![1
SCHOOL OF ARCHITECTURE, BUILDING & DESIGN
Centre for Modern Architecture Studies in Southeast Asia (MASSA)
Bachelor of Science (Honours) (Architecture)
THEORIES OF ARCHITECTURE & URBANISM [ARC61303]
Project: ‘Life Between Buildings: Using Public Space’
Assessments Type
Learning
outcomes
Marks Presentation Submission
Project
(Part A & B)
Group/Individual
3,4,5
(refer to MO)
60%
(20%+40%)
Paper
Case Study
& Research
Analysis
Images: Life Between Buildings, Jan Gehl, 1971
https://mendeznicolasarchitecture.wordpress.com/2014/04/11/gehl/
Introduction
Students are required to present an in-depth and analytical research study on the designated topic.
Students are to explore the idea of “Life Between Buildings Using Public Space” (1986) by Jahn
Gehl. The project consists of 2 parts; first is case study and the second part is to produce a
comparative analysis essay.
Jahn Gehl, is a Danish architect and urban design consultant based in Copenhagen whose career
has focused on improving the quality of urban life by re-orienting city design towards the pedestrian
and cyclist. He published his influential Life Between Buildings in Danish in 1971, with the first
English translation published in 1987. Gehl advocates a sensible, straightforward approach to
improving urban form: systematically documenting urban spaces, making gradual incremental
improvements, then documenting them again. Gehl receives many awards for his efforts and
participates in and advises many urban design and public projects around the world (Source:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jan_Gehl)](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/theoriesofarchitectureurbanismprojectguidelinesaugust20171-171230045450/85/Theories-of-architecture-urbanism-project-guidelines-august-2017-1-1-320.jpg)
Theories of architecture urbanism project guidelines august 2017 (1)
- 1. 1 SCHOOL OF ARCHITECTURE, BUILDING & DESIGN Centre for Modern Architecture Studies in Southeast Asia (MASSA) Bachelor of Science (Honours) (Architecture) THEORIES OF ARCHITECTURE & URBANISM [ARC61303] Project: ‘Life Between Buildings: Using Public Space’ Assessments Type Learning outcomes Marks Presentation Submission Project (Part A & B) Group/Individual 3,4,5 (refer to MO) 60% (20%+40%) Paper Case Study & Research Analysis Images: Life Between Buildings, Jan Gehl, 1971 https://mendeznicolasarchitecture.wordpress.com/2014/04/11/gehl/ Introduction Students are required to present an in-depth and analytical research study on the designated topic. Students are to explore the idea of “Life Between Buildings Using Public Space” (1986) by Jahn Gehl. The project consists of 2 parts; first is case study and the second part is to produce a comparative analysis essay. Jahn Gehl, is a Danish architect and urban design consultant based in Copenhagen whose career has focused on improving the quality of urban life by re-orienting city design towards the pedestrian and cyclist. He published his influential Life Between Buildings in Danish in 1971, with the first English translation published in 1987. Gehl advocates a sensible, straightforward approach to improving urban form: systematically documenting urban spaces, making gradual incremental improvements, then documenting them again. Gehl receives many awards for his efforts and participates in and advises many urban design and public projects around the world (Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jan_Gehl)
- 2. 1 Objectives of Project The objectives of this project are as follow: 1. To provide critical perspectives on key issues within the contemporary discourse of architecture, through integration of case-studies and theoretical studies. 2. To enhance the understanding of the complexity of architecture and the ability to undertake independent research Learning Outcomes of this Project 1. Analyse architecture and urban forms in relation to relevant architectural theories 2. Analyse and critique the relationship between architecture and its social, cultural and intellectual context 3. Produce, orally and in writing, a critical interpretation of architecture and urbanism in relation to relevant theories within the contemporary discourse of architecture. Brief/Guidelines This project comprises of 2 parts: • PROJECT PART 1: CASE STUDY (20%) • PROJECT PART 2: A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS ESSAY (40%) PROJECT PART 1: CASE STUDY (Group) Grouping will be following the Design Studio 5 tutorial group. Jahn Gehl in the Life Between Buildings (1971) “examined the relationship between patterns of space use, especially outdoor activities, and the spatial properties of the physical world. He introduced the concepts of necessary, optimal and social activities (Beatriz Campos, http://www.journalofspacesyntax.org/). For this particular task, students are to read Jahn Gehl’s Life Between Buildings (Chapter 1). Subsequently, the students are to examine patterns of social activities in a city (foreign city to be provided by instructor*) and identify ‘contact points’. They are to classify the varying degrees of contact intensity. Students are expected to research for information from publications and other relevant sources. Submission Requirements : Two (2) A3 size illustrated diagrams of the city Identifying Contact points (mimimum of 5) and intensity accompanied with an introduction of the city and images. Submission DUE : Wednesday, 27 September 2017 (Week 5)
