PART 3 UFS Department of Architecture Validation Visit 2017 by joh deetlefs

PART 1

PART 2

PART 3

PART 4

PART 5

Appendices

Programme Report SACAP â&#x20AC;¢ CAA Validation Visit

04 | 05 | 06 | 07 April 2017

Introduction Achievements of the Department

Part 1 Self-Appraisal

1.1

Response to specific issues raised in the 2012 report

1.2

Changes introduced to improve the courses since the last visit and the effects of those changes on resource provisions

1.3

Branding and intellectual identity

1.4

Structure of programme vis-รก-vis the new Higher Education Qualifications Framework

1.5

Strategic objectives of qualifications

1.6

Strengths and weaknesses of the ALS

1.7

Staff / Student Ratio | Student Numbers

1.8

Provisions for staff development

1.9

Transformation initiatives

1.10

Relationships with parent institution and other departments

1.11

Links with other tertiary institutions and research agencies

1.12

The future: Details of courses and facilities planned

Part 2 Response to questionnaire

2.1

Learner recruitment, selection and admission

2.2

Course structures and curriculum contents

2.3

Teaching and assessment

2.4

Staff provisions in 2016 and 2017

2.5

Research and higher degrees

2.6

Finance

2.7

Management structure

2.8

Meetings with management

2.9

Resources and facilities

2.10

Practice, training and professional development

Part 3 Appendices

Programme structure and the HEQSF

Report by student body

Core syllabi

102

Design Module Guides & Programmes

128

External examiners

216

Research Outputs

243

Rubrics and Declaration of Receit Form

248

Selection Forms

258

RPL Portfolio Applications

297

Practise Based PhD DArch HEQSF

353

Part 4 Previous validation report

364

Part 5 Miscellaneous

384

5.1

Sophia Gray

386

5.2

UIA 2014

392

5.3

The Earth Unit

394

5.4

Environmental Built Innovations (EBI) programmes

397

5.5

BloemBuild Expo

408

5.6

UFS Staff Performance Management

410

5.7

Winter School Programme

444

5.8

ALS Brochure

450

5.9

Special Lectures

458

5.10

Financials

459

Batho Community Centre, Werner van Zyl, 2nd Year, 2013

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP â&#x20AC;¢ CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Introduction

PART 3 Appendices

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP â&#x20AC;˘ CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Introduction

Dialogue Box, Andre Meyer, Greg McQueen, Melani Thomson, Nilene van Niekerk, Pieter Fischer, Petru du Toit, Eugene Olivier, Is-mari Wheeler, Olebogeng Ditaunyane, 3rd Year, 2013

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP • CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Programme Structure and the HEQSF

PART 3 | Appendix A - Programme Structure and the HEQSF Professional Programme: BArch degree programme code 40114 392 credits*

The compulsory programme is as follows: First year (120 credits*)

Credits

NQFL

Precondition

1.DESN1500 2.CONS1506 3.HARC1504 4.PTEC1504 5.TRIG1512 6.PHOT1522 7.UFS101 8.EALN1508

48 24 16 16 8 8 16 32

5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5

BArch Selection BArch Selection BArch Selection BArch Selection BArch Selection BArch Selection -

Hours 9 5 2 3 3 2 2 2

Second year (136 credits)

Credits

NQFL

Academic Prerequisite

Contact

1.DESN2600

Design

2.CONS2606

Construction

3.HARC2604

History of Architecture

4.TARC2604

Theory of Architecture

5.CDRA2604 6.CSCR2604

Computer Draughting Construction Science

16 16

6 6

DESN1500, CONS1506, HARC1504 DESN1500, CONS1506, HARC1504 DESN1500, CONS1506, HARC1504 DESN1500, CONS1506, HARC1504 TRIG1512 -

Third year (136 credits)

Credits

NQFL

Academic Prerequisite

1.DESN3700

Design

2.CONS3706

Construction

3.HARC3704

History of Architecture

4.TARC3704

Theory of Architecture

5.CCMD3704 6.CSCR3704

Building Contracts Law Construction Science

16 16

7 7

DESN2600, CONS2606, HARC2604, TARC2604 DESN2600, CONS2606, HARC2604, TARC2604 DESN2600, CONS2606, HARC2604, TARC2604 DESN2600, CONS2606, HARC2604, TARC2604 -

Design Construction History of Architecture Presentation Techniques Trigonometrical Drawing Photography University Preparation Programme Academic Literacy

* (total credits excluding credits of the UFS101 and EALN1508 modules) BArch Degree articulate on NQFL 7 – HEQSF alligned

Contact

Hours 9 5 2 2 3 4

Contact

Hours 9 5 2 2 1 2

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP â&#x20AC;˘ CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Programme Structure and the HEQSF

PART 3 | Appendix A - Programme Structure and the HEQSF Professional Programme: BArch degree The Bachelor of Architecture degree involves full-time education that extends over six semesters and involves continuous evaluation. Learning outcomes of the BArch professional programme | Graduates will be able to: 1. demonstrate and deduce the fundamentals of the design process, thorough appropriate planning, problem analysis on a basic level and knowledge of social and environmental issues concerning the human ecological landscape; 2. relate and compose knowledge of construction methods, basic structural concepts pertaining to buildings and uses for materials related to simple low-rise building types; 3. identify and outline knowledge of historical periods and theoretical thought in architecture from antiquity to the contemporary world; 4. relate and assess terms, concepts, facts and principles specific to the history and theory of architecture within the unique cosmological and contextual setting; 5. adapt these historical and theoretical terms, concepts, facts and principles to the design of specific buildings; 6. illustrate and recommend typical architectural construction and design theories relating to structures ranging from single story dwellings to multi-storey institutional buildings and landscape projects to urban settings; 7. demonstrate different and innovative architectural design approaches and construction practices; 8. employ specific design approaches and construction practices to specific cultural and historical landscapes on specific environmental levels; 9. classify, examine and assess interrelated theoretical, design and construction complexities connected to a possible design solution and unique to a specific human ecological landscape (landscape specific to man, place, time and culture); 10. classify the different aspects of the human ecological landscape as integrated systems that impact on architectural design and construction, and appreciate diversity of and within unique human ecological landscapes; 11. identify and analyse responsible and professional architectural decisions for design and construction projects; 12. deduce independent thought and practices into design and construction methods and the appropriate applications; 13. orally defend the design and construction decisions during studio critique sessions and design and construction assessment, given specific design and construction problems for a specific environment; 14. review and illustrate knowledge of the various technological aspects relating to building services, building regulations and technology; 15. examine and produce a set of working drawings of a low-rise building to acceptable practice standards taking into consideration responsible design and construction, sensitive to the context; 16. classify, examine and address appropriate design and construction problems, using computer packages, technical drawings, analysis, and two and three dimensional modelling; 17. effectively illustrate and communicate ideas through academic and professional oral, visual and/or written conversion and presentation techniques in a variety of mediums and in two and three dimensions; 18. work effectively as an individual, in teams, with peers in groups and the communities and in multidisciplinary environments showing leadership and performing critical functions; 19. outline component and material specification and local authority approval requirements and procedures as well as the relevance of appropriate national building regulations; 20. identify and interpret the contents of the various building contracts, the terminology and basic concepts of architectural practice, and the administrative and logistical support systems in a practice.

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP • CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Programme Structure and the HEQSF

PART 3 | Appendix A - Programme Structure and the HEQSF Professional Programme: BArchHons degree Programme Code 4567 (160 credits) The compulsory programme is as follows: First year 1.DESN6800 2.CONS6808 3.HURB6804 4.RARC6808 5.DMET6812 6.RMET6822 7.EOKR6804

Design Construction History of the Urban Settlement Research in Theory of Architecture Design Methodology Research Methodology Property Economics

Credits

NQFL

Precondition

48 32 16 32 8 8 16

8 8 8 8 8 8 8

BArchHons Selection BArchHons Selection BArchHons Selection BArchHons Selection BArchHons Selection BArchHons Selection BArchHons Selection

BArchHons Degree articulate on NQFL 8 – HEQSF alligned

Contact

Hours 9 5 2 2 2 2 1

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP â&#x20AC;˘ CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Programme Structure and the HEQSF

PART 3 | Appendix A - Programme Structure and the HEQSF Professional Programme: BArchHons degree The Bachelor of Architecture Honours degree involves full-time education that extends over two semesters and involves continuous evaluation. Learning outcomes of the BArchHons professional programme | Graduates will be able to: 1. employ design method and qualitative and quantitative research methods and independent research to formulate and evaluate sustainable architectural construction and design theories relating to responsible conservation, housing, sustainable and urban architectural development; 2. employ and formulate appropriate problem solving methods, skills and tools, including historical and theoretical research, computer aided design, technical drawings, analysis, two and three dimensional modelling, simulation, and information handling, to organise interrelated theoretical, design and construction problems related to urbanity, conservation, sustainability and housing; 3. design and appraise an appropriate design concept and rational and execute a competent design of a simple multi story building, based on parameters and constraints developed through independent research, which are sensitive to issues of environment and sustainability, as well as cultural issues in a responsible, appropriate and economical manner in an urban, a sub-urban or rural context; 4. synthesise various and diverse research relating to architectural theory, history, and basic spatial aspects of contemporary urban, sustainability, housing and conservation approaches within urban environments in an analytical and constructive, critical manner; 5. illustrate and communicate effectively independent research relating to investigations into the history and theory of architecture, and construction and design problem solving through academic and professional oral, visual and/or written conversion and presentation techniques in a verity of mediums and in two and three dimensions; 6. differentiate and integrate knowledge of contemporary urban settlement and theoretical thought in architecture, relating to sustainable and responsible architectural place-making; 7. analyse and organise contemporary urban, sustainably, conservation and housing theories, design methods and construction techniques; apply these theories, design methods and construction techniques to highly complex urban environments; 8. identify and analyse the complexities involved when choosing and utilising normative architectural design approach and construction practice in complex, culturally and historically diverse urban and human environments with sensitivity to urban aspects; 9. describe and question the appropriateness of a theoretical application or design and construction interventions by critically assessing the historical, cultural and urban relationships; 10. analyse and integrate information from historical and theoretical resources, as well as architectural precedent and case studies in order to produce design and construction solutions relating to urban, sustainability, housing or conservation issues; 11. integrate architectural design and construction with the elements of the human ecological landscape (landscape specific to man, place, time and culture) and manage design and construction within the human ecological system through an understanding of the delicate, diverse and unique nature of each human ecological landscape; 12. employ and responsible evaluate the human ecological landscape as systems that impact on architecture, and to diagnose diversity of and within unique human ecological landscapes. 13. investigate and structure the relationship between the natural and the built environment taking into account landscapes and environmental structures in basic terms in an analytical, constructive and critical manner; 14. manage the basic spatial, functional and aesthetical aspects appropriate to urban architecture concentrating specifically on responsible solutions for conservation, housing, urbanity and sustainability;

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP â&#x20AC;˘ CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Programme Structure and the HEQSF

15. compare and structure construction methods and uses for materials related to simple multi story building while managing the demands of context, local resources and appropriate technologies that harmonise with the environment, which influence the construction of a building; 16. devise durable, cost-effective, climate responsive construction details, basic structural concepts pertaining to buildings and research relevant to construction methods and materials; 17. prepare a set of working drawings (including component and material specifications) as part of a set of contract documents of a complex building to acceptable practice standards which illustrates durable, cost-effective, climate-responsive construction systems and details sensitive to the contextual language of the design concept; 18. employ national building regulations and local authority approval requirements 19. identify and interpret the contents of the various building contracts, the terminology and basic concepts and principles of architectural business practice, and the administrative and logistical support systems in a practice.

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP • CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Programme Structure and the HEQSF

PART 3 | Appendix A - Programme Structure and the HEQSF Professional Programme: MArch (professional) degree Programme Code 4711 (180 credits)

The compulsory programme, presented over the course of two semesters, is as follows: First year 1.DDIS7900 2.CONS7908 3.ATRE7904 4.BPKR7914 5.PARC7904

Extended Research Essay Building Science Theory of Architecture Professional Practice Professional Architect's Practice

Credits

NQFL

Precondition

100 32 16 16 16

9 9 9 9 9

MArch Selection MArch Selection MArch Selection MArch Selection MArch Selection

MArch Degree articulate on NQFL 9 – HEQSF alligned

Contact

Hours 10 5 2 2 2

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP â&#x20AC;˘ CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Programme Structure and the HEQSF

PART 3 | Appendix A - Programme Structure and the HEQSF Professional Programme: MArch (professional) degree The Master of Architecture degree involves full-time education that extends over two semesters and involves continuous evaluation and summative assessment. Learning outcomes of the MArch professional programme Graduates will be able to: 1. evaluate contemporary theoretical thought in architecture, relating to sustainable and responsible architectural place-making; 2. order and assess, independently, a wide range of contemporary architectural and related theories, design methods and construction techniques; structure these theories, design methods and construction techniques to highly complex human ecological environments (landscape specific to man, place, time and culture); 3. investigate design method and qualitative and quantitative research methods to formulate and evaluate sustainable architectural construction and design theories relating to responsible architectural development applicable to the specific problems inherent to the complex human ecological landscape chosen to be investigated; 4. critique various and diverse thinking relating to specific problems inherent to the human ecological landscape (chosen to be investigated) that the design and construction solution should address; 5. design, choose and support the appropriate design rational and design synthesis in a complex human ecological environment with sensitivity to all aspects of that human ecological landscape in a logical manner; 6. formulate and evaluate appropriate problem solving methods, skills and tools, including historical and theoretical research, computer aided design, technical drawings, analysis, two and three dimensional modelling, simulation, and information handling, to research interrelated theoretical, design and construction problems related to the complex human ecological landscape (chosen to be investigated); 7. describe and evaluate autonomously the appropriateness of a theoretical application as well as the design and construction interventions by critically assessing all aspects of the human ecological landscape relevant the complex human ecological landscape (chosen to be investigated); 8. integrate and generate information from leading and current historical and theoretical resources, as well as architectural precedent and case studies in order to produce design and construction solutions relating to the complex human ecological landscape (chosen to be investigated); 9. illustrate and communicate effectively to a range of academic and professional audiences independent research relating to discourses appropriate to the history and theory of architecture, and construction and design problem solving, through academic and professional oral, visual and/or written conversion and presentation techniques in a verity of mediums and in two and three dimensions; 10. structure and appraise an appropriate concept and competent building design of a complex nature, based on parameters and constraints developed through independent scientific research, which is sensitive to issues of environment and sustainability, as well as cultural issues in a responsible, appropriate and economical manner in an urban, a sub-urban or rural context; 11. structure and assess construction methods and uses for materials related to multi-storey, multi-functional, complex building types while managing the demands of context, local resources and appropriate technologies that harmonise with the environment, which influence the construction of a building; 12. devise and revise durable, cost-effective, climate responsive construction details, basic structural concepts pertaining to buildings and research relevant to construction methods and materials; 13. integrate structural concepts pertaining to buildings and building design;

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP â&#x20AC;˘ CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Programme Structure and the HEQSF

14. evaluate architectural and urban environments in very basic terms in an analytical, constructive and critical manner, with sensitivity to architectural and urban aspects; 15. generate various technological aspects relating to services in one cohesive design and find technological solutions while adhering to building regulations; 16. prepare a comprehensive set of contract documents of a complex building to acceptable practice standards which illustrates durable, cost-effective, climate-responsive construction systems and details in harmony with the contextual language and the design concept; 17. evaluate issues of sustainability in the built environment in an ethical and socially responsible manner; 18. employ national building regulations and local authority approval requirement; 19. identify and interpret the contents of the various building contracts, the terminology and basic concepts and principles of architectural business practice, and the administrative and logistical support systems in a practice, apply regulatory and legal aspects of the profession and implement the contents of the various building contracts and the SAIA practice manual.

