All posts by Haley DeNardo

Final 1500w

Reforming Formal Architecture Education

Leave a comment

Reforming Formal Architectural Education

Periodical: Arch Daily or Design Intelligence

       There currently exists a disconnect between the design driven aspect of school and the true workings of an architectural office. This is corrected by incorporating internships and office experiences into formal architecture education. In addition, we should consider the way schools are reviewed and accredited to be changed or overhauled. By changing the formal education that architecture students currently receive, students will have a better understanding of the professional worlds and be better prepared to intelligently solve design problems.

The current formal model of architecture education works to “expose students to various situations and train them to cultivate and appreciate values” (Chakraborty). The current education given in the studio environment does this well. But when you stop and focus on other areas of study such as construction, one can see that these books and writings haven’t been updated recently (Chakraborty). In addition, studio has become rigid and product oriented, rather than focusing on a student development. This skill of developing a project more completely would allow students to adapt to the ever-changing design world that we are now involved in (“The Future of Architectural Education”). This would allow students to work as true design thinkers and problem solvers enabling students to work towards solving local, community, and world problems.

From speaking to several students about their experiences, the formal education that they have received thus far has effectively taught them how to be an efficient designer and to think creatively. For students that had an internship this summer, students learned many things that they had never heard of in school. Learnings rangers from the ever-changing state and national codes that define how we design, building spaces, and the buildings themselves including their systems and build ups. The education changes that are proposed and based on these experiences “shouldn’t merely be just like being in practice; it should offer the opportunity to experiment, to push and test ideas” as a problem solver would in the design world (Hunter).

One program that could be used as a precedent is the architecture program at Drexel University. At Drexel they have the option to do a 2+4 program. This program starts out the first two years with a formal education of the design process and other fundamentals. The other four years are spent taking night classes and working full-time as an intern at local firm in Philadelphia (Drexel University). This type of education allows students to receive a meaningful formal education as well as gain real world experience over four years. In addition to the experience, this model allows students to start working or potentially completing their IDP hours so that upon graduation they are eligible for completion of their ARE exams.

A second program that is a great example is that of the Master of Architecture at University of Cincinnati. Designed for students without an undergraduate degree in architecture, this program is unique in that it has a co-operative education program as well as research concentrations. The co-operative education program offers a connection between the academic and commercial worlds (Cincinnati), allowing students to gain irreplaceable knowledge in the field, as well as continuing their formal education. The research concentration option provides mentorship with a faculty member and potentially an architect in the community for student-led research (Cincinnati).

These schools both serve as excellent examples of internship experience in a firm and how it can be integrated into formal architecture education. It is important to remember that students learn a great amount during our education. The studio culture that we thrive in is very important to the way students learn and practice once they graduate. The interactions that occur in studio are often similar to those that one would experience in the field when speaking to a client. When reforming formal architecture education by adding the previously listed items, reformers must remember that studio culture is an integral part of education. These mentioned reforms do not eliminate studio culture, but rather help to make it more healthy and beneficial to students.

In addition to implementing internships and outside learning experiences, the accreditation requirements for our programs should be changed. The process required to complete an accredited degree is an extremely daunting challenge: 150 credits in college (five years or more), internships (usually five years), and a seven part registration exam (two to four years). According to the National Council of Architectural Registration Boards (NCARB), this takes an aspiring architect on average 14.5 years after the completion of high school (Mruk). When compared to other professions such as law who attend three years of graduate school, most students are able to sit for their bar exams within three months (Mruk). Considering that both of these are professional degrees, shouldn’t the time to pass architecture education be shortened to match other degrees similar to it? One solution to this problem is to allow specialization and a tiered education system. This would allow students to have different requirements based on what they plan on doing with their degrees. This is not to say that education the way it is now would cease to exist. The ‘generalist’ education we receive now is not to be completely discredited, but should be split to allow for other skills.

licensure-1

Design Intelligence article “A Better Path to Practicing” by Renee Cheng

       Reforming architectural education as a whole is another solution that bridges the gap between school and the professional environment. Accreditation is a tricky process and streamlines architecture education across the country. By changing the accreditation values, education could be a forced reform for all schools, and not optional for those that can fit internships into their programs. Schools are able to define their curriculum but NAAB has the power to define what is required of faculty and information that must be provided to students.

