You are on page 1of 11

SCHOOL OF ARCHITECTURE, BUILDING AND DESIGN

Centre for Architecture Studies in Southeast Asia (MASSA)

Bachelor of Science (Honours) in Architecture


Module: Theories of Architecture & Urbanism

Week 6- 2 May 2018


Lecture & Briefing
Lecture: LT-22 , Tutorial: E4.16-17

1.0 Synopsis Briefing 8:30 AM-9:00 AM


2.0 Lecture on Modernism and Post Modernism 9:00 AM-10:00 AM
3.0 Group Reading (Text or Reader 1-2) 10:00 AM-1:00 PM
Assessment Plan
Learning
Assessments Type Marks Presentation Submission
outcomes

1, 2
Synopsis Group/Individual 40% Reaction Paper Paper
(refer to MO)

Synopsis –Readings-Lecture:
1: Week 6: Theories of Urbanism
2: Week 6: Modern & Post Modern Theory
3: Week 7: Phenomenology: of Meaning and Places
4: Week 8: Critical Regionalism: Kenneth Frampton

Introduction
Subsequent to each thematic lecture, students are required to submit a synopsis in the form of a reaction
paper. Its aim is for the students to read a selected reading in relation to the theme that has been discussed in
class for the week and submit a reaction paper to the text. There will be a total to 4 synopses.

A reaction or response paper requires the writer to analyze a text, then develop commentary related to it. It
requires thoughtful reading, research and writing. It should identify the key points highlighted in the text
and then focus on your personal perspective on issues raised through the text. In addition to your
personal perspective, you should identify experiences or insights that have shaped your perspective.
SYNOPSIS

a brief summary or general survey of something.


"a synopsis of the insurance cover provided is set out below"

synonyms: summary, precis, résumé, abstract, outline,


condensation, digest, summarization, summing-up, rundown,
round-up, abridgement, review, sketch, compendium; rare
conspectus

"a basic synopsis of the play"

•an outline of the plot of a play, film, or book.

SYNOPSIS
Reminder
It is not a direct summary of the reader but a telling the
important details of the reader in your own words.
Writer may relate to other reader(s) and share related
experience(s) or opinion(s).

Previous semester work sample


Tasks & Methodology
Paper Format
Student may continue with the same grouping
from Project 1: Case study. Group reading
is encourage for idea collaboration and
What is the Author
better learning. Each student is to prepare trying to prove? Introduction
and submit a total of (4) reaction paper as a Is the Author Introduce the
successful and clear reader/text
synopsis of the given reading during tutorial about his attempt? What makes
sessions. The reaction papers shall be the reader
different from
formulated based on questions listed below: What is the book other reader?
about? Main Body
 What issues or problems does the author
address? What is the What is your
 What is the author's main point? Author’s argument? opinion of the
book? Impact
Analyze the
 What points or assumptions does the author’s point of of the reader
author make, and how does he/she back view on you?
Conclusion
that up?
 What are strengths and weaknesses?
Where are problems with the argument?
 How do the texts relate? (if multiple texts)
 How do these ideas connect to the overall
ideas of the class/unit/etc.? http://www.esuhistoryprof.com/writing_reaction_papers.htm
BACHELOR OF SCIENCE (HONOURS) IN
Submission Format ARCHITECTURE
THEORIES OF ARCHITECTURE AND
URBANISM (ARC61303/ARC2224)
 The reaction paper should be at least 300 SYNOPSIS: REACTION PAPER
(MARCH 2018)
words (not to exceed 1 page of A4 size)
Name: ID No.:
Lecturer: Tutorial Time:
 Use the attached given template. Reader/Text Title: Synopsis No:
Author:

 Type-written, Arial narrow 12 pts, 1 ½ - spacing.

Assessment Components
1. Identification of key points from the reading
2. Use of appropriate architectural terminologies and
writing skills in the synopsis
3. Clarity in opinions and reactions

Word Count: Mark Grade


Assessed by: Date. Page No
List of Text for Reading/Paper Text 3
(Group A):
Text 1
Juhani Pallasma,
(Group A):
“The Eyes of the Skin: Architecture and the Senses” (2007), pp40-46
Georg Simmel, “The Metropolis and Mental life” (1903)
(Group B):
(Group B):
Juhani Pallasma, “The Geometry of Feeling A Look at Phenomenology
Louis Wirth, “Urbanism as a Way of Life” (1938)
of Architecture” (1996)
Text 2 pp448-452
(Group A):
Text 4
Frank Lloyd Wright, “In the Cause of Architecture” (1908)
(Group A)
(Group B):
Kenneth Frampton
Robert Venturi, et al, “Learning from Las Vegas:
‘Towards Critical Regionalism: Six Points for an Architecture of
The Forgotten Symbolism of Architectural Form (1977)
Resistance. No.1, 2 & 3
(Group B)
Kenneth Frampton
Online References
‘Towards Critical Regionalism’: Six Points for an Architecture of
1. http://www.wikihow.com/Write-a-Reaction-Paper Resistance. No.4, 5 & 6
2. http://www.slideshare.net/venj88/guide-to-writing-a-
reaction-paper
Submission DUE
Wednesday, 23 May 2018 (Week 9)
Assessment Scheme Synopsis
SYNOPSIS DESCRIPTION ASSESSMENT RUBRIC