- 3. 2 For this semester our case study will be on cities in Asia. (One city per group) 1. Singapore, Singapore 2. Manila, Philippines 3. Hanoi, Vietnam 4. Phnom Penh, Cambodia 5. Hong Kong, Hong Kong 6. Tokyo, Japan 7. Jakarta, Indonesia 8. Taipei, Taiwan 9. Bangkok, Thailand PROJECT PART 2: COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS ESSAY (Individual) Part 2 of the project requires students to write a comparative analysis essay based on findings from case study (Part 1) and local site research (Studio). Students are to examine similarities and dissimilarities based on the patterns of social activities, types of ‘contact points’. And the varying degrees of contact intensity between the two cities. A comparative analysis essay is a commonly used type of writing assignment where students are require to critically analyze any two subjects, finding and pointing out their similarities and/or dissimilarities. Students are expected to research for information from publications, internet and other relevant sources. For local site, students are expected to conduct own site observation (Studio) Submission Requirements : 2000 words comparative analysis essay Submission DUE : 29 November 2017 (Week 13) Key References: 1. “Life Between Buildings: Using Public Space”, Jahn Gehl, (1986) 2. http://writingcenter.fas.harvard.edu/pages/how-write-comparative-analysis SUMMARY OF PROCESS DIAGRAM PROJECTPAR1 1 CITY SELECTION RESEARCH IDENTIFICATION OF "CONTACT POINTS" AND INTESITY LEVEL SUBMISSION PART 1 - 27 SEPTEMBER 2017 PROJECTPART2 COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS DIAGRAMS PROJECTPART2 COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS ESSAY SUBMISSION PART 2 - 29 NOVEMBER
- 4. 3 Assessment criteria 1. Critical analyse of architecture and urban forms in relation to relevant architectural theories. (Part 1) 2. Critical analysis of architecture and urban forms within its social, cultural and intellectual context. (Part 2) 3. Structure, clarity and logical coherence of the arguments presented. (Part 2) 4. References and research skills. (Part 2) Note: Kindly refer to Assessment Rubric for reference. Prepared by: Checked by: Approved by: Prince Favis Isip Keith Tan Kay Hin Mohd Adib Ramli ……………………………. ……………………………. ……………………………. Date: 24/8/2017 Date: 24/8/2017 Date: 24/8/2017 Email: Princefavis.isip@taylors.edu.my Stream Coordinator Programme Director Office No.: 0356295498 (Culture, Artistic & Social Studies) Office Location: Academic Suite C5 Remarks: 1. The Project Brief is to be distributed to the students in the first week of the semester. 2. Any changes to the Project Brief shall be communicated (in writing) to the Programme Director and the approved revised version must be communicated to the students
- 5. 4 PROJECT PART 1: CASE STUDY (20%) No. CRITERIA 1 2 3 4 5 Unsatisfactory/Fail Poor Satisfactory Good Excellent 1 Introduction -HistoricalBackground -Street Profile -Morphological study of Street (20%) No evidence of introduction of city and street. Has an introduction but lacks clarity. Has written an introduction but required clarity &improvements. Has an understandable introduction, using good terminologies. Has clear introduction & appropriate descriptive words. 2 Analysis (Text & Diagrams) 1. Clarity of point and analysis. 2. Effective use of illustration, images and diagrams. 3. Applied theories correctly. (50%) No relationship between theory and analysis Little relationships between theory and analysis Some relationships between theory and analysis. Identified the theory and are interrelated with analysis Identified the theory which are clearly linked to analysis 3 Proper Referencing (20%) No evidence of relating study to required references. Very minimal evidence of relating study to required references. Satisfactory evidence of relating study to required references. Good evidence of relating study to required references. Very good evidence of relating study to required references. 3 Peer Evaluation (10%) Absence in participation & contribution to work & team Minimal participation & contribution to work & team. Satisfactory participation & contribution to work & team Substantial participation & contribution to work & team Very good participation & contribution to work & team PROJECT PART 2: COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS ASSESSMENT RUBRIC (40%) No. CRITERIA 1 2 3 4 5 Unsatisfactory/Fail Poor Satisfactory Good Excellent 1 Background/ Introduction Streets Critical analysis of architecture and urban forms within its social, cultural and intellectual context. (20%) No relationship between theory and analysis Little relationships between theory and analysis Evidence of some relationships between theory and analysis Identified theory which are interrelated with analysis Identified theory which are clearly linked to analysis 2 Comparative Essay+ Illustrated Diagram Comparative Analysis Use of diagrams, illustrations, sketches and images to aide analysis. (50%) Arrangement of images and illustrations is confusing. Arrangement of images and illustrations is unclear. Images and illustrations are roughly arranged in a workable order. Images and illustrations are orderly arranged with annotations Images and illustrations are arranged well. Clarity & with annotations. Comparison is unclear. Comparison is often unclear Comparison is generally clear with minimal ambiguity. Comparison is clear with minimal improvements Comparison is clearly stated and justified. 3 Referencing & Research Skills (30%) No evidence of sources. Lacks in-depth investigation. Identified at least 2 sources. Evidence of investigation however lacking. Uses at least 3 sources. Evidence of investigation Uses at least 4 sources. Clear evidence of investigation Uses at least 5 sources. Indicated rigorous investigation