildings.”","PeriodicalId":216118,"journal":{"name":"Practice of Teaching | Teaching of Practice: The Teacher’s Hunch","volume":"10 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"114609113","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Skittles: Jinni or Universe in a Pocket?","authors":"Antonio Petrov","doi":"10.35483/acsa.teach.2019.69","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.35483/acsa.teach.2019.69","url":null,"abstract":"This was the big data economy, and it promised spectacular gains. A computer program could speed through thousands of resumés or loan applications in a second or two and sort them into neat lists, with the most promising candidates on top. This not only saved time but also was marketed as fair and objective. After all, it didn’t involve prejudiced humans digging through reams of paper, just machines processing cold numbers…The math- powered applications powering the data economy were based on choices made by fallible human beings.Some of these choices were no doubt made with the best intentions. Nevertheless, many of these models encoded human prejudice, misunderstanding, and bias into the software systems that increasingly managed our lives. Like gods, these mathematical models were opaque, their workings invisible to all but the highest priests in their domain. Their verdicts, even when wrong or harmful, were beyond dispute or appeal. And they tended to punish the poor and the oppressed in our society, while making the rich richer…Without feedback, however, a statistical engine can continue spinning out faulty and damaging analysis while never learning from its mistakes…They define their own reality and use it to justify their results. This type of model is self-perpetuating, highly destructive, and very common.","PeriodicalId":216118,"journal":{"name":"Practice of Teaching | Teaching of Practice: The Teacher’s Hunch","volume":"19 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"130537647","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Thinking through Building The Eindhoven School","authors":"S. M. Figueiredo","doi":"10.35483/acsa.teach.2019.4","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.35483/acsa.teach.2019.4","url":null,"abstract":"In December 1988, the exhibition “The Eindhoven School: The Modern Past” opened at deSingel in Antwerp. Presenting the work of twenty-three architecture graduates from TU Eindhoven (TU/e), this exhibition signaled the emergence of a new type of architecture in the Netherlands. However, unlike the Chicago or the Amsterdam School, the Eindhoven School was not presented on the basis of formal similarities. Instead, it was described as “a constellation of diverse attitudes which range[d] from Han Westerlaken’s high tech to the refinement of Jo Coenen and the intellectualism of [Wiel] Arets and [Wim] Van den Bergh,” but also included the work of John Körmeling, Sjoerd Soeters, René van Zuuk, Martien Jansen, Gert-Jan Willemse, Johan Kappetein, Jos van Eldonk, and Bert Dirrix.1","PeriodicalId":216118,"journal":{"name":"Practice of Teaching | Teaching of Practice: The Teacher’s Hunch","volume":"133 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"126845153","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Augmentations of the Real: A Critical Interrogation of the Relationship between the Actual, the Virtual and the Real","authors":"Matias del Camp, Sandra Manninger","doi":"10.35483/acsa.teach.2019.28","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.35483/acsa.teach.2019.28","url":null,"abstract":"Augmentations of the Real presents itself as an occasion to critically interrogate the opportunities that Augmented Reality present for the discipline of architecture1. The problem was illuminated from different angles, reaching from aspects of the augmentation of spatial experiences through articulation and ornamentation, to aspects of AR as an aid in advanced construction methodologies. Special attention was given to the fact that these techniques seamlessly fuse aspects of symbolic culture with considerations of materialism. Augmentations of the Real is profoundly embedded in speculative territories. Moments of uncertainty collide with aspects of precision and control. The result is not an imitation of the former but rather a contemporary interpretation. The foundation can be discerned in the possibility to overlap various experience levels, which allows mining for potentialities in contemporary ornamentations. In this extent, Augmentations of the Real can be considered part of the discussion on Post Digital discourse in Architecture. An era in which computational tools are part of normal reality and other aspects of Digital Design are positioned center stage. Not the toolsets become the main actors, but the cultural agency produced by the toolsets.","PeriodicalId":216118,"journal":{"name":"Practice of Teaching | Teaching of Practice: The Teacher’s Hunch","volume":"49 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"123956193","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Neonomads: Between Education and Practice","authors":"P. Rhodes, Gregory Thomas Spaw","doi":"10.35483/acsa.teach.2019.58","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.35483/acsa.teach.2019.58","url":null,"abstract":"This paper examines the inherent intermediary realities of design-build within a continuum of academia and practice through the presentation of a series of “in-betweens” associated with a year-long design-build studio, a mobile shelter and research station for the Sharjah Environment and Protected Areas Authority (EPAA) sited within the extreme climatic conditions of the Arabian Desert. It analyzes a set of liminal, cultural, and environmental conditions and how they defined the design process; the way in which we engaged the community; and the resulting architecture as an assessment of the studio experience from the