Architectural Design Studio 2: Exploration

Teacher(s)

Amand Arnd; Berton Clément; Boghaert Christoffel; Coton Gauthier; De Groote Geert; De Paepe Mathieu; Fache Dimitri; Meunier Matthieu; Surroca Damien;

Language

French

Prerequisites

The prerequisite(s) for this Teaching Unit (Unité d’enseignement – UE) for the programmes/courses that offer this Teaching Unit are specified at the end of this sheet.

Main themes

The Architectural Design Studio 2 explores various aspects of architectural composition through a series of project assignments with targeted objectives, supported by appropriate references. The themes addressed are defined by a program and an environmental context:

• Dwelling in its broadest sense (domestic, collective, urban, territorial).
• The built environment, at a neighborhood scale, on defined plots, and in relation to existing buildings, incorporating the constituent dimensions of architectural space: structure, light, and materials.

As part of the learning process for architectural composition, the Architectural Design Studio 2 integrates these themes into the progressive acquisition of design skills.

Learning outcomes

At the end of this learning unit, the student is able to :

Specific Learning Outcomes By the end of this course, students will be able to design an architectural project that responds to a contextualized question while integrating sustainable development principles. Students will be able to: Analyze a given situation, identify its challenges, and articulate architectural intentions by taking a clear position, Develop an architectural project with coherence, sensitivity, and an understanding of the discipline’s fundamental and enduring values, Communicate and represent the architectural project, translating intentions into materialization through oral argumentation, models, and drawings. Architectural Design Studio 2 builds upon the foundational skills introduced in Architectural Design Studio 1 and develops these general objectives through exploratory exercises. General Learning Outcomes In line with the program’s learning outcomes (LOs), this course contributes to the development and acquisition of the following LOs: LO1.1 Identify the parameters and issues of a given situation.   LO1.2 State the intentions and choices of an architectural project at different intervention scales.   LO1.3 Design spaces conducive to the well-being of both human and non-human occupants.   LO1.4 Compose the material elements of a construction or development.   LO1.5 Creatively compose a project.   LO1.6 Incorporate Sustainable Development requirements into the design process, at multiple scales.  LO2.3 Proficiently portray spatial experiences.   LO2.4 Proficiently illustrate construction logics.   LO2.5 Proficiently represent a creative process. LO3.2 Acquire and explain the construction and technical processes related to architecture.   LO4.2 Learn and experiment with the concepts and approaches of artistic disciplines. LO5.1 Communicate attentively and inclusively with the various stakeholders of the architectural project.

Teaching methods

The proposed teaching method is part of a cross-disciplinary approach combining fundamental teaching and project work. The focus on these two themes aims to design a project, explore structural principles and possible materials for a project in line with initial intentions that respond to simple guidelines: space/light/material/uses.
The workshop will be organised according to the principle of work in progress.
During thematic sessions, students will be asked to:
- Formulate project intentions in response to the simple issues defined above.
- Formalise project scenarios and argue them objectively.
- Prioritise and justify spatial organisation choices.
- Develop hypotheses of structural principle and materiality.
- Align space, material and structure.
- Communicate and represent their project according to conventional representation codes.
The ‘exploratory’ dimension fuels the project, both in terms of learning research processes and completing the architectural project. Teachers will pay particular attention to this. 
Research through the project
Ongoing work on the architectural project fuels the research process through the filter of the workshop challenges. These approaches are cumulative and transform the proposal for spaces into a continuous creative process.
The workshop is a place for discussion and learning. Students conduct research through drawing and modelling at different scales, depending on their relevance. To encourage responsibility and autonomy, students are free to produce all the documents necessary for understanding and communicating their approach and proposal. Regular, daily work is required.
The project will be supervised by two teachers throughout the semester.

Evaluation methods

Weighting of assessments
For panel assessments, we will use a points-based system based on the following five main themes:
• Commitment to personal architectural narrative
• Architectural quality of choices that conserve resources, environments, places and the living
• Relevance between techniques and architecture
• Habitability, attention to uses, movements, spatial quality
• Materiality, atmosphere, sensoriality
Educational grade
The assessment is based on continuous assessment throughout the semester (50%) and the jury assessment at the end of the semester (50%).
The educational grade is a weighted average of the final grade established by the teaching team and outside the juries on the basis of documents revealing your personal research process.
The weighting of the educational mark is as follows:
• -10% No personal research process
• -5% Weak personal research process
• 0% Satisfactory personal research process
• +5% Committed personal research process
• +10% Outstanding personal research process
Management of deadlines and late submissions
The learning path must be followed as closely as possible. For physical or digital submissions, any delay will result in a 10% penalty on the assessment grade for each hour of delay, up to a maximum of 3 hours. After this time limit, the work will be rejected and a grade of 0 will be awarded for this assessment.
However, it is understood that certain exceptional circumstances may prevent students from submitting their documents within the prescribed deadlines. In this case, it is the student's responsibility to notify the course instructors in writing as soon as possible (at least 24 hours in advance) in order to negotiate an extension or consider alternatives.
If a request for an extension is accepted at the end of the session, the student will be given a ‘Z’ grade (grade delayed at the student's request), which will be converted to a final grade at the end of the prescribed period.

Absence from assessment
Unjustified absences from an assessment will result in a grade of 0.

Bibliography

• S PIESIK - Atlas mondial de l’architecture traditionnelle et vernaculaire – éd. Flammarion
• FH JOURDA – Petit manuel de conception durable – éd. Decitre
• M FREDERICK – 101 petits secrets d’architecture qui font les grands projets – éd. Dunod
• Patrick BOUCHAIN – Histoire de Construire – éd. Actes Sud
• Peter ZUMTHOR – Penser l’architecture – éd. Birkhauser
• Glenn MURCUTT – éd. Gallimard
• TEZUKA Architectes - The Yellow book – T. Sherman and G. Logan – éd. Jovis
• J. LAJUS-PUEYO, A. MENEC, M. RIEUBLANC – What about vernacular ? – éd. Parenthèses 2023
• D. WRIGHT – Manuel d’architecture naturelle – éd. Parenthèses 2004
• JJ. TERRIN Villes et changement climatique : îlots de chaleur urbains. Parenthèses,2015
• J.GEHL Des villes à échelle humaine, Éditions Parenthèses, 2012
• T. R. OKE, Urban Climates, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2017.
• L. HOWARD The Climate of London, W. Phillips, 1818–1820.
• C. DEVAUX. L’habitat participatif. Presses universitaires de Rennes, 2015,
• S. LANOE, Petit manuel de l’habitant participatif , ed. du commun, 2020
• Ass. HAMEAUX LEGERS, Habitat léger, Guide pratique pour s’installer en habitat réversible : tiny house, bois – terre paille.

Faculty or entity

> LOCI