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP â&#x20AC;¢ CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Programme Structure and the HEQSF

PART 3 | Appendix A

Architecture Professional Degrees | HEQFS Aligned & deemed Accredited | DHET signed-off

University of the Free State (H06) Outcome Not HEQSF-aligned HEQSF-aligned and deemed Accredited HEQSF-aligned and deemed Accredited Re-categorised Not HEQSF-aligned and Re-categorised to Category C Not HEQSF-aligned and Re-categorised to Category C Total number of applications submitted Existing qualification name Magister Architecturae (Professional) Magister Architecturae Baccalaureus Architecture Studiorum Baccalaureus Architecture Studiorum Honores Philosophiae Doctor

Aligned qualification name Master of Architecture Master of Architecture Bachelor of Architecture Bachelor of Architecture Honours Doctor of Philosophy

Category C B A C B C

Number 267 125 69 1 8 3 473 Qualification reference number 4711 4710 4310 4567 4920

LAW

NAS EMS EDU 32 36 4 1 1 1 75 HEQSF reference number SAQA qualification NQF Total ID credits CategoryOutcome H06/14584/HEQSF 62969 Level 9 180 B HEQSF-aligned and deemed Accredited H06/14585/HEQSF 8917 Level 9 180 B HEQSF-aligned and deemed Accredited H06/14651/HEQSF Level 7 400 B HEQSF-aligned and deemed Accredited H06/14524/HEQSF Level 8 176 B HEQSF-aligned and deemed Accredited H06/14689/HEQSF Level 10 360 B HEQSF-aligned and deemed Accredited

HUM

HSC

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP â&#x20AC;˘ CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Programme Structure and the HEQSF 93

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP â&#x20AC;¢ CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Programme Structure and the HEQSF

UNIVERSITY NAME: UNIVERSITYUNIVERSITY OF THE FREENAME: STATEUNIVERSITY OF THE FREE STATE Abbreviation

HEQF Qual Type Abbreviation

Qualifier 1

HEQF Qual Type

Qualifier 1

Qualifier 2

SAQA ID SAQA ID SAQA ID (Old) Authorised SAQAQualification ID (Old) NameAuthorised Qualification Name (New/ aligned) (New/ aligned)

Old

Interim

New Old

Designator Interim

RA 48731

02 BArch

66 02

Architecture 45 66 02

Architecture n/a

n/a

8765/ IJCR 81 RA 48731 Bachelor 8765/ of Architecture IJCR 81

Bachelor of ArchitectureBArch

CESM Code New

Designator CESM Code CESM 1st Code CESM Code 1st 1st Qualifier CESM Cod 1st Qualfier Qualfier

8757/ IJCR 82

Bachelor 8757/ of Architecture IJCR 82 Honours Bachelor of ArchitectureBArchHons Honours

06 BArchHons 48

70 06

Architecture 48 70 02

Architecture n/a

n/a

62969

Master62969 of Architecture Coursework Master of Architecture Coursework MArch

07 MArch

73 07

Architecture 49 73 02

Architecture N/A

N/A

8917

Master8917 of Architecture Dissertation Master of Architecture Dissertation MArch

07 MArch

72 07

Architecture 49 72 02

Architecture N/A

N/A

16765

Doctor16765 of Philosophy in Architecture Doctor of Philosophy in Architecture PhD (Architecture)

08 PhD (Architecture) 50

74 08

Philosophy 50

0201 Architecture, Philosophy 17 (02) General

74 17 (02)

0201 Architecture, Architecture General

Arc

Description & CESM Total Code

Contact 0

Bloemfontein 1 Contact

Bloemfontein

1.00 0

0.00

1.00 2

1.00 Contact 0.00

Bloemfontein 2 Contact

Bloemfontein

1.00 180

1.00 0

0.00

100

1.00 3

1.00 Contact 0.00

Bloemfontein 3 Contact

Bloemfontein

0201 Architecture, General,0202 0201 Architecture, General,0202 City/Urban, Community and Regional City/Urban, Community and Regional Planning,0203 Building/Construction Planning,0203 Building/Construction Site Management,0204 Environmental Site Management,0204 Environmental Design/Architecture,0205 Interior Design/Architecture,0205 Interior Architecture and Design,0206 Architecture and Design,0206 9 180 0 9 180 Landscape Architecture,0207 Landscape Architecture,0207 Architectural History and Architectural History and Criticism,0208 Architectural andCriticism,0208 Built Architectural and Built Environment Technology,0209 Environment Technology,0209 Quantity Surveying,0299 Architecture Quantity Surveying,0299 Architecture and the Built Environment, Other and the Built Environment, Other

1.00 180

1.00 0

0.00

180

1.00 3

1.00 Contact 0.00

Bloemfontein 3 Contact

Bloemfontein

chitecture

0201 Architecture, General, 0203 0201 Architecture, General, 0203 Building/Construction Site Building/Construction Site Management,0204 Environmental Management,0204 Environmental Design/Architecture,0205 Interior Design/Architecture,0205 Interior Architecture and Design, 0206 Architecture and Design, 0206 Landscape Architecture,0207 Landscape 10Architecture,0207 360 0 Architectural History and Architectural History and Criticism,0208 Architectural andCriticism,0208 Built Architectural and Built Environment Technology,0299 Environment Technology,0299 Architecture and the Built Architecture and the Built Environment, Other Environment, Other

2.00 360

2.00 0

0.00

360

2.00 4

2.00 Contact 0.00

Bloemfontein 4 Contact

Bloemfontein

Resea Resea Total Formal WIL/EL Total Total WIL/EL rch rch

7 0

3 400

1.00 160

9 100

0201 Architecture, General, 0201 Architecture, General, 0202 City/Urban, Community and 0202 City/Urban, Community and Regional Planning,0204 Environmental Regional Planning,0204 Environmental Design/Architecture, Design/Architecture, 0205 Interior Architecture and 0205 Interior Architecture and Design,0206 Landscape Architecture Design,0206 Landscape Architecture 8 160 0 8 32 0207 Architectural History and 0207 Architectural History and Criticism,0208 Architectural andCriticism,0208 Built Architectural and Built Environment Technology,0299 Environment Technology,0299 Architecture and the Built Architecture and the Built Environment, Other Environment, Other

0201 Architecture, General, 0201 Architecture, General, 0202 City/Urban, Community and 0202 City/Urban, Community and Regional Planning,0203 Regional Planning,0203 Building/Construction Site Building/Construction Site Management,0204 Environmental Management,0204 Environmental Design/Architecture, Design/Architecture, 0205 Interior Architecture and 0205 Interior Architecture 9 180 and 0 Design,0206 Landscape Architecture, Design,0206 Landscape Architecture, 0207 Architectural History and 0207 Architectural History and Criticism,0208 Architectural andCriticism,0208 Built Architectural and Built Environment Technology, Environment Technology, 0209 Quantity Surveying, 0209 Quantity Surveying,

10 360

Formal WIL/EL

Bloemfontein

0201 Architecture, General, 0201 Architecture, General, 0202 City/Urban, Community and 0202 City/Urban, Community and Regional Planning, Regional Planning, 0203 Building/Construction Site0203 Building/Construction Site Management, Management, 0204 Environmental 0204 Environmental Design/Architecture, Design/Architecture, 7 400 0 0205 Interior Architecture and 0205 Interior Architecture and Design,0206 Landscape Architecture, Design,0206 Landscape Architecture, 0207 Architectural History and 0207 Architectural History and Criticism,0208 Architectural andCriticism,0208 Built Architectural and Built Environment Technology,0209 Environment Technology,0209 Quantity Surveying,0209 Quantity Quantity Surveying,0209 Quantity Surveying Surveying

Funding Level

WIL/EL

South Campus

Description & CESM Code CESM Code 2nd Qualifier

Total Subsidy Units

21 APRIL 2016

Qwaqwa

deQualifier 2nd Qualifier

NQFSubsidy Credits Units NQF Level Total

21 APRIL 2016

South Campus

Major Fields NQF of Level StudyNQF Credits

Bloemfontein Funding Level

Qualifier 2 Major Fields of Study

Mode of Delivery (Contact/ Distance)

Mode of Delivery (Contact/ Distance) Qwaqwa

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP â&#x20AC;˘ CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Programme Structure and the HEQSF

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP • CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Report by the Student Body

PART 3 | Appendix B - Report by Student Body Introduction The A5 – Architecture Student Representative Council – consists of five members and five portfolios, with each member running their respective portfolio, while still functioning as a whole.

Carmen van Staden - Academics Katie Klemp - Chairperson Xander Cilliers - Social Linka Bitzer - First Years Marc Makeka - A magazine Editor

The 2016 A5. Photograph: van der Westhuizen, M. 2015.

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP • CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Report by the Student Body

The objectives of the A5 are to: • Act as liaison between staff and students • Create a platform where students’ problems are recognized and handled in an appropriate manner • Promote social interaction between students, particularly between year groups, through organised social events and other activities • Keep students informed through various social media platforms • Always act as the representatives of the entire student body The A5 Student Council is elected annually on an agreed date, using a fair election process whereby all registered architecture students in the Department of Architecture are asked to vote for five candidates. The person with the most votes is elected Chairperson, and the rest of the portfolios are divided amongst the council. The portfolios usually consist of: • Chairperson – acts as representative and leads weekly meetings • Academics – handles all academic related problems • Social – organises all social events • First years – organises first year events and acts as an advisory member of the first year group • A magazine editor – collects and edits student work to be published in the annual A magazine; collects sponsorships to ensure the magazine can be distributed for free Operational structure The A5 Committee meets weekly as an independent society. Mx Jakobus Olivier, as representative of staff, also attends meetings when necessary on an advisory basis. Each year group within the Department selects one or two class representatives in the beginning of the new academic year. The A5 Committee communicates with the Class Representatives through meetings and various social media platforms as required. The Class Representatives relay all necessary information to their respective year groups to ensure an open channel of communication. The chairperson of the A5 Committee (or representative) also attends the bi-weekly staff meeting to ensure complete transparency between students and staff.

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP • CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Report by the Student Body

An open-door policy exists within the staff body. Students can report any concerns to (usually in this order): • Their respective class representative/s • The respective A5 committee member/s • The lecturers • The programme director • The Head of Department • The Dean of the Faculty

Student experience of studying architecture at the University of the Free State Since 2009, the A5 has organised an annual student publication (A Magazine) where student work is featured. The publication is made possible through sponsors that advertise in the magazine and it can therefore be distributed with little or no cost incurred by the Department itself. The shared studio facilities and 24/7 security access control keep the studio culture alive. Information is freely and easily available in the Department’s Research Hub and in the fully equiped computer lab with internet. Internet is also available within the studios through Campus Wi-Fi. The shared studio spaces are connected with an exhibition corridor where student work is displayed. This allows for students to follow what each respective year group is doing. The exposure is incredibly valuable and the exhibitions serve to inspire students. The annual Sophia Gray Memorial Lecture and Exhibition, hosted by the Department of Architecture, is a great event for students to attend. Students always enjoy the exposure to the inspired architect and the portfolio that he/she produced for the event. To further expose the students to inspired architecture, annually each year group goes on a class tour. Students are allowed the opportunity to experience architecture and sometimes even meet the architects of the buildings they visit.

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP • CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Report by the Student Body

2016 A5 events The A5 organised and coordinated a number of events in the past year, all of which assisted in created a better cohesion between year groups. The first event for the year,organised in conjunction with the First Year lecturers was the First Years’ Showcase, which was very well supported by students. It was organised to introduce the new faces in the Department and initiate the mentorship program for the year. Seniors that were willing to mentor a First Year were asked to put their names on a list which were then put into a hat that the First Years were asked to draw a name out of. This is how mentors were selected and introduced to each other.

Poster advertising the First Years’ Showcase. Graphic Design: Bitzer, L. 2016.

The next event for the year was an informal social event in the form of a Bus Inter. It was the most successful event in terms of social integration between year groups. The A5 also assisted the lecturers in facilitating the Winter School, giving prospective students the real student insight into what studying architecture is like. They also organised the annual formal event for the year, which is attended by both students and lecturers. The formal is the last official event for the year and it also allows for the screening of class videos and finally the announcement of the new A5 for the following year.

100

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP â&#x20AC;˘ CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Report by the Student Body

Photograph of the tables arranged by the A5 members at the formal. Photograph: Klemp, K. 2016

Table number marker. Graphic design: Bitzer, L. 2016.

The A5 was also asked to man the info box at the annual BloemBuild Expo, assist in driving the delegates for the Sophia Gray Memorial Lecture and the various other meetings that took place at the Department at the same time. They also assisted at the First Year welcoming event, as well as the University Open Day, giving a student perspective presentation at both. In these ways, the A5 acted as the student face for the Department of Architecture, assisting lecturers wherever possible.

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP â&#x20AC;˘ CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Report by the Student Body

Conclusion The A5 is involved in many aspects in the Department and assist in allowing for transparency between students and staff by keeping everyone informed at all times. The result is an integrated department of lecturers and students with an enjoyable academic environment.

101

102

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP • CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Core Syllabi

PART 3 | Appendix C - Core Syllabi CORE CURRICULUM MODULES FOR BArch, BArchHons & MArch DEGREES: Core curriculum modules descriptors are structured according to vertical integrated courses between different study years for the degrees: BArch, BArchHons and MArch (professional).  First, the Core Curriculum Course: Design, Construction, History of Architecture and Theory of Architecture are disseminated.  Followed by Core Supporting Course: Graphic Presentation and Methodology courses, and  Finally, the Core Professional Practice Course.

1. CORE CURRICULUM COURSE 1.1

Design Course 1.1.1 Overview 1.1.2 Descriptions of Modules i DESN1500 ii DESN2600 iii DESN3700 iv DESN6800 v DDIS7900

1.2

Construction Course 1.2.1 Overview 1.2.2 Descriptions of Modules i CONS1506 ii CONS2606 iii CSCR2604 iv CSCR3704 v CONS3706 vi CONS6808 vii CONS7908

1.3

History of Architecture Course 1.3.1 Overview 1.3.2 Descriptions of Modules i HARC1504 ii HARC2604 iii HARC3704 iv HURB6804

1.4

Theory of Architecture Course 1.4.1 Overview 1.4.2 Descriptions of Modules i TARC2604 ii TARC3704 iii RARC6808 iv ATRE7904

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP â&#x20AC;¢ CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Core Syllabi

2. CORE SUPPORTING COURSE 2.1

Graphic Presentations Course 2.1.1 Overview 2.1.2 Descriptions of Modules i PTEC1504 ii TRIG1512 iii PHOT1522 iv CDRA2604

2.2

Methodology Course 2.2.1 Overview 2.2.2 Descriptions of Modules i DMET6812 ii RMET6822

3. CORE PROFESSIONAL PRACTICE COURSE 3.1

Professional Practice Modules 3.1.1 Overview 3.1.2 Descriptions of Modules i CCMR3704 ii EOKR6804 iii BPKR7914 iv PARC7904

103

104

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP â&#x20AC;˘ CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Core Syllabi

1. Core Curriculum Courses 1.1 DESIGN COURSE Include modules: DESN1500, DESN2600, DESN3700, DESN6800, & DDIS7900 1.1.1 OVERVIEW: The Design course stretches over five years. The first three modules DESN1500, DESN2600, DESN3700 constitute a part of design course in the BArch programme, while the DESN6800 module forms part of the BArchHons degree design course, concluding with a integrated cap stone mini-dissertation project. The five year design course concludes with the supervised Design Dissertation (DDIS7900), a dissertation that aims to synthesis of all the tools employed by the candidate architect in the design and construction of a building. The modules are aimed at developing the student's ability to identify and creatively solve problems concerning man's interaction with his physical environment. The design process is learnt by the completion of prescribed projects in the studio. This process involves the creation of spaces and artefacts (landscapes, cities, buildings, utility objects), to make the environment (natural, social and cultural) friendly and functional. Aspects such as functional planning, structural integrity and meaningful shaping is emphasised during this course, where the spectrum of design theories, a wide variety of project types and architectural history is utilised in varying combinations in order to integrate all the fields of study into the curriculum. During the three BArch years of study all the above-mentioned aspects of design, taking into consideration the variety of courses presented in each year, are addressed in an even more complex form. The BArchHons year has similar integrating objectives, but is specifically aimed at the student who intends following architecture as a career.

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP â&#x20AC;˘ CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Core Syllabi

1. Core Curriculum Courses 1.1 DESIGN COURSE Include modules: DESN1500, DESN2600, DESN3700, DESN6800, & DDIS7900 1.1.2 DESCRIPTION OF MODULES: i.

DESN1500 - Design (48 credits) (NQFL5)

Contact sessions: One one-hour lecture per week and eight to nine practical (facilitated) periods per week. Both semesters. Assessment: Continuous evaluation by means of studio critique sessions, assignments, precedent, and case studies, and visual and oral project presentation of portfolios. Module presented by the Department of Architecture Content: This module contains fundamental knowledge, theories, principles, practices, and processes of Architectural Design explored through the theme: the place of the individual (my story) in the natural landscape. The projects address inter alia the concepts: Genius Loci (sense of place), enclosure and threshold, typology, geometry, ergonomics, order and space, climate and meaning and architecture. The module introduces the student in a progressive and systematic way to an essential understanding of architecture, the abstract theoretical design principles, and fundamental elements (type, place, and form of the discipline. Compulsory excursions form part of the module. ii.

DESN2600 â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Design (48 credits) (NQFL6)

Contact sessions: One one-hour lecture per week and eight to nine practical (facilitated) periods per week. Both semesters. Assessment: Continuous evaluation by means of studio critique sessions, assignments, precedent, and case studies, and visual and oral project presentation of portfolios. Module presented by the Department of Architecture Content: This module contains fundamental knowledge, theories, principles, practices, and processes of Architectural Design explored through the theme: the place of the individual group within the urban built environment (shared narratives within the peripheral urban landscape: basic human settlement). Through design projects the concepts topology, typology and morphology and the application thereof on different environmental levels are investigated in the study field of architecture. Compulsory excursions form part of the module.

105

106

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP • CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Core Syllabi

1. Core Curriculum Courses 1.1 DESIGN COURSE Include modules: DESN1500, DESN2600, DESN3700, DESN6800, & DDIS7900 1.1.2 DESCRIPTION OF MODULES: iii.

DESN3700 – Design (48 credits) (NQFL7)

Contact sessions: One one-hour lecture per week and eight to nine practical (facilitated) periods per week. Both semesters. Assessment: Continuous evaluation by means of studio critique sessions, assignments, precedent, and case studies, and visual and oral project presentation of portfolios. Module presented by the Department of Architecture Content: This module contains fundamental knowledge, theories, principles, practices, and processes of Architectural Design explored through the theme: the place of the community (institutional building/structure: especially more complex multi-functional buildings), and the contextual relationship with the human ecological landscape, specifically the urban environment. This module investigates the role of the urban spatial structure and urban narrative in the individual and group experience of a place. Through design projects the human body’s relationship to space, the making of place, design methodologies, the use of metaphors, tectonic assembly, and urbanity are critically formulated. Compulsory excursions form part of the module. iv.

