Due: 7am before the presentation, as a new blog post and link to the online presentation (or an upload to ANGEL).
The discussants for the day’s reading will prepare a compelling 20 minute presentation and a thoughtful short (<500w) commentary summarizing their reaction to the readings, addressing the following issues:
- Who is the author? Who are the main authors referenced in the text?
- What is the author’s thesis? Why do you think the author wrote this piece?
- What evidence does the author use to support his/her argument? Do you believe this evidence? Why?
- How does the author acknowledge competing explanations or understandings?
- What assumptions does the author make? Is he/she explicit about these assumptions?
- How and why does this work matter to the field of architecture? Why do you think Rebecca assigned this reading?
- Provide at least two questions for extended and thoughtful class discussion.
The entire presentation should include images of architectural works relevant to the reading. They can be projects that the author(s) laud or excoriate. Additionally, select work that you believe embodies or rejects the principles argued for in the reading. Include names of the project team, plans, sections, elevations, and photographs, as well as sources of images and information.
Note: No slide shall have more than 25 words.
As an alternative to Powerpoint for this presentation, feel free to examine other online presentation services & link to your presentation in the blog post:
Evaluation of this assignment will be according to the Discussion Evaluation Rubric.
|Mon 9/14||Why We Build||Rebecca||Addie||xxxx|
|Mon 9/21||On Critique||Paige||Suheng||Megan|
|Mon 9/28||Wicked Problems||John||Steph||xxxx|
|Mon 10/19||Semiotics 1||Andrew||Haley||Chin|
|Wed 10/21||Semiotics 2||Ali||Lindsay||Veronica|
|Mon 11/2||Multiple Logics||Andrew||Jomar||xxxx|
featured image by Gabriel Jorby