There are all of these ideas on how to change the education students are currently receiving, but how should one go about implementing all of these changes? As mentioned in an article by Robert Ivy for the AIA NAAB accrediting team, we are asking for new design intelligence and real world business practice at the same time. While asking for all of these changes, school budgets are being pulled in all directions, a factor that is often forgotten. Many in the industry believe that universities, students, and professionals want to better the education that architecture students receive, but working together is required in order to implement solutions that are worth while and make a difference.

Some professional say that the current education system is okay how it is and that an overhaul in the education system would be more disruptive than beneficial. There are no longer many that oppose the change in education. Faculty and practicing architects are now looking for creative minds to solve new design problems as well as graduates that are face-paced with technology and able to work across several disciplines (Ivy). Many folks in the industry are promoting and asking for a change in our formal education so that graduates are ready for the work force and can bring the skills needed to solve our worlds ever changing problems.

By changing educational values as a whole, we would be able to bridge the gap between formal architectural education and the professional work field. The main strategy suggested that would help to bridge this gap is to incorporate internships and firm experience info the formal education students currently receive. Programs such as Drexel and Cincinnati are great examples of ways to incorporate this learning into the education we already receive. Another way to incorporate firm experience into education would be similar to study abroad, but instead a study away where a student would move to a city and have an internship for a semester that would quantify for some credits as well. In order to implement this, students must take control of their education and call upon NAAB and NCARB to make an official change to the education requirements. NCARB has the ability to change the requirements for IDP and ARE exams that would pressure NAAB to change education requirements. NAAB has the most power in this situation by being able to change what is required for students learn and in part how they gain the information and experience. Changing formal architecture education is no small task and will not be a short process, but this should not deter anyone from causing change for the better.

 

 

Work Cited:

-Chakraborty, Manjari. “Designing Better Architecture Education: Global Realities and Local Reform” Copal Publishing Group. Copyright 2015. Print. Pages 120-200.

-Cramer, James P. “A Proposal to Improve Architectural Education” Design Intelligence. November 1, 2012. <http://www.di.net/articles/a-proposal-to-improve-architectural-education/>

-Drexel University. Architecture home page. Copyright 2015. <http://drexel.edu/westphal/undergraduate/ARCH/>

-Hunter, Will. “Alternative Routes for Architecture” The Architectural Review. September 28, 2012. <http://www.architectural-review.com/education/alternative-routes-for-architecture/8636207.article>

-Ivy, Robert. “Practicing Architecture: Take Five: Should Architecture Education Change?” AIA. September 14, 2012. <http://www.aia.org/practicing/AIAB095950>

-Mruk, Frank J. “Architect Licensing Needs a Gut Rehab” The Wall Street Journal. September 29, 2015. <http://www.wsj.com/articles/architect-licensing-needs-a-gut-rehab-1443569103>

-University of Cincinnati. Masters of Architecture home page. Copyright 2015. <http://daap.uc.edu/academics/said/m_arch.html>

-No Author. “The Future of Architectural Education” Designing Buildings. July 21, 2014. <http://www.designingbuildings.co.uk/wiki/The_future_of_architectural_education>

 

 

Featured Image: Photo and Work By- Kai Hian Ong. Diploma 13. “Geometric Plate VI-X Chaos vs Order”

Peer Design Review

Design Development Peer Review- Justin Chen

Leave a comment

Atlas. The name itself is a bit confusing but overall the project has made great strides towards completion. The name drew me in as well as the consistent graphics but I could not connect the title to the design. I think that if the title is important, it could be a strong force within the project. The graphics of the board are simple and well put together. The strong red line that connects the top of the board to the bottom is a great feature that pulls the boards together well and is closely related to the elevation and section. On the same note as the graphics, I noticed that all of the requirements for our section are on the boards, but the drawings are not as telling as they could be. I know that Justin has the ability to produce great drawings and I hope that his skills are better shown in the final review.