DESN6800 – Design (48 credits) (NQFL8)

Contact sessions: One one-hour lecture per week and eight to nine practical (facilitated) periods per week. Both semesters. Assessment: Continuous evaluation by means of studio critique sessions, assignments, precedent, and case studies, and visual and oral project presentation of portfolios. Module presented by the Department of Architecture Content: This module contains fundamental knowledge, theories, principles, practices, and processes of Architectural Design explored through the themes: urban design, environment responsible design (environmental impact, earth construction, alternative technologies, etc.), conservation and housing. A group investigation of each theme precedes the individual critical research of this theme, which then extends to reports and design projects. This module investigates the insider-outsiders architect’s responsibility towards sustaining and caring for the personhood, life-world, and times and places of the urban environment. Compulsory excursions form part of the module.

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP • CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Core Syllabi

1. Core Curriculum Courses 1.1 DESIGN COURSE Include modules: DESN1500, DESN2600, DESN3700, DESN6800, & DDIS7900 1.1.2 DESCRIPTION OF MODULES: v.

DDIS7900 – Design Dissertation (100 credits) (NQFL9)

Contact sessions: Twenty supervision periods per week. Both semesters. The final integrated design dissertation in the MArch degree facilitates candidates’ professional and disciplinespecific research primarily through supervision. The modules includes lectures in source reference methodology. Assessment: ─ Assessment in ARCHITECTURAL TREATISE, DESIGN DISSERTATION and CONSTRUCTION takes place throughout the year by means of five Panel Reviews through formal oral and project presentation. ─ Final internal and external examination and oral defence of a written and illustrated Mini-Dissertation Design Document and Design Presentation (comprising a researched treatise and full design documentation - design sketches, working drawings and 3-dimensional models as documentation indicating research, design, philosophical/theoretical, technical, contractual, management, communication and graphic representational competencies) Module presented by the Department of Architecture Content: This module involves the investigative research and critical judgement of all aspects pertaining to the chosen and approved design subject and project, and is set out in an academically rigorous document, including: The development of the chosen design project with reference to concept development, development and setting out of accommodation and programme, the integration of all aspects involved in an appropriate design solution and the presentation thereof in a document with the necessary illustrations, sketches, drawings and models).

107

108

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP â&#x20AC;˘ CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Core Syllabi

1. Core Curriculum Courses 1.2 CONSTRUCTION COURSE Include modules: CONS1506, CONS2606, CSCR2604, CSCR3704, CONS3706, CONS6808, & CONS7908: 1.2.1 OVERVIEW: The Construction course stretches over five years. The first five modules CONS1506, CONS2606, CSCR2604, CSCR3704, and CONS3706 constitute a part of construction course in the BArch programme, while the last two modules CONS6808 and CONS7908 form part of the BArchHons and MArch (professional) degree construction course. The modules CONS1506, CONS2606, CONS3706 and CONS6808 consists of theoretical, technical, and practical instruction, combined with visits to sites, manufacturers and trade shows â&#x20AC;&#x201C; e.g. BloemBuild. Through analysing and dissecting local examples of well-constructed buildings, students develop an understanding of the processes involved in the making of architecture. Unit for Earth Construction: The Department of Architecture also presents an UNESCO accredited Earth-Unit (EU). During the 3 years of the BArch degree, in addition to course syllabus, a module of Earth Construction is introduced as alternative construction method. The EU trains people on different levels of the building industry.

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP • CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Core Syllabi

109

1. Core1.Curriculum Core Curriculum CoursesCourses 1.2 CONSTRUCTION 1.2 CONSTRUCTION COURSE COURSE Include modules: Include modules: CONS1506, CONS1506, CONS2606, CONS2606, CSCR2604,CSCR2604, CSCR3704,CSCR3704, CONS3706, CONS3706, CONS6808, CONS6808, & & CONS7908: CONS7908: 1.2.2 DESCRIPTION 1.2.2 DESCRIPTION OF MODULES: OF MODULES: i.

CONS1506 i. CONS1506 – Construction – Construction (24 credits)(24 (NQFL5) credits) (NQFL5)

Contact sessions: ContactTwo sessions: one-hour Twotheory one-hour lecture theory periods, lecture and periods, three one-hour and threepractical one-hourperiods. practical periods. Both semesters. Both semesters. Assessment: Assessment: ContinuousContinuous evaluationevaluation by means of bystudio meanscritique of studio sessions, critiquetests, sessions, assignments, tests, assignments, precedent precedent and case and case studies, and studies, seminars: and The seminars: relationship The relationship between design between anddesign structure. and Oral structure. presentation Oral presentation of portfolio. of portfolio. Module presented by the Department of Architecture Module presented by the Department of Architecture Content: Content: This module contains knowledge,knowledge, theories, principles, and practices Construction, including: including: This modulefundamental contains fundamental theories, principles, andofpractices of Construction, ─ Theory:─The basic structural design problems a simplefor single storey house on ahouse level site. Theory: The basic solutions structuraltosolutions to designfor problems a simple single storey on a The level site. The parts of theparts building and construction materials for the structure a whole.as a whole. of the building and construction materials for theas structure ─ Working of theory) of Single-storey structure. structure. ─ drawings: Working (application drawings: (application theory) Single-storey ─ Site visits: Illustration of theory. of theory. ─ Site visits: Illustration ii.

ii. CONS2606 – Construction credits) (NQFL6) CONS2606 – Construction (24 credits)(24 (NQFL6)

ContactTwo sessions: Twotheory one-hour theory lecture periods, and threepractical one-hourperiods. practical periods. Contact sessions: one-hour lecture periods, and three one-hour Both semesters. Both semesters. Assessment: bystudio meanscritique of studio critiquetests, sessions, tests, assignments, Assessment: ContinuousContinuous evaluationevaluation by means of sessions, assignments, precedent precedent and case and case studies, and The seminars: The relationship between and Oral structure. Oral presentation of portfolio. studies, and seminars: relationship between design anddesign structure. presentation of portfolio. Module presented by the Department of Architecture Module presented by the Department of Architecture Content: Content: This module contains knowledge,knowledge, theories, principles, and practices Construction, including: including: This modulefundamental contains fundamental theories, principles, andofpractices of Construction, ─ Structural theories associated with the complete construction of a double-storey structure from site from site ─ Structural theories associated with the complete construction of a double-storey structure investigation, sub structures, waterproofing systems, superstructures, services, elements of framedof framed investigation, sub structures, waterproofing systems, superstructures, services, elements structures structures to applicable building regulations. to applicable building regulations. ─ Working a double-storey structure with basement; site visits illustrating of theory. of theory. ─ drawings Workingfor drawings for a double-storey structure with basement; site visits illustrating ─ Site visits: Illustration of theory. of theory. ─ Site visits: Illustration

110

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP • CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Core Syllabi

1. Core Curriculum Courses 1.2 CONSTRUCTION COURSE Include modules: CONS1506, CONS2606, CSCR2604, CSCR3704, CONS3706, CONS6808, & CONS7908: 1.2.2 DESCRIPTION OF MODULES: iii.

CSCR2604 – Construction Science (16 credits) (NQFL6)

Contact sessions: Four one-hour lecture periods per week. Both semesters Assessment: Formative assessment by means of tests, assignments, class tests, and Summative assessment by means of two examination papers of two hours during the second semester official university examination. Module presented by the Department of Quantity Surveying and Construction Management Content: This module contains fundamental knowledge, theories, principles, and practices of Construction Science, including: Basic site measurements as well as survey levels and setting out buildings for construction work, related to: ─ Introduction to land surveying: The Land Survey Act, the land surveyor and the Surveyor-General. ─ Mapping and map series: Mapping procedures and map series: international, national, regions and local areas. ─ Trigonometry beacons and references. ─ Surveying: Planimetry and principles; measuring-tape measurements, levelling, plumb levels and contours. Solving construction problems, related to: ─ Structural behaviour: Stresses, tensions, shearing forces, bending moments, centres of gravity, moments of inertia and resistance.

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP • CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Core Syllabi

1. Core Curriculum Courses 1.2 CONSTRUCTION COURSE Include modules: CONS1506, CONS2606, CSCR2604, CSCR3704, CONS3706, CONS6808, & CONS7908: 1.2.2 DESCRIPTION OF MODULES: iv.

CSCR3704 – Construction Science (16 credits) (NQFL7)

Contact sessions: Two one-hour lecture periods per week. Both semesters Assessment: Formative assessment by means of tests, assignments, class tests, and Summative assessment by means of two examination papers of two hours during the second semester official university examination. Module presented by the Department of Quantity Surveying and Construction Management Content: This module contains fundamental knowledge, theories, principles, and practices of Construction Science, including: Building services in the construction of projects, related to: Sanitation ─ Serviceability of buildings: serviceability of buildings. ─ Sanitary fittings: Types, quality, placement, norms and design codes for determining type and quantity. ─ Water supply: Types of pipes, piping systems, components of pipes, route-planning for hot and cold water systems, empirical rules for determination pipe sizes, design norms and codes. ─ Sanitary drainage: Types of pipes, piping systems, components of pipes, route-planning, empirical rules for determination pipe sizes, design norms and codes. Electrical and Mechanical services: ─ Lighting: planning of buildings, orientation, and intensity of light and light fittings. Types of light fittings, placement and intensity requirements. Wiring, design codes, principles and procedures of design. ─ Power supply: Supply requirements for specific uses, wiring, design codes, principles and procedures. ─ Circuits: Internal distribution networks, conductors and conduits, distribution boards, fittings, empirical rules for determining requirements, sizes, norms and codes of design. ─ Telecommunication: Communication system, fittings, placement, wiring, norms and codes of design. ─ Consumption of power: Empirical rules for determining consumption, measures for conservation of energy. Utilisation of solar energy and solar heating systems. Mechanical services ─ Natural ventilation, forced ventilation and climate control: General requirements, codes and procedures of design. Types of ventilation and air purification systems; placement, routes, central control equipment, empirical rules for determining volumes, sizes and systems. Evaluation of different. ─ Heating systems: Types of systems, equipment, central propulsion, pipe routes and systems. ─ Transport: Lifts, elevators, conveyor belts, etc. ─ Refrigeration: Refrigeration and freezing-rooms; construction, capacity, utilisation, requirements and norms of design, empirical rules for determining requirements.

111

112

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP • CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Core Syllabi

1. Core Curriculum Courses 1.2 CONSTRUCTION COURSE Include modules: CONS1506, CONS2606, CSCR2604, CSCR3704, CONS3706, CONS6808, & CONS7908: 1.2.2 DESCRIPTION OF MODULES: vii.

CONS7908 – Construction (8 credits) (NQFL9)

Contact sessions: Research and practical exercises in own time, Individual appointment with lecturers (every week) to discuss content and progress. Both semesters. Assessment: Internal and external examination of the dissertation document (the technical report), a set of drawings of the building on a structural-technical level, and an oral defence. Summative assessment. Module presented by the Department of Architecture Content: The module comprises the construction theory and technical investigation (considering: materials, structural systems and construction methods) of the proposed design scheme, including: ─ Detailed design- and technical development of the proposed scheme. ─ Presentation of a technical report and a full set of working drawings enabling the graduates to be employable in the appropriate category for which they qualify with the South African Council of the Architectural Profession. ─ This module takes place parallel to the Design Dissertation module (DDIS7900) but is examined separately. This module takes place parallel to the Architectural Treatise module (ATRE7904), but is examined separately.

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP â&#x20AC;˘ CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Core Syllabi

1. Core Curriculum Courses 1.3 HISTORY OF ARCHITECTURE Include modules: HARC1504, HARC2606, HARC3704, & HURB6804 1.3.1 OVERVIEW: The History course stretches over four years. The first three modules HARC1504, HARC2604, HARC3704 constitute a part of history course in the BArch programme, concentrating on architectural history. While the last module HURB6804 forms part of the BArchHons degree history course, focussing on urban history. In order to ensure that students firmly and confidently grasp the subject, the emphasis is also on a practical, as opposed to an exclusively academic outcome. For instance, the work covered in History will become the precedent studies in Design to ensure integration as well as a better understanding of the history and applicability to contemporary design. The course is chronologically organised, but adapted to serve as a vehicle for design awareness across history. Contextualisation of historical precedents in the design course helps to integrate the theoretical lecture course and studio conversations. Design principles are analysed and brought into a relationship with design outcomes in the studio.

113

114

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP • CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Core Syllabi

1. Core Curriculum Courses 1.3 HISTORY OF ARCHITECTURE Include modules: HARC1504, HARC2606, HARC3704, & HURB6804 1.3.2 DESCRIPTION OF MODULES: i.

HARC1504 – History of Architecture (16 credits) (NQFL5)

Contact sessions: Two one-hour lecture periods per week. Both semesters Assessment: Continuous evaluation by means of tests, assignments, class work, essays, seminars, and discussions. Module presented by the Department of Architecture Content: This module contains fundamental knowledge, theories, principles, and practices of History of Architecture, including: ─ The position of history within the study field of architecture and universal factors influencing the formation of architecture. ─ The application of universal factors as well as the specific significance of architectural development within different time periods from pre-historical times up to and including the Gothic period. ii.

HARC2604 – History of Architecture (16 credits) (NQFL6)

Contact sessions: Two one-hour lecture periods per week. Both semesters Assessment: Continuous evaluation by means of tests, assignments, class work, essays, seminars, and discussions. Module presented by the Department of Architecture Content: This module contains fundamental knowledge, theories, principles, and practices of History of Architecture, including: ─ International architectural history as well as a overview of theoretical and philosophical ideas from the fifteenth century Renaissance to the beginning of the early twentieth century Modern Movement. ─ The pre-colonial history of architecture in South Africa and the influence of European settlers from 1652 to 1910 on South African architecture.

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP • CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Core Syllabi

1. Core Curriculum Courses 1.3 HISTORY OF ARCHITECTURE Include modules: HARC1504, HARC2606, HARC3704, & HURB6804 1.3.2 DESCRIPTION OF MODULES: iii.

HARC3704 – History of Architecture (16 credits) (NQFL7)

Contact sessions: Two one-hour lecture periods per week. Both semesters Assessment: Continuous evaluation by means of tests, assignments, class work, essays, seminars, and discussions. Module presented by the Department of Architecture Content: This module contains fundamental knowledge, theories, principles, and practices of History of Architecture, including: ─ The international and local pioneers of Modernism and mutations / revisions / hybrids that occurred within the Modern tradition. ─ Modernism from a South African point of view. South African architecture at the turn of the previous century and the current practice of architecture in SA through in depth study of the work of local architects. iv.

HURB6804 – History of Urban Settlement (16 credits) (NQFL8)

Contact sessions: Two one-hour lecture periods per week. Both semesters Assessment: Continuous evaluation by means of tests, assignments, class work, essays, seminars, integrated cap stone project, and discussions. Module presented by the Department of Architecture Content: This module contains fundamental knowledge, theories, principles, and practices of History of Urban Settlement, including: ─ The study of the built form of human settlements in history, internationally and in South Africa, with an emphasis on town planning, urban design, housing, conservation and environment responsible design development. ─ An assessment of cities during different periods to non-western, modern, third world and South African cities.

115

116

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP â&#x20AC;˘ CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Core Syllabi

1. Core Curriculum Courses 1.4 THEORY OF ARCHITECTURE Include modules: TARC2606, TARC3704, RARC6808, & ATRE7904 1.4.1 OVERVIEW: The Theory course stretches over five years. The first three modules TARC2604 and TARC3704 constitute a part of theory course in the BArch programme, while the last two modules RARC6808 and ATRE7904 form part respectively of the BArchHons and MArch (professional) degree theory course. In postgraduate studies, the theory course progressively moves towards independent research. In broad terms, it comprises the reading and interpretation of the chronological development of Architectural Theory from enlightenment. The course entails a study of contemporary architectural and philosophical thought, and the critical reaction on and interaction of concepts and ideas with the human ecological landscape and architectural design. The primary objective is to enable the student during their final year of study to motivate their own designs through a critical theoretical discourse.

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP • CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Core Syllabi

1. Core Curriculum Courses 1.4 THEORY OF ARCHITECTURE Include modules: TARC2606, TARC3704, RARC6808, & ATRE7904 1.4.2 DESCRIPTION OF MODULES: i.

TARC2604 – Theory of Architecture (16 credits) (NQFL6)

Contact sessions: Two one-hour lecture periods per week. Both semesters Assessment: Continuous evaluation by means of tests, assignments, class work, essays, seminars, and discussions. Module presented by the Department of Architecture Content: This module comprises the introduction to, and overview of the Theory of Architecture, including: The cosmological, theoretical and philosophical influences on architecture phenomenology, through an overview, critique, and architectural application of the concepts and ideas of Christian Norberg-Schulz. Special reference is made to the following aspects: existential space, architecture as the meaningful making of place supplying an existential foothold, questions of identity and belonging, and his language of architecture composed of topological, morphological, and typological aspects.

ii.