Grades Marks Key points (25%) Appropriateness of Clarity in Opinions and Logical Progression
Terminologies (25%) Reactions (25%) (25%)

A 75- Evidence of outstanding Appropriate use of Outstanding Clarity in Outstanding


100 understanding of Key Terminologies In discussing the opinions and reactions - Articulation of logical
points through clear Issues/ Concepts/Theories Supported with strong expressions ending
explanation Logical explanation with well-developed
paragraphs
B 60-74 Evidence of Reasonable use of Reasonable clarity in Appropriate use of
understanding of Key Terminologies In discussing the opinions and reactions - Terminologies In
points through Issues/ Concepts/Theories with Supported with Logical discussing the Issues/
reasonable explanation Minor unfamiliarity explanation Concepts/Theories

C 50-59 Evidence of Some Acceptable use of Acceptable Clarity in Acceptable


Understanding of Key Terminologies in discussing the opinions and reactions - Articulation of logical
points through Issues/ Concepts/Theories with Supported with expressions ending
acceptable explanation Noticeable unfamiliarity satisfactory explanation with some ambiguous
statements

D 40-49 Evidence of Some Evidence of Terminologies Weak Clarity in opinions Poor Articulation of
Understanding of Key however poorly communicated and reactions - logical expressions
points through not quite in discussing The Issues/ Supported with Lengthy ending with noticeable
acceptable explanation Concepts/Theories With explanation ambiguous statements

F 0-39 Insufficient Evidence of Insufficient Evidence of Improper opinions and Unable to Articulate /
Understanding of Key Terminologies in discussing the reactions. Not Matching illogical expressions.
points through weak Issues/ Concepts/Theories With the Issues/ Concepts/ Poorly written synopsis.
explanation Theories -Inadequate
Reasons
Project (Part 2): COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS ESSAY
Project Part 2:
Assessment Components
1.0 Introduction to project/ Site Study
1.1 Brief Introduction of the project 1. Critical analysis of architecture and urban forms in
1.2 Asian City (Case Study) relation to relevant architectural theories (Part 1)
1.3 Local City (Analysis)
2. Critical analysis of architecture and urban forms within its
2.0 Comparative Analysis social, cultural and intellectual context (Part 2)
2.1 Similarities
3. Structure, clarity and logical coherence of the arguments
2.2 Dissimilarities
presented (Part 2)
3.0 Conclusion 4. References and research skills (Part 2)
Take note of the following:
• Urban forms, Architecture in relation to relevant
architectural theories/
• Architectural and Urban form within its social and
cultural context.
• Nodes, Activity Centers and Contact Points

3.0 Conclusion

4.0 Referencing
• Publishing
• online reference
Learning
Assessments Type Marks Presentation Submission
outcomes

Project 3,4,5 60% Case Study


Group/Individual Paper
(Part A & B) (refer to MO) (20%+40%) Research Analysis

Project Part 2, 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 5)

Submission Requirements : 2000 words comparative analysis essay


Submission Format : A-4 paper (neatly compiled)
Submission Due : 20 June 2018 (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
Assessment Scheme Project (Part 2)
1 2 3 4 5
No. CRITERIA
Fail Poor Satisfactory Good Excellent
Background/Intro No relationship Little Evidence of Identified theory Identified theory
Critical analysis of between theory relationships some which are which are
architecture & urban and analysis between theory relationships interrelated with clearly linked to
1 forms within its social, and analysis between theory analysis analysis
cultural and intellectual and analysis
context. (20%)

Comparative Essay+ Arrangement of Arrangement of Images and Images and Images and
Illustrated Diagram images and images and illustrations are illustrations are illustrations are
Comparative Analysis illustrations is illustrations is roughly arranged orderly arranged arranged well.
Use of diagrams, confusing. unclear. in a workable with annotations Clarity & with
illustrations, sketches order. annotations.
2 and images to aide
analysis. (50%) Comparison is Comparison is Comparison is Comparison is Comparison is
unclear. often unclear generally clear clear with clearly stated
with minimal minimal and justified.
ambiguity. improvements
Referencing & No evidence of Identified at Uses at least 3 Uses at least 4 Uses at least 5
Research Skills sources. Absence least 2 sources. sources. sources. Clear sources.
3 (30%) of investigation. Lack of Evidence of evidence of showed rigorous
evidence of investigation investigation investigation
investigation.