Interpretation of Assessment Criteria: Draft #1

After receiving the assessment criteria for Project 2, I felt it a necessary step to annotate each point with my own interpretation based on our past lectures and individual project direction, to ensure that I will be on the 'same page' as my Tutor.

Too often in past design subjects, intentions and expectations (both tutor's and mine) haven't been made clear at an early stage in the design process which has led to stress on both parties, disagreements and sometimes a negative 'Crit' experience.

It is my aim through a series of drafts, to negotiate with my Tutor a set of criteria that satisfies the subject's objectives and outcomes, suits us both, and is tailored to my capabilities and strengths. I hope that through this process, I shall be able to produce a final design outcome that conveys my intentions and in-depth ideas and is something that I can be proud of and include in my portfolio.

Listed below is my first draft of 'Assessment Criteria' based off the document on Blackboard. I have used bolding, underlining and blue texting to highlight important points and my own thoughts on potential outcome possibilies.

Assessment Criteria

·         Must document ideas and design development in BLOG

·         Communicate outcome in FINAL PRESENTATION

SCRIPT

·         Logical and realistic constructed series of EVENTS resulting in a STORY

·         Reality – relevant contexts that I OBSERVE TODAY are studied and well incorporated à Plot Slide

·         Creativity – background contexts from PROJECT ONE are refined and developed uniquely à brief diagram, pick out relevant research, urban sprawl picture, people and lifestyles diagram and add new age groups

·         Show that proposal is RELEVANT

·         Show IMPORTANT ASPECTS through captured scenes, storyboard or movie à Choose character to follow throughout a period of their life i.e. From 20yrs to 30yrs – looking at issues they experience and how proposal helps and responds to these

STAGE

·         Ensure and show that Architectural entity WORKS

·         Purpose – responds to NEEDS and DESIRES of future citizens

·         Meaningful spaces and services that make proposal IMPERATIVE to community

·         Navigation – SPECIFIC USES are studied

·         CIRCULATION and ACCESS are studied

·         Show how people ARRIVE, FIND and MOVE in and around proposal

·         EVALUATE and re-evaluate circulation and access

·         Integrity – structural, operational integrity

·         Show structures, details and materials used à research materials

·         Realistic structure and materials, and show how they WORK and are MAINTAINED

SCENES

·         Presence and Identity – PRESENCE and RELEVANCE of proposal

·         IDENTITY in location

·         What it should PROVIDE and what it should be KNOWN for

·         PHYSICAL and PSYCHOLOGICAL presence APPROPRIATE to context

·         Show how proposal signifies own REASON and purpose for EXISTENCE

·         How do people identify and RECOGNISE proposal?

·         First-Person Experience – show EXPERIENCE of users and their perspective

·         Design decisions have been based on REQUIREMENTS  of users

·         Construct scenarios that depict how SPECIFIC USERS  with SPECIFIC NEEDS use, experience and circulate through the spaces à disabled, with children, blind

à  A1 panel/s à find out how many panels in total??

à Must all have name

à Present in allocated time-slot