TARC3704 – Theory of Architecture (16 credits) (NQFL7)

Contact sessions: Two one-hour lecture periods per week. Both semesters Assessment: Continuous evaluation by means of tests, assignments, class work, essays, seminars, and discussions. Module presented by the Department of Architecture Content: This module contains fundamental knowledge, theories, principles, and practices of Theory of Architecture, including: ─ The ideologies, theories, philosophies, and ethics that influenced the development of architecture over the last century. The synthesis of theory with design, applied to international and South African examples and as a base for design process. ─ A critical view of human ecological landscape is developed. ─ Concepts of body, place; method, metaphor; tectonics, urbanism, and the environment.

117

118

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP • CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Core Syllabi

1. Core Curriculum Courses 1.4 THEORY OF ARCHITECTURE Include modules: TARC2606, TARC3704, RARC6808, & ATRE7904 1.4.2 DESCRIPTION OF MODULES: iii.

RARC6808 – Research in Theory of Architecture (32 credits) (NQFL8)

Contact sessions: Two one-hour lecture periods per week. Both semesters Assessment: Continuous evaluation by means of assignments, class work, essays, seminars, a cap stone minidissertation project, and discussions. Module presented by the Department of Architecture Content: This module contains fundamental knowledge, theories, principles, and practices of the Research into Theory of Architecture, including: individual research, reflective assessment and critique of architecture by applying knowledge from contemporary architectural thought, humanities and social and natural sciences. Analyses of relevant contemporary premises. Research into Theoretical aspects applicable to a specific chosen design theme and project. Research into concepts in contemporary architectural theory relating to urban design, environment responsible design, conservation and housing as applicable to the chosen design problem. iv.

ATRE7904 – Architectural Treatise (16 credits) (NQFL9)

Contact: Two one-hour lectures/seminars/individual contact sessions per week. Both semester. Research in own time. Assessment: Continuous assessment of seminars and draft dissertation submissions. Internal and external examination of the dissertation document (integrated theoretical argument of the design report) and an oral defence. Continuous and summative assessment. Module presented by the Department of Architecture Content: This module involves a critical investigation of the theoretical aspects of the specific chosen and approved design subject and project and is complementary to the pursuit of the Design Dissertation (DDIS7900). The module includes: Critical analyses of relevant contemporary theoretical premises, as well as applicable theoretical issues pertaining to the specific design subject and project set out in an academically rigorous treatise.

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP â&#x20AC;˘ CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Core Syllabi

2. Core Supporting Course: 2.1 GRAPHIC TECHNIQUES COURSE Include modules: PTEC1504, TRIG1512, PHOT1522, & CDRA2604 2.1.1 OVERVIEW: The Graphic Techniques course runs over two years in the BArch degree. Graphic Techniques course comprises the following modules Presentation Techniques (GRT104), Trigonometric Drawings (GRT112), Photography (GRT122) and Computer Draughting (GRT204). In broad terms, it comprises the development of graphic techniques, from hand sketches to computer-aided design in support of the Design and Construction Courses. Project presented in the modules are horizontally integrated with specific Design or Construction module projects.

119

120

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP • CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Core Syllabi

2. Core Supporting Course: 2.1 GRAPHIC TECHNIQUES COURSE Include modules: PTEC1504, TRIG1512, PHOT1522, & CDRA2604 2.1.2 DESCRIPTION OF MODULES: i.

PTEC1504 – Presentation Techniques (16 credits) (NQFL5)

Contact sessions: Three one-hour practical studio periods per week, lectures are presented when each presentation technique is introduced. Both semester. Assessment: Continuous-evaluation by means of assignments and presentations. Module presented by the Department of Architecture Content: This module contains fundamental knowledge, principles, and practices of Presentation Techniques, including: The introduction of graphic representation techniques, morphological studies, and the utilisation of different hand-based media: watercolour painting, ink and pencil rendering, model building, collages, etc.

ii.

TRIG1512 - Trigonometrical Drawing (8 credits) (NQFL5)

Contact sessions: Three one-hour practical studio periods per week, lectures are presented when each presentation technique is introduced. First semester. Assessment: Continuous-evaluation by means of assignments and presentations. Module presented by the Department of Architecture Content: This module contains fundamental knowledge, theories, principles, and practices of Trigonometrical Drawing, including: ─ Orthographical projection, scale, isometry, axonometry, sections through solid bodies, development, horizontal projection. ─ Studio-based theoretical instruction is coupled with practical exercises.

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP â&#x20AC;˘ CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Core Syllabi

2. Core Supporting Course: 2.1 GRAPHIC TECHNIQUES COURSE Include modules: PTEC1504, TRIG1512, PHOT1522, & CDRA2604 2.1.2 DESCRIPTION OF MODULES: iii.

PHOT1522 - Photography (8 credits) (NQFL5)

Contact sessions: One one-hour lecture period per week and one one-hour practical lecture per week. Second semester. Assessment: Continuous-evaluation by means of assignments and presentations. Module presented by the Department of Architecture Content: This module contains fundamental knowledge, theories, principles, and practices of digital photography, including: Types of cameras, adjustment, light measurement, types of photographs, enlargements, duplicating, model photography, building photography, composition. As of 2013 the module focus on mobile devise photography and include an introduction to digital photo editing programmes and techniques.

iv.

CDRA2604 â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Computer Draughting (16 credits) (NQFL6)

Contact sessions: Three one-hour computer laboratory periods per week. Both semesters. Assessment: Continuous-evaluation by means of assignments and presentations. Module presented by the Department of Architecture Content: This module contains fundamental knowledge, theories, principles, and practices of Computer Draughting, including: The theory and practice of computer aided technical drawing and the graphic presentation of designs. Introduction to various CAD and graphic design software. Theoretical instruction coupled with practical exercises.

121

122

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP â&#x20AC;˘ CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Core Syllabi

2. Core Supporting Course: 2.2 METHODOLOGY COURSE Include modules: DMET6812 & RMET6822 2.2.1 OVERVIEW: The Methodology course is presented in the BArchHons degree, comprising the following two semester modules Design Methodology (DMET6812), and Research Methodology (RMET6822). These modules are presented in support of the Design and Research in Theory of Architecture modules, sharing projects, horizontally integrated, with the aforementioned modules. Ultimately, the course prepares students for independent research in the MArch (professional) degree.

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP • CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Core Syllabi

2. Core Supporting Course: 2.2 METHODOLOGY COURSE Include modules: DMET6812 & RMET6822 2.2.2

DESCRIPTION OF MODULES i.

DMET6812 – Design Methodology (8 credits) (NQFL8)

Contact sessions: Two one-hour lecture periods per week. First semesters Assessment: Continuous evaluation by means of tests, assignments, presentation, and discussions. Module presented by the Department of Architecture Content: This module contains fundamental knowledge, theories, principles, and practices of Design Methods in Architecture, including: An introduction to a wide range of design methods. Research and structuring devices in design, case studies, mediums of representation, participatory research methods and on-site observational and ethnographic techniques. The application of these design methods on the design of buildings are investigated .

ii.

RMET6822 – Research Methodology (8 credits) (NQFL8)

Contact sessions: Two one-hour lecture periods per week. Second semesters Assessment: Continuous evaluation by means of tests, assignments, presentation, and projects. Oral moderation. Module presented by the Department of Architecture Content: This module contains fundamental knowledge, theories, principles, and practices of Research Methods in Architecture, including: Academic writing, selected methods and techniques applicable to research in Architecture and the design of a research proposal. Literature review, annotated bibliography, research methods and techniques in architecture, academic writing, and sources and resources in the field of Architecture.

123

124

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP • CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Core Syllabi

3. Core Professional Practice Course 3.1 PROFESSIONAL PRACTICE MODULES Include modules: CCMR3704, EOKR6804, BPKR7914, & PARC7904 3.1.1 OVERVIEW: The Professional Practice Course runs over three years in the BArch, BArchHons, and MArch (professional) degrees. Professional Practice Course introduces the sources of knowledge related to:  Building Contract Law (CCMR3704),  Property Economics (EOKR6804), and  Professional Practice (BPKR7914 and PARC7904) The Department of Quantity Surveying and Construction Management and the Department of Architecture present the modules.

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP • CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Core Syllabi

3. Core Professional Practice Course 3.1 PROFESSIONAL PRACTICE MODULES Include modules: CCMR3704, EOKR6804, BPKR7914, & PARC7904 3.1.2 DESCRIPTION OF MODULES i.

CCMR3704 – Building Contract Law (16 credits) (NQFL7)

Contact sessions: One one-hour lecture periods per week. Both semesters Assessment: Formative assessment by means of tests, assignments, class tests, and Summative assessment by means of one examination papers of two hours during the second semester official university examination. Module presented by the Department of Quantity Surveying and Construction Management Content: This module contains fundamental knowledge, theories, principles, and practices of Building Contract Law, including: ─ Parties to the building contract; types of building contracts; structure and forms, sureties, interpretation of building contracts, general conditions of building contracts in use and deeper study of standard clauses, terms and conditions in building contracts, the interpretation and implication thereof. ─ Utilisation of standard building contracts.

ii.

EOKR6804 – Property Economics (16 credits) (NQFL8)

Contact sessions: One one-hour lecture periods per week. Both semesters Assessment: Formative assessment by means of tests, assignments, class tests, and Summative assessment by means of two examination papers of two hours during the second semester official university examination. Module presented by the Department of Quantity Surveying and Construction Management Content: This module contains fundamental knowledge, theories, principles, and practices of Property Economics, including: ─ Introduction to building cost estimating methods. Single-price, single-price-detail and detail cost estimation methods. The use of computerised data for the determination of prices and the composition of building costs. ─ Introduction to property investment, the property market, proprietary rights and sectional title rights, property budgets, planning and management, project planning and control techniques.

125

126

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP • CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Core Syllabi

3. Core Professional Practice Course 3.1 PROFESSIONAL PRACTICE MODULES Include modules: CCMR3704, EOKR6804, BPKR7914, & PARC7904 3.1.2 DESCRIPTION OF MODULES iii.

BPKR7914 – Professional Practice (16 credits) (NQFL9)

Contact sessions: Two one-hour lecture periods per week. First semester Assessment: Formative assessment by means of tests, assignments, class tests, and Summative assessment by means of one examination papers of two hours during the first semester official university examination. Module presented by the Department of Quantity Surveying and Construction Management Content: This module contains fundamental knowledge, theories, principles, and practices of Professional Practice, including: Aspects pertaining to the professional running of an architect's practice. It includes aspects such as office administration and finances, professional service to clients, communication, presentation of projects, marketing, liaison with consultants, etc.; specifically: ─ Law of procedure and procedures: Introduction to law of procedure; law of criminal procedure, civil procedure and law of evidence. ─ Mediation and arbitration: Alternative procedures for settling disputes. ─ Documentation: The standard building contract and tender documentation. Integration of different documents and relationship. Special documents and clauses. ─ Practice: The organisation of the practice. ─ Office administration: Extent of office administration and functions in practice. ─ Communication: Theory and principles of communication.

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP • CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Core Syllabi

3. Core Professional Practice Course 3.1 PROFESSIONAL PRACTICE MODULES Include modules: CCMR3704, EOKR6804, BPKR7914, & PARC7904 3.1.2 DESCRIPTION OF MODULES iv.

PARC7904 – Professional Architect’s Practice (16 credits) (NQFL9)

Contact sessions: Two one-hour lecture periods per week. Both semesters Assessment: Continuous evaluation by means of assignments, class discussions, and class tests. Module presented by the Department of Architecture Content: This module contains fundamental knowledge, theories, principles, and practices of Professional Architect’s Practice, including: General office administration, financial administration, the scope of professional services to clients, communication and presentation of projects and professional marketing, and liaison with consultants and other members of the design team, including: ─ ─

the management processes involved in an architect’s office. autonomous professional, administrative and ethical decisions which affect general office administration, financial administration, the scope of professional services to clients, communication and presentation of projects and professional marketing, and liaison with consultants and other members of the design team.

127

128

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP â&#x20AC;¢ CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Design Module Guides & Programmes

PART 3 | Appendix D - Design Module Guides & Programmes DESN 1500 | COURSE GUIDE

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP • CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Design Module Guides & Programmes

Figure 1. Jan Hendrik Nel, 2014 – First years huts. Class of 2014

2016 UV | DEPARTMENT OF ARCHITECTURE | BArch

DESIGN MODULE GUIDE

DESN 1500 LECTURERS:

MODERATOR COORDINATOR CREDITS COURSE LOAD LECTURE ROOM & TIME

Design tools component

Mnr/ Mr J Ras RasJW@ufs.ac.za Room 112, Departement of Architecture 051 401 2422 Mnr/ Mr J Nel NelJH@ufs.ac.za Room 109, Departement of Architecture 051 401 2094 Jan Hendrik Nel 48 credits 9 periods|week Independant study Room 11, Architecture building. Monday, Wednesday & Fridays 10:10 – 13:00 Queries to lecturers only per appointment

129

130

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP • CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Intr Design Module Guides & Programmes oduction

BESKRYWING VAN DIE MODULE

Hierdie module bevat fundamentele kennis, teorieë, beginsels, praktyke en prosesse van Argitektuur-ontwerp ondersoek deur die tema: die plek van die individu (my gebou / struktuur ) in die natuurlike landskap . Die ontwerp-proses word geleer deur die voltooiing van voorgeskrewe projekte in die ateljee. Die projekte spreek onder andere die volgende konsepte aan: Genius Loci (gees van plek), omheining en drumpel, tipologie, meetkunde, ergonomie, orde en ruimte, klimaat en die betekenis en argitektuur. Die projekte dien om probleme verbandhoudend met die mens se interaksie met sy fisiese omgewing te identifiseer en kreatief op te los. Die ontwerp-proses behels die skepping van ruimtes en artefakte (landskappe, geboue, nut voorwerpe), om die omgewing (natuurlike, sosiale en kulturele) vriendelik en funksioneel te maak. Aspekte soos funksionele beplanning, strukturele integriteit en betekenisvolle vormgewing word beklemtoon in hierdie kursus, waarin die spektrum van ontwerp teorieë, 'n wye verskeidenheid van die projek tipes en argitektuur geskiedenis gebruik word in verskillende kombinasies om al die velde van die studie te integreer in die kurrikulum. Verpligte toere vorm deel van die Ontwerp module.

DOELWITTE VAN DIE MODULE

In die eerste drie jaar (B Arch. Stud. – graad) word gepoog om die student toe te rus met die basiese werktuie, toerusting en inligting benodig vir ‘n beroep in argitektuur. Die hooffokus in die 1ste jaar sowel as die 1ste graad is meer algemeen van aard. Kennis ingewin kan ook in aan verwante ontwerpberoepe toegepas word. Onderliggend aan die strukturering van die program, is die teorie van die ‘maak van betekenisvolle plekke’ (‘n begrip wat vir elkeen toeganklik is binne sy/haar spesifieke kultuurverwysingsraamwerk). Die ‘maak van plek’ berus op die teorie ontwikkel deur Christiaan Norberg-Schulz (1984), waarin die wese van enige mensgemaakte skuiling relevant is, en dit dus ‘n konstante doelwit vir enige program behoort te wees. In die eerste jaar word hierdie konsep ontwikkel rondom ‘die enkeling (ek) in die natuurlike landskap” Die student word geleidelik en progressief bekendgestel aan, wat in die tradisionele siening in argitektuur, die abstrakte teoretiese ontwerpsbeginsels en fundamentele elemente (argetipes) van die dissippline genoem word. Daar moet besef word dat die koordinasie en integrasie van alle vakke in die kursus, hetsy ontwerp en die teorie daarvan, tegniese vaardigheid, kennis van materiaal en die samehang van die historiese ontwikkeling en die teorie daarvan, ‘n voorvereiste is vir die sukses van hierdie program.

TEMAS

Die hoof tema van eerstejaarsontwerp verwys na die individu in die landskap. Hierdie tema word onder die volgende onderwerpe behandel: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8.

Self-analise & Objektifisering Plekteorie: Genius Loci (sin van natuurlike plek) Veilige mens-gemaakte plek Menslike interaskies met elemente van `n sisteem wat bydra tot `n beter menslike welsyn Terrein spesifieke klimaatsontwikkeling en 3-dimensionele ontwikkeling Veilige mens-gemaakte plek in die natuurlike landskap Orde, lig, artikulasie & betekenis Manifestasie van Plek in die natuurlike landskap

Inleidende lesings oor elke tema sal die argitektoniese relevansie van die konsepte verduidelik en ondersteuning bied vir die ontwerpontwikkeling van elke projek.

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP • CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Design Module Guides & Programmes

LEERUITKOMSTE

Teen die einde van die module word daar van die student die volgende verwag: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5.

LESINGPROGRAM

Die ondersoek van verskillende bronne van inligting met betrekking tot spesifieke ontwerpsoplossing oor individuale skuiling Ontwikkeling en voorstelling van `n toepaslike ontwerpsoplossing tot `n spesifieke argitektoniese toestand en konteks (natuurlike landskap) Betekenisvolle toepassing van teoretiese en historiese beginsels tot n ontwerpsprobleem en oplossing Ontwikkel `n toepaslike ontwerpsoplossing wat die integrasie van verskeie konsepte demonstreer: Genius Loci, omsluiting en drumpel, tipologie, geometrie, ergonomie, orde en ruimte, klimaat en betekenis en argitektuur. Oordeel kennis met betrekking to Genius Loci binne die natuurlike landskap.