One part of the project that I really enjoy is the large amount of green spaces that are designed into the site and program. The ramp that leads up to the roof is a great feature that helps take advantage of the site. This area has a lot of green space that is great at welcoming the community onto the site. The great thing about the ramp is it allows the site to be determined by the ramp itself and leaves a majority of the site open to be formed into a green public space. One of the reviewers comments that applies to the green ramp is the angle that it is set at. The angle seems to be covering up a shift that the building made in some way, but by changing this angle, the building could really dominate the right side of the site. The building is a very long piece and by changing the angle of the ramp, the view point and overlooks will be more powerful and will follow a more strict set of rules.

One of the comments that the critics made that I did not entirely agree with was that the structure should be changed so that it is lighter. It makes sense that a different system should be used in order to have less columns in the bays. It is important to recognize that eventually a truck may hit a column when there are so many where the trucks are driving through. Justin’s idea of using a strong and durable material is a good one that seems to fit well with his other design ideas. I think the use of concrete is a good idea, but hollow core plank should be used to allow for larger span in the bays instead of steel.

Another comment made about structure is that the basis of square framing does not work well with the current shape of the building. With the different conditions that are created within the emerging building, a rectangular bay size would be better suited for the program placed within. The square framing according to Juan is at a more domestic scale, but I don’t seem the problem with that. The firehouse is where the firefighters spend most of their time and it is their home. I think that rectangular bay would be more efficient for the apparatus part of the building, and therefore be used throughout.

A statement that Juan also made that I agree with, is that the building seems to be reinforcing the idea of horizontality, rather than the idea of verticality that Justin explained the building had. Part of his concept is adding verticality to the site, but the building seems to be more horizontal than vertical. One suggestion to combat this is the bring the monitor museum up from underground and placing it on top of the building. This would emphasize the verticality as well as making the ramp an even greater community presence. Juan’s suggestion was to reinforce the horizontality instead since it works so well with the site. An idea of how to do this is to take the building all the way over to make an urban park to the left between the building and the inlet. This idea as a whole works extremely well with one of the concept ideas of making a large, green, communal, park space. With the building stretched out and the ramp realigned, the park and green space take over the entire site once more, including over the building.

One piece of the project that plays directly into the orders of worth is the end view point for the public that is located on the roof that is accessible via the ramp. The two worlds that this main point connects with are civic and project. By creating a strong connecting point for the public to use as a communal space as well as a vantage point to Manhattan, the public is able to make this space their own. More programing in this space would be beneficial as well as to the overall site. Also consider the character of each space in order to make them more beneficial to the public and the green space that you wish to give back to them, if that is the ultimate goal.

A solution to define all of these small changes is to set a series of strict rules that will allow you to design in a coordinated manner. By first solving issues of structure, others will be solved indirectly. The geometries within the buildings will also be able to inform site work and create a language that the users can experience.

Overall I think the project thus far is at a great point and it is close to being complete. With the completion of some of the suggestions above, the project as a whole will become much stronger and coherent in consideration to the site and the buildings connection to the site/surrounding area. The involvement of the community and public into the spaces will help lead the design and make a strong project. I know that Justin has the ability to create a great project as well as drawings and with some reworking and time spent producing, the project will be even stronger than it is now.

Photo Credit:

http://school00.blogspot.com/2011/01/architecture-in-schools-in-singapore_03.html

Project Statement

DD Design Statement

Leave a comment

Our site is located in historical and industrial Brooklyn on the edge of Bushwick Inlet that leads your ideas to a picturesque view of Manhattan. The land has been compromised though, being labeled as a brownfield and should be cleaned and redesigned immediately. My design encompasses both by creating a occupiable area that borders on a constructed wetland that surrounds the inlet. In addition to constructed wetlands, there are foam mounds covered with earth and vegetation with retention pools to help with cleaning, flooring, and water collection. With a focus on community, the complex draws people in with multiple public sections including a park area, kayak launch, and museum. Varying heights and materials such as wood for residential, concrete for public, and core ten for focal points, guide people to public spaces and away from private ones. A focal public space is the hose drying tower that allows pedestrians and the community to ascend the tower to view not only the complex as a whole but also the amazing views surround the sight like Manhattan and industrial Brooklyn. The building itself is made from planes derived from the angular streets that lead to the inlet. Through theses planes, the land is pulled back to create wetlands and a communal area with a publicly and privately segmented building.

