Jory,
I agree that reviewers can sometimes get out of hand---but someone harping
on ANY aspect of the design for an inordinate length of time---even if it is
germaine to the problem---is a bother. Reviewers need to be aware of the
educational objective of the exercise and emphasize that in the reviews; if
they feel it would be of benefit to the students, other topics should be
addressed, within reason.
As a third-year student, I sometimes sit in on first and second year reviews.
Having been there (and having often done the same project myself!) I know
what the vital issues are, what the objective is, etc., but I won't hesitate
to mention something else---I won't spend too much time on it, or take a
student to task for something they don't know about, but just plant the
idea in their mind for next time.
Any interest here for a thread on critiques? Not just arch. reviews, but any
design or art. I'm interested in the difference between reviews in arch.
schools as opposed to elsewhere.
Mark
I agree that reviewers can sometimes get out of hand---but someone harping
on ANY aspect of the design for an inordinate length of time---even if it is
germaine to the problem---is a bother. Reviewers need to be aware of the
educational objective of the exercise and emphasize that in the reviews; if
they feel it would be of benefit to the students, other topics should be
addressed, within reason.
As a third-year student, I sometimes sit in on first and second year reviews.
Having been there (and having often done the same project myself!) I know
what the vital issues are, what the objective is, etc., but I won't hesitate
to mention something else---I won't spend too much time on it, or take a
student to task for something they don't know about, but just plant the
idea in their mind for next time.
Any interest here for a thread on critiques? Not just arch. reviews, but any
design or art. I'm interested in the difference between reviews in arch.
schools as opposed to elsewhere.
Mark