Lesing 1 Skofgoed –‘n ‘dingemalerie’ Algemene reëls en regulasies. (Self)-analise & Objektifisering • Ondersoek verskillende materiale as `n middel van self-uitdrukkingLeeswerk word uitgedeel. • Ontwikkeling en aanbieding van `n toepaslike ontwerpsoplossing spesifiek tot die fisiese en meta-fisiese landskap van die menslike liggaam • Sinvolle toepassing van kennis met betrekking tot die abstraksie van die individu Lesing 2 Landskap interpretasie Plekteorie: Genius Loci (sin van natuurlike plek) • Ondersoek die veranderinge in `n landskap • Die ontwikkeling en voorstelling van `n toepaslike ontwerpsoplossing wat beide die fisiese en emosionele invloede op `n spesifieke terrein ondersoek • Oordeel kennis met betrekking tot die teoretiese term 'Genius Loci' Lesing 3 Hut: Primitiewe Hut Veilige mens-gemaakte plek • Ondersoek die elemente van argitektuur (vloer, muur en dak) as a reaksie op spesifieke materiale en klimaatsomstandighede van die kosmiese Vrystaat landskap met betrekking tot 'Genius Loci' • Die ontwikkeling en voorstelling van `n toepaslike ontwerpsoplossing wat die verskillende domeine van ruimte definieer deur die geometriese samestelling van ruimtes en artikulasie van materiale • Die sinvolle toepassing van kennis met betrekking tot die verskillende faktore wat tot die ontwikkeling van die maak van betekenisvolle plek lei Lesing 4.1 Ergonometrie Menslike interaksies met elemente van `n sisteem wat bydra tot `n beter menslike welsyn • Ondersoek menslike verwantskap en skaal met betrekking tot die elemente van ruimte • Ontwikkel `n begrip met betrekking tot die verwantskap tussen die menslike liggaam en die verskillende elemente van die onmiddelike konteks • Die sinvolle toepassing van kennis met betrekking tot ergonometrie wat beydra tot die ontwikkeling van die maak van betekenisvolle plek Lesing 4.2 4 Tipes Landskappe - Kosmies Terrein spesifieke klimaatsontwikkeling en 3 dimensionele ontwikkeling • Ondersoek die tipologies invloede op mens-gemaakte omsluiting as `n reaksie op die materiaal en klimaat van `n spesifieke landskap • Die ontwikkeling en voorstelling van `n toepaslike ontwerpsoplossing as `n 3dimensionele reaksie op `n spesifieke landskap • Die sinvolle toepassing van kennis met betrekking tot die verskillende faktore wat die vormgewing van `n gebou binne ` n spesifieke landskap beinvloed

131

132

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP • CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Design Module Guides & Programmes

Lesing 5 Analitiese Vergelyking - 1ste semester Veilige mens-gemaakte plek in die natuurlike landskap • Ondersoek die elemente van argitektuur (vloer, muur en dak) as a reaksie op spesifieke materiale en klimaatsomstandighede van die kosmiese Vrystaat landskap met betrekking tot 'Genius Loci'. • Die sinvolle toepassing van kennis met betrekking tot die verskillende faktore wat tot die ontwikkeling van die maak van betekenisvolle plek lei • Die ontwikkeling en voorstelling van `n toepaslike ontwerpsoplossing wat die verskillende domeine van ruimte definieer deur die geometriese samestelling van ruimtes en artikulasie van materiale Lesing 6 Verhoog & Tombe Ondersoek die oordrag van betekenis in argitektuur deur die gebruik van patrone as simbole, abstraksie en simboliek • Ondersoek die oordrag van betekenis in argitektuur deur die gebruik van patrone as simbole, abstraksie en simboliek • Ontwikkel `n toepaslike ontwerpsoplossing wat betekenis in argitektuur oordra deur die gebruik van ontwerpsbeginsels, skaal en geometrie, artikulasie van materiale, die gebruik van lig en terrein spesifieke reaksies • Die sinvolle toepassing van kennis met betrekking tot die verskillende faktore wat tot die ontwikkeling van die maak van betekenisvolle plek lei Lesing 7 Analitiese Plakkaat – Konsepsuele analise van Besoekerssentrum by Boyden Manifestasie van Plek in die natuurlike landskap • Ondersoek verskillende bronne van inligting met betrekking to die mens se interaksie met sy fisiese omgewing • Analiseer die konsepsuele ontwikkeling wat die integrasie van die onderstaande terme demonstreer: Genius Loci, omsluiting en drumpel, tipologie, geometrie, ergonomie, orde en ruimte, klimaat en betekenis en argitektuur. Lesing 8 Analitiese Plakkaat – Jaaranalise Oorsig van Plek en die Individu in die natuurlike landskap • Ondersoek die spesifieke uitkomste van elke projek soos uiteen gesit in uithandiginge. • Analiseer jou ontwerpsoplossings vir projekte 1-6 wat die integrasie van die verskeie konsepte per projek demonstreer: Genius Loci, omsluiting en drumpel, tipologie, geometrie, ergonomie, orde en ruimte, klimaat en betekenis en argitektuur. • Reflekteer krities ten opsigte van jou kennis met betrekking to die individu en Genius Loci binne die natuurlike landskap

ASSESSERING

Opdragte en Gewigte

OPDRAG

1 2 3 4.1 4.2 5

SEMESTER 1 Skofgoed Draadmodel – Landskap interpretasie Hut: Primitiewe Hut 4 Tipes landskappe – Kosmiese Studio 4 Tipes landskappe – Romantiese Studio Analitiese Vergelyking – Eerste Semester

Punte

50 100 150 100 100 200

TOTAAL SEMESTER 1 SEMESTER 2 6 (i Analise van presedent studie – Verhoog & Tombe 6 (ii Verhoog & Tombe 7 Analitiese Plakkaat: Konsepsuele Analise van Boyden 8 Analitiese Plakkaat: Jaaranalise

100 400 200 300

TOTAAL SEMESTER 2

1000

TOTAAL JAAR

700

1700

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP • CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Design Module Guides & Programmes

VISUELE AANBIEDINGS

SEMINARE Powerpoint/Prezi word gebruik vir die seminaar aanbieding. Dit is ‘n visuele argument ter voorbereiding van ontwerp ontwikkeling. Die formaat van die aanbieding moet esteties verantwoord wees en spreek van ‘n ontwerper se aanvoeling. Gebruik relevante hoë kwaliteit beelde, met die nodige onderskrifte en verwysings. Elke bladsy moet funksioneel ontwerp wees en nie bloot dekoratief vertoon nie. Sluit analitiese sketse, foto’s en argitektoniese voorstelle, wat die argument kommunikeer, in. Sluit ook ‘n bibliografie aan die einde in. By assessering word die volgende oorweeg: • • • • •

Duidelikheid van titel Bladuitleg en ontwerp: skyfies is nie onnodig leeg of oorbelaai met teks nie Visuele materiaal is relevant en vorm op sigself ‘n argument, en onderskrifte is korrek Duidelike analitiese sketse is ingesluit Visuele materiaal is nie dekoratief aangewend nie – elke beeld dra by tot die argument

KLAGTES EN PROBLEME

Klagtes moet op die volgende volgorde en wyse ge-opper word: 1) Die verantwoordelike dosent | lid van die A5 akademies 2) Die Programdirekteur 3) Die Dekaan van die fakulteit Geen anonieme klagtes sal hanteer word nie.

SLAAG en ONDERSKEIDING

‘n Slaagsyfer van 50% is ‘n universiteitsvereiste; ‘n slaagsyfer van 75% word vereis vir ŉ onderskeiding.

VERKLARING VAN ONTVANGSVORM

Alle inligting met betrekking tot die algemene struktuur van die programme in argitektuur, die vordering reëls van die departement en nagraadse seleksie word in die Verklaring van Ontvangsvorm omskryf. Elke student moet die Verklaring van Ontvangsvorm aflaai vanaf BlackBoard en onderteken gedurende die eerste week van klasse in die eerste semester. Die Verklarings van Ontvangs Vorms moet by die studentevoog|studiomeester van elke jaar ingedien word.

133

134

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP • CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Design Module Guides & Programmes

DESN 1500 DESCRIPTION OF MODULE

AIMS OF MODULE

This module contains fundamental knowledge, theories, principles, practices and processes of Architectural Design explored through the theme: the place of the individual (my building/structure) in the natural landscape. The design process is learnt by the completion of prescribed projects in the studio. The projects address inter alia the concepts: Genius Loci (sense of place), enclosure and threshold, typology, geometry, ergonomics, order and space, climate and meaning and architecture. The projects serve to identify and creatively solve problems concerning man's interaction with his physical environment. The design process involves the creation of spaces and artefacts (landscapes, cities, buildings, utility objects), to make the environment (natural, social and cultural) friendly and functional. Aspects such as functional planning, structural integrity and meaningful shaping is emphasised during this course, where the spectrum of design theories, a wide variety of project types and architectural history is utilised in varying combinations in order to integrate all the fields of study into the curriculum. Compulsory excursions form part of the Design module.

The aim in the first three years (B Arch Stud – degree) is to enable the student with the basic tools and skills that he/she may need for the architectual profession. The main aim in the first year and the 1st degree is more general. Knowledge gained may also be applicable in related design careers. The program is structured with its main focus on ‘meaningful placemaking’ (this idea is accessable to everyone within his/her specific cultural frame of reference). ‘Meaningful placemaking’ rely on the theories of Christiaan Norberg-Schulz (1984) who places value and finds relevance in any manmade shelter. We find this notion an essencial aim for any design program. In the first year this concept will feature as ‘the individual (me) in the natural landscape. The student will be introduced in a progressive and systematic way to, according to traditional views on architecture, the abstract theoretical design principles and fundamentel elements (archetypes) of the discipline. It is important to realize that the success of this program relies on the coordination and integration of the different subjects in the course – design and design theory, technical skills, knowledge of materials and history and its integrated theories.

THEMES

The main theme of first year design investigates the relation of the individual in the natural landscape. This theme is will be discussed under the following subjects: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8.

(Self)-analysis & Objectification Place theory: Genius Loci ('sense of natural place') Safe Man-made place Human interactions with elements of a system that optimize human well-being Site specific climatic responces and 3 dimensional development Safe Man-made place in the natural environment Order (Palladio, Le Corb & Aalto), light, articulation & meaning Manifestation of Place in the Natural landscape

Introductory lectures on each theme will explain the architectural relevance of the concepts and provide support in the design development of each project.

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP • CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Design Module Guides & Programmes

GOALS AND LEARNING OUTCOMES

At the end of the module, the student is expected to be able to: 1. 2. 3. 4.

LECTURE PROGRAMME

Investigate different sources of information pertaining to specific design problems concerning individual shelter; Develop and present an appropriate design solution to a particular architectural situation and context (natural landscape); Meaningfully apply theoretical and historical principles to design problems and solutions; Judge knowledge pertaining to Genius Loci (sense of place), enclosure and threshold, typology, geometry, ergonomics, order and space, climate and meaning and architecture for why, where and how it could be applied.

Lecture 1 Phantom of the first year - A thingification (Self)-analysis & Objectification • Investigate different materials as a means of self-expression • Develop and present an appropriate design solution as a response to the physical and meta-physical landscape of the human body • Meaningfully apply knowledge to the shoulder piece as an abstraction of the individual Lecture 2 Landscape-interpretation Place theory: Genius Loci ('sense of natural place') • Investigate the differences in the landscape • Develop and present an appropriate design solution as a response to the physical and meta-physical landscape of the human body • Meaningfully apply knowledge to the shoulder piece as an abstraction of the individual Lecture 3 Hut: Primitive Hut Safe Man-made place • Investigate the elements of architecture (floor, wall and roof) as a response to specific materials and climatic conditions of the Free-State cosmic landscape pertaining to 'Genius Loci' • Develop an appropriate design solution that defines the threshold between the different domains of space through geometric configurations and articulation of natural materials • Meaningfully apply knowledge pertaining to the different factors consituting to the development of meaningful-place making Lecture 4.1 Ergonomics Human interactions with elements of a system that optimize human well-being • Investigate human relations and scale with regards to elements of space • Develop an understanding of the relation of the human body to the different elements of its emmediate context. • Meaningfully apply knowledge pertaining to ergonomics and the development of meaningful-place making Lecture 4.2 4 Types of Landscapes Site specific climatic responces and 3 dimensional development • Investigate the typological influences on man-made enclosure as a response to materials and climate of a specific landscape • Develop an appropriate design solution as a 3-dimensional response to a specifc landscape • Meaningfully apply knowledge pertaining to the differente factors influencing the the form-giving of a building within a specific landscape Lecture 5 Analytical Comparison - first semester Safe Man-made place in the natural environment • Investigate the elements of architecture (floor, wall and roof) as a response to specific materials and climatic conditions of the natural landscape pertaining to 'Genius Loci' • Develop an appropriate analysis regarding the different factors of the landscape influencing man-made place within different landscapes • Meaningfully apply knowledge pertaining to the different factors consituting to the development of meaningful-place making

135

136

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP • CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Design Module Guides & Programmes

Lecture 6 Stage & Tomb Order (Palladio, Le Corb & Aalto), light, articulation & meaning • Investigate the translation of meaning in architecture through patterns as symbols, abstraction and symbolism. • Develop an appropriate design solution that translates meaning into architecture through design principles, scale and geometry, articulation of materials, the use of light and site specific responses. • Apply knowledge pertaining to the different factors consituting to the development of meaningful place-making Lecture 7 Analytical Poster: Conceptual Analysis of proposed Visitors Centre at Boyden Manifestation of Place in the Natural landscape • Investigate different sources of information pertaining to man's interaction with his physical environment • Analyse the conceptual development of proposed Visitors Centre that demonstrates the intergration of the following themes: Genius Loci, enclosure and threshold, typology, geometry, ergonomics, order and space, climate and meaning and architecture. • Judge knowledge pertaining to Genius Loci (sense of place) within the natural landscape Lecture 8 Analytical Poster: year Analysis Manifestation of Place in the Natural landscape • Investigate different sources of information pertaining to man's interaction with his physical environment • Analyse your design solutions for project 1 – 6 during the year that demonstrates the intergration of various concepts for each individual project: Genius Loci, enclosure and threshold, typology, geometry, ergonomics, order and space, climate and meaning and architecture. • Reflect critically on your knowledge pertaining to the individual and Genius Loci (sense of place) within the natural landscape

ASSESSMENT

Assignments and Weights

ASSIGN

SEMESTER 1 Phantom of the first year Wire Model – landscape interpretation Primitive Hut 4 Types of landscapes - Cosmic 4 Types of landscapes - Romantic Analytical Comparison 1st semester

MARKS

1st SEMESTER TOTAL SEMESTER 2 6 (i Analysis of precedent studies – Tomb & Stage 6 (ii Tomb & Stage 7 Analytical Poster: Conceptual Analysis of Boyden 8 Analytical Poster: Year Analysis

700 100 400 200 300

2nd SEMESTER TOTAL YEAR TOTAL

1000 1700

1 2 3 4.1 4.2 5

50 100 150 100 100 200

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP • CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Design Module Guides & Programmes

VISUAL PRESENTATIONS SEMINARS

Powerpoint/Prezi is used for the seminaar presentation. It is a visual argument in preparation of the written argument. The format of the presentation must be aesthetically acceptable and indicate skill as a designer. Use high quality images with the necessary captions. Include analytical sketches, photograps, and architectural proposals that help to communicate the argument. Include a bibliography at the end. Upon assessment the following will be considered: • • • • •

Clarity of title Page design and text. Slides are not cluttered with text or unneccesarily empty. Visual material is relevant and forms an argument independly. Captions are correct. Clear analytical drawings are included. Visual material is not used decoratively – each image supports the argument.

PROBLEMS AND COMPLAINTS

Should be handled in the following order and manner: 1) The responsible Lecturer(s) or A5 member for academics 2) The Programme Director 3) The Dean of the Faculty Anonymous complaints will be given no attention.

PASS and DISTINCTION

To pass this subject a sub-minimum of 50% is a university requirement; 75% is required to pass with distinction.

DECLARATION OF RECEIPT FORM

All information pertaining to the general structure of the programmes in architecture, the progression rules of the department and post graduate selection in provided in the Declaration of Receipt Form. Each student must download and sign the DECLARATION OF RECEIPT FORM during the first week of classes in the fisrt semester. Declarations of Receipt Forms must be submitted to the student guardian|studio master of each year.