 

Photo Citation:

Photo By: Kongjian Yu
Design By: Turenscape and Peking Univesrity, Beijing

Draft 1000w

Reforming Formal Architectural Education

Leave a comment

Periodical: Arch Daily

There currently exists a disconnect between the design driven aspect of school and the true workings of an architectural office. This can be corrected by incorporating internships and office experiences into formal architecture education. In addition, revamping the way schools are reviewed and accredited should be considers. By changing the formal education that architecture students currently receive, students will have a better understanding of the professional worlds and be better prepared to intelligently solve design problems.

The current formal architecture education works to “expose students to various situations and train them to cultivate and appreciate values” (Chakraborty). The current education given in the studio environment does this well. But when you stop and focus on other things such as construction, you see that these books and writings haven’t been updated anytime recently (Chakraborty). In addition, studio has become rigid and product oriented, but should rather focus on a students development. This skill of development would allow students to adapt to the ever changing design world that we are now involved in (No Author). This would allow students to work as true design thinkers and problem solvers enabling us to work towards solving local and world problems.

From my own personal experience, the formal education that I have received thus far has taught me how to be an efficient designer and to think creatively. At the internship that I had this summer, I learned many things that I had never ever heard of in school. I learned about the ever changing state and national codes that define how we design, building spaces, and the buildings. The education that I hope to create based on these experiences “shouldn’t merely be just like being in practice; it should offer the opportunity to experiment, to push and test ideas” as a problem solver would in the design world (Hunter).

One program that could be used as a precedent is the architecture program at Drexel University. At Drexel they have the option to do a 2+4 program. This program starts out the first two years with a formal education of the design process and other fundamentals. The other four years are spent taking night classes and working full time as an intern at local firm in Philadelphia (Drexel University). This type of education allows students to receive a meaningful formal education as well as gaining real world experience over four years. In addition to the experience, this allows students to start working or potentially completing their IDP hours so that upon graduation they can have some of their ARE exams completed and can sit for the rest of them.

A second program that is a great example is that of the Master of Architecture at University of Cincinnati. They offer a Masters of Architecture to students with an architecture undergrad. This program is unique in that it has a co-op program as well as research concentrations. The co-op program offers a cross between the academic and commercial worlds (Cincinnati). This allows students to gain irreplaceable knowledge in the field as well as continuing their formal education. The research concentration option provides mentorship with a faculty member and potentially an architect in the community for student led research (Cincinnati).

These schools both serve as excellent examples for show casing how work in a firm or the ‘real world’ can be integrated into formal architecture education. It is important to remember that as students we learn a great amount during our education. The studio culture that we thrive in is very important to the way we learn and practice once we graduate. The interactions that occur in studio are often similar to those that we experience in the field what speaking to a client. When reforming our education by adding internships and firm experience, we must remember that studio culture is an integral part of education. These mentioned reforms do not get ride of studio culture but help to make it more healthy.

In addition to implementing internships and outside learning experiences, the accreditation of our programs should be changed. When everything is lined up at once, it is an extremely daunting challenge: 150 credits in college (five years or more), internships (usually five years), and a seven part registration exam (two to four years). According to the National Council of Architectural Registration Boards (NCARB) this takes an architect on average 14.5 years after the completion of high school (Mruk). When compared to other professions such as law, they attend three years of graduate school and most students sit for their bar exams within three months (Mruk). One solution to this problem is to allow specialization and a tiered education system. This would allow students to have different requirements based on what they plan on doing with their degrees. This is not to say that education the way it is now would cease to exist. The ‘generalist’ education we receive now is not to be completely discredited, but should be split to allow for other skills.

Design Intelligence
Design Intelligence article “A Better Path to Practicing” by Renee Cheng

Reforming architectural education as a whole is another solution that bridges the gap between school and the professional environment. Accreditation is a tricky process and streamlines architecture education across the country. By changing the accreditation values, education could be a forced reform for all schools, and not optional for those that can fit internships into their programs.