conceptual through to the deployment of built work. The impetus for the studio was a fascination with the Empty Quarter of the Rub’ al Khali, one of the most isolated places on Earth and until recently referred to as “terra incognita”, and the intersection between the disappearing Bedouin culture and the rapidly developing and modernizing culture of the United Arab Emirates. For thousands of years, the Bedouins have traversed the Arabian deserts and are the only masters of their more than 650,000 square kilometers of ancient sands. The first foreign explorers were not able to penetrate the Quarter until 1931, with the first accurate Western maps made by Thesiger between 1946 and 1950. Since then, only a few extreme adventurers have attempted its crossing, leaving the rest of us to wonder at its edge.","PeriodicalId":216118,"journal":{"name":"Practice of Teaching | Teaching of Practice: The Teacher’s Hunch","volume":"49 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"121226643","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"From Lab to Field: Extending the Architectural Design Studio to Integrate Emerging Technologies","authors":"C. Cannaerts","doi":"10.35483/acsa.teach.2019.17","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.35483/acsa.teach.2019.17","url":null,"abstract":"The architectural design studio, as a place for educating future practitioners, is faced with two necessary dissociations: the distance from practice and its futurity. While the responses in architectural education have been varied1, the question of how to integrate emerging technologies seems to further sharpen these dissociations. This paper discusses the MMlab and Fieldstation studio, two learning environments set up as extensions of the design studio aiming to question the impact of emerging technologies on architecture. These extensions are particular ways of responding to the dissociations between the design studio and practice and its futurity: through hands-on experimentation with emerging technologies and questioning their relevance for architectural practice and culture, and by exploring the impact of technologies on the environments in which we operate as architects, deliberately looking for places and sites where emerging technologies manifest themselves with a particular urgency. The argument builds on a number of design studios, workshops and elective courses, it discusses two case studies in detail and describes the shift from lab to field in terms of subject matter, spatial setting and pedagogical approach.","PeriodicalId":216118,"journal":{"name":"Practice of Teaching | Teaching of Practice: The Teacher’s Hunch","volume":"213 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"114453610","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"(Digital) Design-Build Education","authors":"Andrew Colopy","doi":"10.35483/acsa.teach.2019.25","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.35483/acsa.teach.2019.25","url":null,"abstract":"Architectural education is often held up as an exemplar of project-based learning. Perhaps no discipline devotes as much curricular time to the development of a hypothetical project as is found in the design studio model prevalent in US architecture schools. Whether the emphasis is placed on more ‘classical’ design skills—be they typological, tectonic, or aesthetic—or on more ‘socio-political or eco-cultural aims,’ studios generally include the skills and values we deem instrumental to practice.1 The vast majority of such studios, therefore, emphasize the production of drawings, images and models of buildings, i.e., representation.2 This is not altogether surprising, as these are, by definition, the instruments of p ractice.3 But the emphasis on drawings and models also reflects the comfortable and now long-held disciplinary position that demarcates representation as the distinct privilege and fundamental role of the architect in the built environment. That position, however, continues to pose three fundamental and pedagogical challenges for the discipline. First, architectural education—to the degree that it attempts both to simulate and define practice—struggles to model the kind of feedback that occurs only during construction which can serve as an important check on the fidelity and efficacy of representation in its instrumental mode. Consequently, design research undertaken in this context may also tend to privilege instrumentation (representation) over effect (building), reliant on the conventions of construction or outside expertise for technical knowledge. This cycle further distances the process of building from our disciplinary domain, limiting our capacity to effect innovation in the built world.4 Second, and in quite similar fashion, the design studio struggles to provide the kind of social perspective and public reception, i.e., subjective political constraints, that are integral to the act of building. Instead, we approximate such constraints with a raft of disciplinary experts—faculty and visiting critics—whose priorities and interests seldom reflect the broad constituency of the built environment. The third challenge, and a quite different one, is that the distinction between representation and construction is collapsing as a result of technological change. In general terms, drawing is giving way to modeling, representation giving way to simulation. Drawings are increasingly vestigial outputs from higher-order organizations of information. Representation, yes, but a subordinate mode that remains open to modification, increasingly intelligent in order to account for direct translation into material conditions, be they buildings or budgets.","PeriodicalId":216118,"journal":{"name":"Practice of Teaching | Teaching of Practice: The Teacher’s Hunch","volume":"22 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"121983392","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}