137

138

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP â&#x20AC;¢ CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Design Module Guides & Programmes

PART 3 | Appendix D - Design Module Guides & Programmes DESN 1500 | YEAR PROGRAMME

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP â&#x20AC;˘ CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Design Module Guides & Programmes DESIGN

DESN1500

ONTWERP

139

2016

Theme: The individual in the natural landscape

01 Feb - 11 Feb

PROJ DATE PROJECT NO DATUM PROJEK

Phantom of the first year a thingification Skofgoed - 'n 'dingemalerie'

THEORY TEORIE

PROJECT TYPE ENVIRONMENTAL LEVEL PRESENTATION PROJEK TIPE OMGEWINGSVLAK VOORLEGGING M A N I N T H E N A T U R A L L A N D S C A P E - design elements and archetypes M E N S I N D I E N A T U U R L I K E L A N D S K AP - ontwerp elemente en argetipes An introduction Bekendstelling

(Self)-analysis & Objectification (Self)-analise & Objektifisering

The human body Die menslike liggaam

Free medium Vrye medium

SKILLS VAARDIGHEID

Weight Geweig

Abstraction & presentation Abstrahering & aanbieding

Outcomes Uitkomste

Investigate different materials as a means of self-expression 1

Develop and present an appropriate design solution as a response to the physical and meta-physical landscape of the human body Meaningfully apply knowledge to the shoulder piece as an abstraction of the individual Ondersoek verskillende materiale as `n middel van self-uitdrukking Ontwikkeling en aanbieding van `n toepaslike ontwerpsoplossing spesifiek tot die fisiese en meta-fisiese landskap van die menslike liggaam

12 Feb - 19 Feb

Sinvolle toepassing van kennis met betrekking tot die abstraksie van die individu

Landscape-interpretation I Landskap interpretasie I

Place theory: Genius Loci ('sense of natural place') Plekteorie: Genius Loci (sin van natuurlike plek)

landscape/place landskap/plek

Natural Landscape: Naval Hill & Liggies Natuurlike Landskap: Naval Hill & Liggies

Wire & Collage Draad & Multimedium

Abstraction & Representation Tactile Sensing Abstrahering en Uitdrukking Tasbare Sintuiglikheid

Investigate the differences in the landscape Outcomes Uitkomste

100

Develop and present an appropriate design solution that interpret the physical and emotional influences on a specific site Judge knowledge pertaining to the theoretical term 'Genius Loci' Ondersoek die veranderinge in `n landskap Die ontwikkeling en voorstelling van `n toepaslike ontwerpsoplossing wat beide die fisiese en emosionele invloede op `n spesifieke terrein ondersoek Oordeel kennis met betrekking tot die teoretiese term 'Genius Loci' F A C T O R S I N F L U E N C I N G F O R M G I V I N G - design principles in architecture

22 Feb 18 Mrch

F A K T O R E W A T V O R M G E W I N G B E ĂŻ N V L O E D - ontwerpsbeginsels in argitektuur Hut: Primitive Hut Hut: Primitiewe Hut

Safe Man-made place Veilige mens-gemaakte plek

Primitive dwelling Primitiewe bewoning

Free State Cosmic Vrystaat Kosmies

Full-scale: earth reeds, grass Volskaal: grond, riete, gras

Space and human scale Ruimte en menslike skaal

Outcomes Uitkomste

Investigate the elements of architecture (floor, wall and roof) as a response to specific materials and climatic conditions of the Free-State cosmic landscape pertaining to 'Genius Loci' Develop an appropriate design solution that defines the threshold between the different domains of space through geometric configurations and articulation of natural materials

150

Meaningfully apply knowledge pertaining to the different factors consituting to the development of meaningful-place making Ondersoek die elemente van argitektuur (vloer, muur en dak) as a reaksie op spesifieke materiale en klimaatsomstandighede van die kosmiese Vrystaat landskap met betrekking tot 'Genius Loci' Die ontwikkeling en voorstelling van `n toepaslike ontwerpsoplossing wat die verskillende domeine van ruimte definieer deur die geometriese samestelling van ruimtes en artikulasie van materiale Die sinvolle toepassing van kennis met betrekking tot die verskillende faktore wat tot die ontwikkeling van die maak van betekenisvolle plek lei

29 Mrch - 04 April 4.1

Ergonomics Ergonometrie

The human body Die menslike liggaam

Diagrams & Models Diagramme & Modelle

Space and human scale Ruimte en menslike skaal

N/A

Outcomes Uitkomste

Investigate human relations and scale with regards to elements of space Develop an understanding of the relation of the human body to the different elements of its emmediate context. Meaningfully apply knowledge pertaining to ergonomics and the development of meaningful-place making Ondersoek menslike verwantskap en skaal met betrekking tot die elemente van ruimte Ontwikkel `n begrip met betrekking tot die verwantskap tussen die menslike liggaam en die verskillende elemente van die onmiddelike konteks

04 April - 20 April

Die sinvolle toepassing van kennis met betrekking tot ergonometrie wat beydra tot die ontwikkeling van die maak van betekenisvolle plek

4.2

4 Types of Landscapes Cosmic 4 Tipes Landskappe Kosmies

Site specific climatic responces and 3 dimensional development Terrein spesifieke klimaatsontwikkeling en 3 dimensionele ontwikkeling

4 Types of Landscapes Climate, Geometry and 3 Cosmic, Romantic, Classical Diagrams & Models & Complex Dimenisional development Diagramme & Klimaat, Geometrie en 3 4 Tipes Landskappe - Kosmies, Modelle Dimensionele ontwikkeling Romanties, Klassiek & Kompleks

Organization and groupings Organiserings en groeperings

100

Outcomes Uitkomste

Investigate the typological influences on man-made enclosure as a response to materials and climate of a specific landscape Develop an appropriate design solution as a 3-dimensional response to a specifc landscape Meaningfully apply knowledge pertaining to the differente factors influencing the the form-giving of a building within a specific landscape Ondersoek die tipologies invloede op mens-gemaakte omsluiting as `n reaksie op die materiaal en klimaat van `n spesifieke landskap Die ontwikkeling en voorstelling van `n toepaslike ontwerpsoplossing as `n 3-dimensionele reaksie op `n spesifieke landskap

20 April - 09 May

Die sinvolle toepassing van kennis met betrekking tot die verskillende faktore wat die vormgewing van `n gebou binne ` n spesifieke landskap beinvloed

4.3

4 Types of Landscapes Romantic 4 Tipes Landskappe Romanties

Site specific climatic responces and 3 dimensional development Terrein spesifieke klimaatsontwikkeling en 3 dimensionele ontwikkeling

4 Types of Landscapes Climate, Geometry and 3 Cosmic, Romantic, Classical Diagrams & Models & Complex Dimenisional development Diagramme & Klimaat, Geometrie en 3 4 Tipes Landskappe - Kosmies, Modelle Romanties, Klassiek & Dimensionele ontwikkeling Kompleks

Organization and groupings Organiserings en groeperings

Investigate the typological influences on man-made enclosure as a response to materials and climate of a specific landscape Outcomes Uitkomste

FIRST SEMESTER

19 March/Maart 2016 - 28 March/Maart 2016 Reccess / Breek Human interactions with elements of Analytical investigation of human scale and a system that optimize human wellbeing proportions Menslike interaksies met elemente Analitiese ondersoek van menslike skaal en van `n sisteem wat bydra tot `n beter proporsies menslike welsyn

Develop an appropriate design solution as a 3-dimensional response to a specifc landscape Meaningfully apply knowledge pertaining to the differente factors influencing the the form-giving of a building within a specific landscape ed Ondersoek die tipologies invloede op mens-gemaakte omsluiting as `n reaksie op die materiaal en klimaat van `n spesifieke landskap Die ontwikkeling en voorstelling van `n toepaslike ontwerpsoplossing as `n 3-dimensionele reaksie op `n spesifieke landskap Die sinvolle toepassing van kennis met betrekking tot die verskillende faktore wat die vormgewing van `n gebou binne ` n spesifieke landskap beinvloed

100

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP â&#x20AC;˘ CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Design Module Guides & Programmes

09 May - 18 May

140

Analytical Comparison first semester Analitiese Vergelyking 1ste semester

Analytical investigation of Free medium, the influence of place on analytical sketches, man-made structure in the Free State Cosmic Safe Man-made place in the natural plans, elevations, natural environment Romantic Cosmic environment sections. Vrye Die analitiese ondersoek Veilige mens-gemaakte plek in die Vrystaat Kosmies Romanties medium, analitiese van die invloed van plek natuurlike landskap Kosmies sketse, planne, op mens gemaakte struktuur in die natuurlike aansigte, snitte landskap

Architecture as order in the landscape. Climate Argitektuur as orde in die landskap. Klimaat

Investigate the elements of architecture (floor, wall and roof) as a response to specific materials and climatic conditions of the natural landscape pertaining to 'Genius Loci'

200

Outcomes Uitkomste

Develop an appropriate analysis regarding the different factors of the landscape influencing man-made place within different landscapes . Meaningfully apply knowledge pertaining to the different factors consituting to the development of meaningful-place making Ondersoek die elemente van argitektuur (vloer, muur en dak) as a reaksie op spesifieke materiale en klimaatsomstandighede van die kosmiese Vrystaat landskap met betrekking tot 'Genius Loci' Die ontwikkeling en voorstelling van `n toepaslike ontwerpsoplossing wat die verskillende domeine van ruimte definieer deur die geometriese samestelling van ruimtes en artikulasie van materiale Die sinvolle toepassing van kennis met betrekking tot die verskillende faktore wat tot die ontwikkeling van die maak van betekenisvolle plek lei Lesings eindig 20 Mei 2016/ Lectures end 20 May 20106 23 May - 03 Junie Toetse/Tests 30-31 Mei / May 2016 External Moderation Eksterne Modering

27 July 29 18 July - 25 Aug July

08 June/Junie 2015 - 20 July/Julie 2015 H O L I D A Y

-VAKANSIE

Tomb & Stage I Analysis of Presedents Graf & Verhoog I Analise van Presedente

Analysis of Precedents (Scarpa, and others) Analise van presedent (Scarpa, en ander)

Analytical comparison Analitiese vergelyking

Site specific analysis Terrein spesifiek analises

Model & Powerpoint

Analytic & symbolic understanding, materiality & meaning Analitiese & simboliese begrip, materialiteit en betekenis

Tomb II (Combined with graphics) Graf II Gekombineer met grafies)

Order (Palladio, Le Corb & Aalto), light, articulation & meaning Orde (Palladio, Le Corb & Aalto) lig, artikulasie & betekenis

Experimental Eksperimenteel

Free State Landscape

Free medium Vrye medium

Materiality & light as form determinant Materialiteit en lig as vormgewende element

100

Outcomes Uitkomste

Investigate the translation of meaning in architecture through patterns as symbols, abstraction and symbolism. Develop an appropriate design solution that translates meaning into architecture through design principles, scale and geometry, articulation of materials, the use of light and site specific responses. Apply knowledge pertaining to the different factors consituting to the development of meaningful place-making

400

Ondersoek die oordrag van betekenis in argitektuur deur die gebruik van patrone as simbole, abstraksie en simboliek Ontwikkel `n toepaslike ontwerpsoplossing wat betekenis in argitektuur oordra deur die gebruik van ontwerpsbeginsels, skaal en geometrie, artikulasie van materiale, die gebruik van lig en terrein spesifieke reaksies Die sinvolle toepassing van kennis met betrekking tot die verskillende faktore wat tot die ontwikkeling van die maak van betekenisvolle plek lei MANMADE PLAC E IN THE NATURAL LANDSCAPE

MENSGEMAAKTE PLEK IN DIE NATUURLIKE

LANDSKAP

7 Sep -11 Nov

31 Aug - 3 Sep 2016 AZA Student Conference Wits University - Student Tour Boyden Observatory Visitor Centre and accommodation (Concept Development)

Manifestation of Place in the Natural landscape Manifestasie van Plek in die natuurlike landskap

Complex in the landscape Kompleks in die landskap

Free State natural landscape Vrystaat natuurlike landskap

Hard copy Poster Harde Kopie Plakkaat

Conclusion of the year - theory of place Samevatting van die jaar plekteorie

Outcomes Uitkomste

Analyse your conceptual design development and demonstrates the intergration of various concepts: Genius Loci, enclosure and threshold, typology, geometry, ergonomics, order and space, climate and meaning and architecture. Judge knowledge pertaining to Genius Loci (sense of place) within the natural landscape

200

Ondersoek verskillende bronne van inligting met betrekking to die mens se interaksie met sy fisiese omgewing Analiseer jou konsepsuele ontwerpontwikkeling wat die integrasie van verskeie konsepte demonstreer: Genius Loci, omsluiting en drumpel, tipologie, geometrie, ergonomie, orde en ruimte, klimaat en betekenis en argitektuur. Oordeel kennis met betrekking to Genius Loci binne die natuurlike landskap

11 Nov 28 Nov

2 0 S e p - 28 Comparative Year Analysis Vergelykende Jaar Analise

Oc t o b e r 2 0 1 6 U n i v e r s i t y o f t h e F r e e S t a t e s u s p e n d s a l l c l a s s e s d u e t o s t u d e n t r i o t s Manifestation of Place in the Natural landscape Manifestasie van Plek in die natuurlike landskap

Complex in the landscape Kompleks in die landskap

Free State natural landscape Vrystaat natuurlike landskap

Hard copy Poster Harde Kopie Plakkaat

Conclusion of the year - theory of place Samevatting van die jaar plekteorie

Investigate different sources of information pertaining to man's interaction with his physical environment 8

Outcomes Uitkomste

SECOND SEMESTER

Investigate different sources of information pertaining to man's interaction with his physical environment

Analyse each individual design solution (project 1-6) to demonstrate the intergration of various concepts: Genius Loci, enclosure and threshold, typology, geometry, ergonomics, order and space, climate and meaning and architecture. Judge knowledge pertaining to Genius Loci (sense of place) within the natural landscape

300

Ondersoek verskillende bronne van inligting met betrekking to die mens se interaksie met sy fisiese omgewing Analiseer elke individuele ontwerpsoplossing (projek 1-6) om die integrasie van verskeie konsepte demonstreer: Genius Loci, omsluiting en drumpel, tipologie, geometrie, ergonomie, orde en ruimte, klimaat en betekenis en argitektuur. Oordeel kennis met betrekking to Genius Loci binne die natuurlike landskap Online Lectures end 28 Nov 2016 28 Nov - 09 Dec: Test week 1 - 2 Dec 2016 External Moderation

Total Marks Totale Punt JAARPUNT- YEARMARK:

/ / /

Aanlyn Lesings eindig 28 Nov 2016 28 Nov - 09 Des 2016 Toetsweek 1 - 2 Des 2016 Eksterne Modering 1700

1700/17 = 100% /2

1 & 2 December 2016 : ORAL/ MONDELING

= 50%

50%

= 50%

50%

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP â&#x20AC;¢ CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Design Module Guides & Programmes

PART 3 | Appendix D - Design Module Guides & Programmes DESN 1500 | PROJECT HANDOUTS

141

142

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP • CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Design Module Guides & Programmes

Mnr / Mr. Jan Ras Nel

Jan

Assignment:

For this project you have to ‘dress your shoulders’ – you have to rethink what happens on the shoulders in order to present the face. Dress yourself in black or in any other fashion or color that will not distract from your shoulder wear. Each one of you have passed a vigorous selection process, and have been selected for your unique talents, abilities, interests, personality and achievements in the past. In this project you have to design and build something to wear on your shoulders in order to focus people’s attention on what/who your phantom version is of yourself. Your face will act as a canvas to extend what your shoulder wear is emphasizing. Communication of who and what your phantom is needs to be abstracted and then communicated effectively. Introduce your other-self to us!

Opdrag:

Vir hierdie projek moet jy ‘skofgoed’ ontwerp – her-evalueer wat skouer-goed kan word as ‘n medium tot self-uitdrukking, eerder as bloot die estetiese/ funksionele voltooing van ‘n uitrusting. Klee jouself in swart of enige ander mode of kleur wat nie die aandag van jou skouerdrag sal aftrek nie. Elkeen van julle het ‘n streng keuringsproses geslaag, en is gekeur vir unieke talente, vermoëns, belangstellings en prestasies in die verlede. Ontwerp en maak nou skofgoed wat die fantoom weergawe van jouself aksentueer. Kommunikasie van wie/wat jou fantoom is, moet geabstraheer word en dan effektief gekommunikeer word. Stel jou ander-self aan ons bekend!

Keywords/Concepts: Kern woorde/konsepte: Material:

unique, self-expression, communicate, re-evaluate, visionary, past/future, colour, first impression uniek, self-uitdrukking, kommunikeer, her-evalueer, visies, verlede/hede, kleur, eerste indruk

Materiaal:

Free medium: wire, plastic, fabric, polystyrene, metal, beads, string, recycled materials, etc Vry medium: draad, plastiek, polystyrene, metal, krale, tou, herwinde materiale, ens

Hand out: Uithandiging:

Wednesday, 03 February 2016 @ 10:10 Woensdag, 03 Februatie 2016 @ 10:10

Hand in: Inhandiging:

Wednesday, 10 February 2016 @ 11:00 in exhibition corridor. Woensdag, 10 Februarie 2016 @ 11:00 in exhibition corridor.

Department of ArchItecture UnIversIty of the Free State

Departement Argitektuur Universiteit van die Vrystaat

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP • CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Design Module Guides & Programmes

Mnr. Ras

Jan Hendrik Nel

‘G e n i u s L o c i - T h e S p i r i t o f P l a c e : C h r i s t i a n N o r b e r g - S c h u l z Cosmic

Inleiding: DOELWIT Introduction: AIM • • •

Classical : :

Romantic

Complex

ABSTRAKTE INTERPRETASIE VAN DIE LANDSKAP ABSTRACT INTERPRETATION OF THE LANDSCAPE

Bewuswording van veranderings in die landskap Developing an awareness for differences in the landscape Interpretasie van die landskap: fisies en emosioneel Interpertation of the landscape: physical and emotional Bewuswording van omgewingsinvloede op `n terrein Developing an awareness of influences on a site.