We have all of these ideas on how to change the education we are receiving, but how do we implement all of this? As mentioned in an article by Robert Ivy for the AIA NAAB accrediting team, we are asking for new design intelligence and real world business practice at the same time. While asking for all of these changes, school budgets are being pulled in all directions, a factor that is often forgotten. I believe that universities, students, and professionals want to better the education that architecture students receive, but we will need to work together in order to implement any solutions.

By changing educational values as a whole, we would be able to bridge the gap between formal architectural education and the professional work field.

 

Work Cited:

-Chakraborty, Manjari. “Designing Better Architecture Education: Global Realities and Local Reform” Copal Publishing Group. Copyright 2015. Print. Pages 120-200.

-Cramer, James P. “A Proposal to Improve Architectural Education” Design Intelligence. November 1, 2012. <http://www.di.net/articles/a-proposal-to-improve-architectural-education/>

-Drexel University. Architecture home page. Copyright 2015. <http://drexel.edu/westphal/undergraduate/ARCH/>

-Hunter, Will. “Alternative Routes for Architecture” The Architectural Review. September 28, 2012. <http://www.architectural-review.com/education/alternative-routes-for-architecture/8636207.article>

-Ivy, Robert. “Practicing Architecture: Take Five: Should Architecture Education Change?” AIA. September 14, 2012. <http://www.aia.org/practicing/AIAB095950>

-Mruk, Frank J. “Architect Licensing Needs a Gut Rehab” The Wall Street Journal. September 29, 2015. <http://www.wsj.com/articles/architect-licensing-needs-a-gut-rehab-1443569103>

-University of Cincinnati. Masters of Architecture home page. Copyright 2015. <http://daap.uc.edu/academics/said/m_arch.html>

-No Author. “The Future of Architectural Education” Designing Buildings. July 21, 2014. <http://www.designingbuildings.co.uk/wiki/The_future_of_architectural_education>

Theory Presentation- Semiotics

Semiotics 1- Architecture and its Interpretation: A Study of Expressive Systems in Architecture

Leave a comment

The main idea to this reading is that the meaning of architecture lies in the interpretations of the individual. Meanings can be formulated from complex things such as cultural backgrounds and religious beliefs to smaller personal ideals such as upbringing and favorite color. These meanings and interpretations vary from person to person and are no longer controlled by the architect or architecture. After the design and construction process, the interpretation is in the individuals hands. But, just because the meaning lies within the individual does not mean that concept and the architects meaning should be disregarded.

Semiotics is a complex system of signals and indexes. Signals are deliberately produced for the purpose of communicating and also so that the interpreter knows that it is used to communicate. Indexes are not used purposefully to communicate an idea. They are preconceived ideas of signals. In addition to signals and indexes there are intentional indexes. They are signals that are not recognized by the interceptor. Pseudo-signals are the interpreters view of a signal, whether is actually is or not. All of these things combined make up the basic of semiotics.

This is important to architecture because at the end of the day, the concept you create as an architect many not be apparent to the people that view your work. The individual has the ability to see what they want within the work. It is still important to have a concept to drive the project through the design process, but it is important to realize that not everyone will see the project as the designer did upon creation. Design should encompass the concept as well as the user and the function of the building. This is something that we should all keep in mind as architects, as the interpretations that we perceive will rarely come true.

If one were to use the Stuckeman Family Building as an example, one thing the architect may have used as a concept is an open floor plan to allow for integration between fields and years as well as leaving everything exposed to be used as learning tools. In addition, one side of the facade is the classical Penn State look using brick and the other is cooper to push the boundaries as architecture often does. A student using the building may interpret part of this building as a view corridor that does not lead to a view that is worthy of such a strong condition. This interpretation could be categorized as an intentional index. Another interpretation that the student might make is that the open spaces are not always conducive to a traditional learning environment.

Overall this reading challenged our ability to analysis architecture writing. But upon further examination, the ideas hidden within this excerpt can apply to our education now as well as to our professional careers. Although this was a difficult reading to understand, we now have a greater understanding on how to interpret an architects concept or meaning of a built from whether intended or not.

Slide show Link: https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1WAyi4_QtAIlBchJQYtHD6XRpaJmmSAr4SIC2zjx5Ogc/edit#slide=id.p

Photo Citation: https://www.pinterest.com/pin/255157135113959850/