Wat is die fokus van hierdie oefening? • • • •

Abstrakte interpretasie van die landskap en die emosionele krag van dit wat op en om die terrein gebeur Kommunikasie van jou interpretasie op `n effektiewe en kragtige manier Verstaan die objek en medium waarin jy kommunikeer Artikulasie van objekte

What is the focus of this exercise? • • • •

Abstract interpretation of the landscape and the emotional power of that which happens on and around the site. Communication of your interpretation in an effective and powerful way Understand the object and medium in which you communicate Articulation of objects

OPDRAG/ASSIGNMENT:

Besoek die terrein wat aan julle uitgewys is in die lesing. Maak sketse, tel objekte op die terrein op, raak bewus van die faktore wat `n invloed op die terrein het. Interpreteer dit op `n manier wat weergee wat jy op die terrein ervaar en gesien het. Draad word as die voorkeur medium aanbeveel, maar die finale produk kan `n collage wees waarin materiale saamgevoeg word om effektief jou interpretasie van die terrein te kommunikeer. Bou een model wat die kontraserende kwaliteite en ervarings van die terrein uitbeeld. Visit the site discussed in class. Make sketches, collect objects on these sites and be aware of the many different factors influencing your personal experience on the site. Interpret your personal experience on each site in an abstract model. Wire is prescribed the preferred material, but the final product may be a collage of different materials put together. Build one model that displays the contradictory qualities and personal experiences of the site.

UITHANDING/HAND OUT: Friday, 12 Feb 2016 HANDIGING/HAND IN: Friday, 19 Feb 2016 @ 10:10, Exhibition Hall

143

144

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP â&#x20AC;˘ CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Design Module Guides & Programmes

145

146

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP â&#x20AC;˘ CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Design Module Guides & Programmes

147

148

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP â&#x20AC;˘ CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Design Module Guides & Programmes

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP â&#x20AC;¢ CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Design Module Guides & Programmes

PART 3 | Appendix D - Design Module Guides & Programmes DESN 2600 | MODULE GUIDE

149

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP â&#x20AC;¢ CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Design Module Guides & Programmes

150

2016 UFS |DEPARTMENT OF ARCHITECTURE | BArch

DESIGNMODULE GUIDE

DESN 2600

THE LANGUAGE OF ARCHITECTURE : TOPOLOGY, TYPOLOGY AND MORPHOLOGY

LECTURERS:

Me P Tumubweinee TumubweineePN@ufs.ac.za Room 109: Department of Architecture. 051 401 2332 Dr. G Bosman bosmang@ufs.ac.za Room 108, Department of Architecture 051 401 2797

MODERATOR COORDINATOR CREDITS COURSE LOAD LECTURE ROOM & TIME

Dr. M Frascini (UCT)

Dr. G Bosman 48 load 3 x 150 minutes per week studio 2, Department of Architecture time 10:15 - 13:00 on Monday, Wednesday andFriday

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP â&#x20AC;˘ CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Design Module Guides & Programmes

DESN2600 THE AIM OF THE MODULE

YEAR THEME: Shared Narratives on the Urban Periphery Underlying the structuring of the specific program is the theory of making of meaningful place: the function of architecture within the wider framework of the human ecological land-scape - which refers to the interrelationship between man, environment, culture and time. The theory of the 'making of meaningful place' was developed by Norberg-Schulz during the 1980's. According to him, we as individuals find 'meaning' in the rich variety of different relationships each of us acquire during the course of our existence. In the first year design program the emphasis was on the place of the individual (my building/ structure) in the natural land-scape. In the second year design program the emphasis shifts towards the place of the individual group (our building) within the built environment. In the third year design program the focus is on the place of the community (their and our buildings) and its contextual relationship with its urban environment. The theory of the 'making of meaningful place' runs horizon-tally through the program of each year - so that the student is progressively exposed to more complex design problems. The abstract universal design principles, as taught in first year, act as constant design aids throughout the course. The various projects, which act as vertical themes to the horizontal structure, will thus always be aided by the universal design principles and becomes more complex each year. For instance, the principle of order will be investigated in each year, but will be approached from a different angle depending on the nature of the project, and will become more complex within this structure. The abstract universal principles (which are constant/ continuous), are enlightened by various projects (variable) and the method of investigation (variable) which encourages students' individual intuitive understanding of design. `...Architecture is more than protective shells. In seeking to bring about places for ritual action, it must get out to define the boundless, that is, to limit space without necessarily enclosing it in all three dimensions. It does this in two specific ways- through circumspection and accent. In the first, it arrests and patterns the flow of the ground. This we might call the architecture of boundary- examples are a 'plot' of land or walled town. The second way involves the setting up of free structure that, by their very mass and height, might focus on an otherwise undifferentiated stretch of open space- architecture as monument. Boundary and monument both imply a determined marking of nature. Human impose through them their own order of nature, and in doing so, introduce that tug of balance between the way things are and the way we want them to be.' - Spiro Kostof- The building fabric gives an image of continuity, of expansiveness stretching to 'infinity', the object as a closed element, finite, comprehensive as an entity. Objects concentrate visual attention-they stand out against a back-ground. This concept can be transposed to the town where certain structures appear as objects (object/ buildings) because they stand out from the urban fabric. The same phenomenon occurs inside buildings where certain elements- columns, doors, windows, niches, fire-place, altar, etc. - appear as isolated elements which can then be identified and even named, while the rest of the environment is characterized by greater homogeneity.' - Pierre von Meiss -

THEMES

TOPOLOGY = ORIENTATION Organization of space `WHERE' is Existential space Elements: Place (centre, node) Path (direction, axis) Area (domain) Environmental levels: hand, body, dwelling, institution, urban space, settlement, landscape MORPHOLOGY = IDENTIFICATION Form giving and character `HOW' Elements: Floor: earth/ ground Wall: horizon Roof: sky Character: Material, structural method, ordering of form, articulation, open to solid, scale, light, colour, texture.

151

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP • CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Design Module Guides & Programmes

152

TYPOLOGY = MEMORY Recognizable identity/ architectural figure `WHAT' Architectural figure: Column, beam, arch, threshold, door, colonnade, baldachin, etc. Functional types: kitchen, bedroom, hall,stoep, etc. Building types: House, shop, bank, church, city hall, etc.

GOALS AND LEARNING OUTCOMES

•

HAND-IN

EVALUATION

From the building as an individual object (accent/ monument) to the building as the ordering and organisation of space (boundary/ enclosure) The language of architecture as defined by `orientation' (topology), identification' (morphology) and `recognition/memory' (typology). Our existential space and therefore our architectural space consist of specific elements occurring at specific environmental levels. The three basic elements of architectural space: 1) Place (centre, node) 2) Path (direction, access) 3) Area (domain, district) The direct environmental levels on which these elements function are: 1) The hand (usable object) 2) The body (furniture) 3) The moving body (room) 4) The dwelling (private dwelling place) 5) The institution (public dwelling place) 6) The urban space 7) The settlement 8) The landscape

Projects will be accepted only on the time and date specified. Late hand-ins are completely unacceptable. If a student is unable to hand in at the required time as a result of illness or other legitimate pressing circumstances, the lecturer concerned is to be notified beforehand or within 24 hours after the time of handing in. Copies of the necessary verification documents, e.g. medical certificates, should be presented to the lecturer at the same time, while the originals should be handed to the departmental secretary. The lecturer will then, according to the merits of each case, decide when the project has to be handed in. It is the responsibility of the student to hand in, exhibit or pin up work for evaluation. The purpose of a hand-in for evaluation and the ritual of a hand-in for evaluation must be understood as such by both the student and lecturer. Ordinary class crits cannot later be recast as evaluation crits and work that has not been handed in specifically cannot be evaluated. Students will be notified of their marks as soon as projects or parts of projects have been evaluated. These evaluations are, however, conditional and can change when the work is submitted for external moderation and the lecturer and moderator agree on the mark. The evaluation can only be regarded as final after the departmental staff has reconsidered the marks in the context of the total performance of the student within a given year.

EXEMPTION

PROBLEMS AND COMPLAINTS

The head and lecturers of the Department of Architecture reserve the right to change the requirements of this guide and the course guide(program) from time to time. A student must meet the prescribed subminimum of 30 percent for each assignments and design task to pass a module. If a student do not submit an assignment or design task or receive less than a subminimum of 30 percent for each assignment and design task, the student will not be able to complete the module and will immediately receive an 'incomplete' for the module as a final mark. Problems and complaints should be communicated and handled in the following order and manner: First discuss it with the responsible lecturer or the member for academic matters on A5. Should there appear to be no progress with the problem, the matter should be discussed with the

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP â&#x20AC;˘ CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Design Module Guides & Programmes

head of the department and after that with the dean of the faculty. Problems that are raised first with the dean are in all cases returned back to the head of the department and back to the responsible lecturer for an answer. This usually takes longer than starting with the person who actually has to provide an answer in all cases.

WRITING UP OF CASE STUDIES AND PRECEDENT STUDIES FOR DESIGN ANALYSIS AND POSTERS: Any attempt at dishonesty, including the re-use of former projects, will be regarded as a serious PLAGIARISM

matter to be referred to the disciplinary committee of the UFS. Plagiarism is totally unacceptable. Students are not allowed to copy work from other people (published or unpublished), including fellow students, without the necessary and correct reference to the source(s) consulted. Where applicable (specifically with precedent studies), the acceptable reference system (Harvard system) of referencing is required. This includes illustrations. Any infringement of this condition will lead to disciplinary action. Prescriptions with regard to the Harvard reference system is applicable to all written work handed in. Use the REDBOOK as well as the following website as basis: http://www2.lib.uct.ac.za/infolit/bibharvard.htm Use the framework for the mini-dissertation as provided. Each written piece must include the following: ! A suitable short and clear title/ sub-title ! A bibliography ! In text references Thorough knowledge of the subject matter as well as technical ability is essential whenwritingwith text on a design poster.

REFERENCING VISUAL MATERIAL

Suitable examples of visual material must be identified and used. The visual material must be documented throughout with the following references: ! The name of the architect/practice ! The name and address of the building or city ! Date (date of completion and other relevant dates) ! Typological description, e.g. residential or commercial ! Type of image, e.g. photographby the author or drawing by the architect, or a photograph of a model, etc. ! Source of the image (book and page number, internet etc.) The complete information is given in a List ofvisual materialinthe assignment. Each image used in the final assignment must be numbered and inlcude a caption with the name of the architect, name of the building and city, date and type of image with its source, e.g.

Figure 1. Roberts en Cassels Architects. The church of Jesus Christ of the latter day saints. Zastron Street,Bloemfontein(1955-2014). Photograph: Verster, W. 2012.

Figure 2: Google Earth image adapted by Verster, W. Location of the Rodenbeck DR Church (2011).

153

154

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP • CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Design Module Guides & Programmes

When referencing your own work:

VISUAL PRESENTATIONS

PROBLEMS AND COMPLAINTS

PASS and DISTINCTION DECLARATION OF RECEIPT FORM

Fig. 3. Verster, W. 2013. Map of Bloemfontein indicating the railway as separation line. A numbered list of visual material must be inlcuded with the assigment. The following information must be indicated: Full names of architect/practice (dates of birth and death, where available). Name and adress of building. (Date). Typological description. Type of image. Source of image (in Harvard style). 1. Roberts and Cassels Architects. The church of Jesus Christ of the latter day saints. 159 Zastron street, Bloemfontein(1955 - demolished 2014). Church. Photograph: Verster, W. 2012. (Unpublished M. Arch dissertation, UFS) The complete information of the source containing the image must be included in the bibliography Powerpoint/Prezi is used for seminaar presentation.The format of the presentation must be aesthetically acceptable and indicate skill as a designer. Use high quality images with the necessary captions. Include analytical sketches, photograps, and architectural proposals that help to communicate the argument. Include a bibliography at the end. Upon assessment the following will be considered: • Clarity of title • Page design and text. Slides are not cluttered with text or unneccesarily empty. • Visual material is relevant and forms an argument independly. Captions are correct. • Clear analytical drawings are included. • Visual material is not used decoratively – each image supports the argument. Should be handled in the following order and manner: 1) The responsible Lecturer(s) or A5 memberfor academics 2) The Programme Director 3) The Dean of the Faculty Anonymous complaints will be given no attention. To pass this subject a sub-minimum of 50% is a UFS requirement; 75% is required to pass with distinction. All information pertaining to the general structure of the programmes in architecture, the progression rules of the department and post graduate selection in provided in the Declaration of Receipt Form. Each student must download and sign the DECLARATION OF RECEIPT FORM during the first week of classes in the fisrt semester. Declarations of Receipt Forms must be submitted to the student guardian|studio master of each year.

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP â&#x20AC;˘ CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Design Module Guides & Programmes

EXERCISES

Title: Bodies in Space. Theme: A poetic expression of the human body in Architectural space Date: Hand-in on Wednesday 03/02/2016 Time: 10:15 Place: Amphi-theatre next to Main Library on Main Campus. Outcome/Medium/Format: An Installation/ performance art/ play Other: In groups of 4 â&#x20AC;&#x201C; 6 people / 3-5min per group. Title: Plan/ Section/ Elevation relationship. Theme:Understanding architectural plan, section and elevation of a building or project. Date: Hand-in on Friday 05/02/2016 Time: 10:15 Place: Studio 2, Architecture building on the UFS Main Campus. Outcomeperformative: Discuss your example building project/ building with your assigned group and produce your own choice of building. Medium/Format: Ink/pencil sketches on A3 format. Annotate the architectural elements accordingly. Colour is optional. Title: Extrapolation. Theme: Extrapolate a 2 dimensional image (not plan or section or elevation yet!) into a 3 dimensional model Date: Hand-in on Monday 08/02/2016 Time: 10:15 Place: Studio 2, Architecture building on the UFS Main Campus. Outcome performative: Take any part or the whole image of a chosen example and extrapolate a model. Any scale will do. Medium/Format: Physical Model. Free medium

155

156

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP â&#x20AC;¢ CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Design Module Guides & Programmes

PART 3 | Appendix D - Design Module Guides & Programmes DESN 2600 | YEAR PROGRAMME

09.09.16 19.10.16

18.07.16 09.09.16

The urban space (Public and semi public space)

Expo Steel pavilion for different performance cultures

Outcome: Grasp of the influence of Topology and Typology on Morphology as architectural language. Grasp of thresholds between private to semi priavte

Densification of neighbourhood

The urban space (Public and semi public place and space)

Taking care of the community The morphology, typology and topology of urban space/place.

The settlement (Community space and place) and the landscape

The institution (public dwelling place and space)

Reclaiming urban space

Site Analysis goup work hand-in/ pin up Bloem Built Expo Context/ Concept approval

22.07.16

50 50 150 50 300

AZA Conference Crits individual Infill/ re-use of urban space: responding to the built environment asshared space and place of care/ AZA Conference input – Precendent study Rethinking living units form Project 3/ Concept approval Design Development: morphology/ typology/ topology Pre-lim. hand-in/ Poster crits Final Hand-in Crits individual

31.08.16 – 02.09.16 05.09.16 – 07.09.16 09.09.16 12.09.16

19.10.16 – 21.10.16

17.10.16

12.10.16

14.09.16 – 30.09.16

12.09.16 – 14.09.16

29.08.16

400

200 50

Design Development: morphology / typology/ topology Pre-lim. hand-in/ Poster crits Final Hand-in/

12.08.16 – 24.08.16 24.08.16

Material pallet/ story board/ mood board/ Hand-in/ Marking (no Crits)

100 100 100 100 300

100

20 20 20 30

03.08.16

27.07.16

27.07.16 – 29.07.16

Urban/ sub urban fabric renewal/ thresholdsbetween shared space and place/ Site Analysis

Identity, cultural context and sense of belonging Concept development and model Section Axonomentic Poster Final Hand-in Final crits individual

Individual aims for 2016/ Profile /learning style Ice breaker anthropomorphic exercise/ Individual foothold Plan, section, elevation exercise in studio Extrapolation exercise in studio Lateral exercise: morphology Concept Pre-lim. hand-in/ Poster crits individual Final Hand-in/ Marking (no crits!)

18.07.16 – 22.07.16

Final oral moderation

Aims: Investigate the intitutional space in the urban context Investigate thresholds between semi private to public space Outcomes: Grasp of intitutional space Grasp of thresholds between semi private to public space

Aim: Investigate Topology as architectural language. Investigate thresholds between private to semi- private

The urban space (Public and semi public space)

09.05.16 – 13.05.16

25.04.16

16.03.16 – 18.03.16 30.03.16 – 06.04.16

14.03.16 – 16.03.16

07.03.16 – 09.03.16

02.03.16 – 04.03.16

26.02.16 – 29.02.16

22.02.16.- 24.02.16

12.02.16 – 15.02.16

10.02.16 – 12.02.16

08.02.16 – 10.02.16

05.02.16 – 08.02.16

Mid-year oral moderation WINTER HOLIDAYS

Outcome: Understanding of the influence of Typology on Morphology as architectural language

Aim: Investigate Typology

Outcome: Understanding of Morphology as architectural language

01.02.16 - 05.02.16

YEAR THEME:Shared Narratives on the Urban Periphery: topology, typology and morphology Weight Interim Exercise/ Outcomes/ description Marks submittions

Aim: Investigate Morphology

Progresssion

The dwelling (private and semi private space)

4. Care in Man-made space

The thresholdsbetween private and public space (place, path, area) and the urban context

3. Threshold Private

Materiality, module, limitations of material; Steel/ Stand. materials

The moving body (expression of the body in space)

2. Identity in cultural context:

30.03.16 13.05.16

The moving body (room)

The body (furniture)

The hand (usable object)

1. Living exhibition (From private to pubic thresholds) Own body in space Private spaces Plan to sectionrelationship 2D extrapolation to 3D form

01.02.1629.02.16

Environmental levels

Project

DESN 2600 YEAR PROGRAMME 2016

Date

2300

600

800

900

700

200

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP • CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Design Module Guides & Programmes 157

158

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP â&#x20AC;¢ CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Design Module Guides & Programmes

PART 3 | Appendix D - Design Module Guides & Programmes DESN 2600 | PROJECT HANDOUTS

Vir die Vrystaat kunsefees word jy deur ‘n eksentrieke klient aangestel. Ontwerp ‘n uitstalruimte vir die produkte wat te koop is. Die klient wil ook graag eet en slaap in hierdie uitstalruimte vir die duur van die fees. Die stuktuur moet kompak wees en moet ook vervoer kan word, om weer te gebruik. Die totale vloeroppervlakte mag nie 18vkm oorskei nie. Dit moet maksimum afmetings van 3000 x 3000 x 6000mm hê. For the Free State arts festival you are commissioned by an eccentric client to design an exhibition for his products on sale. The client also would like to sleep and eat in this exhibition box for the duration of the festival. The structure will be mobile and compact while in transit and will fold out on an area of maximum. 18sqm with maximum dimensions of 3000 x 3000 x 6000mm

OPDRAG / BRIEF:

Aanbieding / Presentation 1:50 model / model 1 x 1A plakkaat/ poster Tipe / Type: interieur ontwerp / interior design / façade / façade / objek / object Vormgewing / Form giving: ordeningsbeginsels/ ordering principals/ artikulasie tussen hemel en aarde / articulation between heaven and earth Karrakter / Character: oop toe/ open closed/ liggewig materiaal / lightweight materials / objek/ object /om uit te hang / to show off.

“HOE” ELEMENTE:

MORFOLOGIE = IDENTIFIKASIE / MORPHOLOGY = IDENTIFICATION vormgewing en karakter / FORMGIVING AND CHARACTER

OMGEWINGSVLAK / ENVIRONEMENTAL LEVEL: DIE LIGGAAM EN UITSTALLING / THE BODY AND EXIBITION

Hand out: 08/02/2016 Hand in: 29/02/2016

1. Om liggaam en objek in argitektoniese ruimte uit te stal / To exhibit body and object in architectural space 2. Om 3 dimensionaliteit op plan, snit en aansig aan te toon/ To illustrate 3dimensinality on plan section and elevation 3. Om punt / lyn / vlak te ektrapoleer in 3 dimensionale ruimte/ To extrapolate point / line / plane in 3dimentional space.

UITKOMSTE/ OUTCOMES:

floor: how does your structure meet the ground/ earth? wall: how do you subdivide your facades/ spaces to place it on a human scale/ recognisable with good composition? roof: how does it meet the walls / sky? gestalt: how does the parts form the whole

“HOW” ELEMENTS:

vloer: hoe ontmoet jou struktuur die grond/ aarde? muur: hoe verdeel jy die fasades/ ruimtes om dit op ‘n menslike? skaal te plaas/ herkenbaar is en ‘n goeie komposisie uitmaak? dak: hoe ontmoet die dak die muur / hemel? geheel: hoe vorm die dele die geheel?

1. Om die menslike liggaam in ruimte te verken: poeties/ indiwidu/ antropomorfies To explore the human body in space: poetry/ individual/ anthropomorphic 2. Om die plan snit aansig verhouding van ‘n struktuur te versterk. Herkenbaarheid/ materiaalgebruik/ aanmekaarsit. To enforce/ strengthen the plan section elevation relationship of a structure/ to recognize/ to put together. 3. Om die ekstrapolasie van ‘n 2 dimensionele na ‘n 3 dimensionele objek te ondersoek. To investigate the extrapolation of a 2 dimensional image to a 3 dimensional object.

DOELWITTE/AIMS:

Project for Louis Vuitton Ginza, Jun Aoki, 2002

projek/project1

2016 Leef uitstalling Living Exhibition

DESN 2600

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP • CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Design Module Guides & Programmes 159

OPDRAG / BRIEF: Kies ‘n teatergroep wat handel met ‘n kontemporere kulturele uitdrukking vanuit suider Afrika om verteenwoordig te word op die jaarlikse MACUFE fees in Bloemfontein. / Choose a theatre group that deal with contemporary cultural expression from southern Africa to be represented at the annual MACUFE festival in Bloemfontein.

Aanbieding / Presentation Terreinmodel (1:200) met blokmodelle van groepontwerpe om uitstalgebied, ligging en 'gestalt' op (1:200) [ingange, parkering en voetgangerroetes] aan te dui. 2) Terreinplan (1:200) 3) Oos-Wes terreinsnit deur ontwerp (1:100) 4) Noord-Suid terreinsnit deur ontwerp (1:100) 5) vier aansigte, (1:50) 6) Plan (1:50) 7) Ontplooide aksonometriese tekening om die staalstruktuursisteem te verduidelik. 8) Enige addisionele tekeninge om jou projek te verduidelik. Site model with block models of group designs to show expo precinct, site and 'gestalt' (1:200) [entrances, parking and pedestrians]. 2) Site plan (1:200) 3) East West site section (1:100) 4) North south site section (1:100) 5) Four elevations, (1:50) 6) Plan (1:50) 7) Extrapolated axonometric drawing to explain the steel structure. 8) Any other drawings that can explain your project further.

Tipe / Type: Tentoonstellingstruktuur / Exposition structure / Kultuuruitdrukking/ Cultural expression objek / object Vormgewing / Form giving: ordeningsbeginsels/ ordering principals/ kultuur invloede op publieke ruimtes/ cultural influences on public spaces Karrakter / Character: swaar struktuur/ heavy structure/ invulmaterial / lightweight materials / objek/ object /om te herken/ to recognise

DOELWITTE/AIMS: Om die herkenbaarheid van kulturele uitrukkings en argitektonies ontwerpbeginsels in publiekeruimtes te verken To explore recognition of cultural expression and architectural design principles in public spaces.

Maak voorsiening vir die volgende ruimtes: 1) ‘n Terreinontwikkelingsplan in groepe 2) 200 vkm verhoog- en sitarea met bykomende ruimte vir a) kleedkamers vir kunstenaars b) publieke toilete Maak voorsiening vir persone met gestremdhede (verwys na die NBR vir hoeveelhede en grotes) 3) klein restaurant met store, 1 x kantoor vir administrasie, kombuis (voorbereiding/ yskas/ stoor/ opwas), aflewering toegang en dienswerf Provision should be made for the following spaces: 1) A site development plan within a group. 2) a 200 sq. stage and seating area with additional requirements for a) change rooms for performers b) public toilets, make provision for people with disabilities, refer to the NBR for number and sizes, 3) small restaurant with storage, 1 x office space for administration,) kitchen (preparation/ fridge/ storage/ scullery) and delivery yard access and service yard

projek/project2

Om herkenbare gesofistikeerde kultuursimbole en vakmanskapkuns in argitektonies ruimte uit te stal / To exhibit recognisable sophisticated cultural symbolism and craftsmanship in architectural memory and space. Hand out: 09/03/2016 Group Context model of two street blocks: 16/03/2016 Name and Identity/Teater group/ contemp. culture: 18/03/2016 Concept model: 06/04/2016 Concept development: 15/04/2016 Model development : 20/04/2016 Sections: 06/05/2016 Axonometric: 11/05/2016 Poster: 16/05/2016 Hand-in: 20/05/2016

UITKOMSTE/ OUTCOMES:

struktuur: hoe om ‘n permanente staalstruktuur te plaas op die grond/ aarde? muur: hoe om invulwerk te verbind binne die struktuur? vakmanskap: hoe om aansluitings/ hegtings te maak? geheel: hoe om met ander dele van die geheel te verbind? “HOW” ELEMENTS: floor: how to place a permanent steel structure on the ground/ earth? wall: how to connect in-fill work within a structure? craftmanship: how to make connections/ joints? gestalt: how to connect to other units of the whole

“HOE” ELEMENTE:

TIPOLOGIE = DIE UITDRUKKING VAN GEBOU / tipe en karrakter TYPOLOGY = EXPRESSION OF BUILDING: / TYPE AND CHARACTER

OMGEWINGSVLAK / ENVIRONMENTAL LEVEL: IDENTITEIT/ KULTUUR IDENTITY AND CULTURE/ PUBLIEKE DRUMPEL / PUBLIC THRESHOLD

2016 Kultuurpaviljoen Cultural Pavilion

DESN 2600

160

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP • CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Design Module Guides & Programmes

Ontwerp leefeenhede vir verhuring met ‘n gedeelde binnehof/gemeenskaplike onthaal/ rekreasie-area. Die kompleks sal skakel met ‘n toekomstige instititionele gebou (sien opvolg projek). Elke eenheid (70 - 80vkm) moet twee slaapkamers, twee klein badkamers, klein kombuis/ eetarea en leefarea hê. Voorsien ook ‘n enkel toesluit-motorhuis met enkel-afdak. Die kompleks moet ook ‘n tuinstoor, buite wc, vulliswerf en gedeelde toegangshek hê. Design rental living units (70 – 80 sqm) with a shared courtyards communal entertainment/ recreational area. The complex will connect with a future institutional building (see followup project). Each unit should have two bedrooms, two small bathrooms, small kitchen/dining area and living area. The complex should have a garden store, outside wc, yard and shared entrance gate.

OPDRAG / BRIEF:

Die woning (privaat/ semi-privaat / The dwelling (private/ semi-private The urban space (public and semi-public)

Omgewingsvlak fokus / environmental level focus:

Aanbieding / Presentation 1:100 model / model 3 x 1A plakkate/ posters Tipe / Type: Leefeenheid-ontwerp / Living units/ drumpels/ thresholds Verdigting van stedelike ruimte/ densification of urban space Herbesetting van stedelike ruimte/Reclaiming urban space

1. Om die invloed van Topologie en Tipelogie op die Morfologie as argitektuur taal te begryp/ To grasp the influence of Topology and Typology on the Morfology as architectural language. 2. Om die oorgang van drumpels tussen privaat na semi-privaat te begryp/ To grasp the transition of thresholds between private to semi-private.

UITKOMSTE/ OUTCOMES:

“WAAR” ELEMENTE: Plek (middle, punt): oop/toe, uitsigte skadu/ lig. Pad (rigting, as): oorgang van drumpels/ binne/ buite/ privaat na semi-privaat/ na semi publiek/ na publiek. Area (domein): oordek/ingeslote oorgang/filter tussen funksies/ om te skakel/ om uit te hou/ om in te bring. “WHERE” ELEMENTS: Place (centre, node): open/closed, views, shade/ light. Path (direction, axis): transition of thresholds/ inside/ outside/ private to semi-private/ to semi public/ to public. Area (domain): covered/enclosed transition/filter between functions/ to link/ to keep out/ to bring in.

projek/project32016

THRESHOLD PRIVATE

1. Ondersoek van Topologie in terme DESN 2600 van Tipelogie en Morfologie as argitektuur taal/ Investigate Topology in terms of Typology and Morfology as architectural language. 2. Ondersoek drumpels van privaat na semi-privaat/ Investigate threshold from private to semi-private

DOELWITTE/AIMS:

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP • CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Design Module Guides & Programmes 161

Final hand in 400/800 Medium: : precendents/ site analysis/ site plan/ ground floor/ first floor plans/ elevations scale 1:100 3 x A1 paper plus all concept models Hand in: Workshop upstairs 10:00 29/08/2016 Crits: 5 + 7/09/2016

Site Analysis 50/800 18/07/2016 Medium: Group work/ digital images of site, plans, sections, perspectives, other images â&#x20AC;&#x201C; 1 x A1 Hand in: Upper corridor 10:00 22/07/2016 Concept approval 50/800 Medium: precendent/case studies/ site analysis/ plans/ sections/ perspectives 1 x A1 bumf plus models Hand in: Upper corridor 10:00 01/08/2016 Material pallet/ story board/ mood board 50/800 Medium: Group work/ digital images of site, plans sections perspectives 1 x A1 Hand in: Studio 2 10:00 08/08/2016 Design development 200/800 Medium: : site plan/ ground floor/ first floor plans elevations scale 1:100 2 x A1 Hand in: Upper corridor 10:00 22/08/2016 Pre-lim hand in/ poster 50/800 Medium: : site plan/ ground floor/ first floor plans/ elevations scale 1:100 2 x A1 plus all concept models Hand in: Upper corridor 10:00 24/08/2016

PROJECT PROGRAMME

162

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP â&#x20AC;˘ CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Design Module Guides & Programmes

Design an educational centre for after school education of children (ages 7 – 13 years). The client is the National Departments of Education and Health. Activities (identify this individually) will include the care of the ecology, body and

BRIEF:

Ontwerp ‘n opvoedkundige sentrum vir die naskoolse opleiding van kinders (ouderdomme 7 – 13 jaar). Die kliente is Nasionale Dept van Opvoedkunde en Gesondheid. Aktiwiteite (identifiseer hierdie individueel) sluit in versorging van die ekologie, liggaam en gees. Maak voorsiening vir: Klein ontvangsarea van 20vkm Twee kantore van 15 vkm Algemene kantoor van 25vkm Kombuis en personeelkamer van 20 vkm Personeel wk van 7 vkm 2 store van 15 vkm elk 3 aktiwiteitsruimtes van 40vkm elk Snoepie van 20vkm Publieke WKs van 25vkm 2 store van 12vkm elk Tuinstoor van 10 vkm Dubbelverdieping met hoof trap en brand trappe Buite speel areas.

OPDRAG:

1. Ondersoek sosiale sorg en argitektoniese innovasie tussen Topologie,Tipelogie en Morfologie as argitektuur taal/ Investigate social care and architectural innovasion between Topology, Typology and Morphology as architectural language. 2. Ondersoek drumpels van semi publiek na publiek/ Investigate thresholds from semi-public to public

DOELWITTE/AIMS:

1. Om sosiale sorg en argitektoniese innovasie in term van Tipelogie, Topologie en Morfologie as argitektuur taal te begryp/ To grasp social care and architectural innovation in Typology, Topology on the Morphology as architectural language. 2. Om drempels van semi-publiek na publiek te begryp/ To understand thresholds from semi-public to public

UITKOMSTE/ OUTCOMES:

soul. Make provision for: Small reception area of 20sqm Two offices of 15 sqm General office of 25sqm Kitchen and staff room of 20 sqm Staff wc of 7 sqm 2 stores of 15 sqm each 3 activities spaces of 40 sqm each Public wcs of 25sqm 2 stores of 12sqm each Garden store of 10 sqm Double storey building with main stairs and fire escape stairs Outside play areas. Aanbieding / Presentation 1:100 modelle gekombineer met Projek 3 / model combine with Project 3 3 x 1A plakkate met hand tekeninge/ 3 x 1A posters with hand drawings. Tipe / Type: Die stedelike ruimte (publiek en semi publiek/The urban space (public and semipublic). Drumpels tussen publiek en semi-publiek/ Thresholds between public and semi-public. Omgewingsvlak fokus / environmental level focus: Die instelling (publieke blyplek en ruimte) / The institution (public dwelling place and space)

projek/project42016

Precedents/case studies/conceptual research outcomes 50/600 Medium: Three Precedents studies /case studies; Research articles application on 1 x A2 Hand in: Studio 10:15 12/09/2016 Concept approval 50/600 Medium: Rethinking position of living units form Project 3; Concept diagrams on scale; concept models Hand in: Upper corridor 10:00 14/09/2016 Design development 150/600 Medium: : Design Development: morphology/ typology/ topology site plan; ground floor; first floor plans elevations on scale 1:100 on 2 x A1 bumf Hand in: Hard copy bump or paper between 11:00 – 12:00 only. Sign for submission at venue to be confirmed! 09/11/2016 Pre-lim. hand in/ poster 50/600 Medium: : site plan/ ground floor/ first floor plans/ elevations scale 1:100 sections 1:50, perspectives and two structural details 1:20; 2 x A1 plus min. 6 photos (two per A4) of Concept/ progress of final model 1:100 Hand in: Online to bosmang@ufs.ac.za or using Dropbox before 10:00 16/11/2016 Final hand in 300/600 Medium: : precedents; new site plan and model 1:100 Project 3 &4; ;ground floor and first floor plans; elevations scale 1:100; two section 1:50; on min 3 x A1 posters plus 10 photos (two per A4) of final model Final hand in: Hard copy A1 in black and white/ no colour posters between 11:00 – 12:00 only. Sign for submission at venue to be confirmed! 21/11/2016

PROJECT PROGRAMME

Temas/ Themes: Om te sorg vir die gemeenskap/ Taking care of the community Die morfologie en tipologie en topografie van stedelike ruimte/ plek/ The morphology, typology and topology of urban space/place

CARE IN MAN-MADE SPACE

DESN 2600

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP • CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Design Module Guides & Programmes 163

164

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP â&#x20AC;¢ CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Design Module Guides & Programmes

PART 3 | Appendix D - Design Module Guides & Programmes DESN 3700 | MODULE GUIDE 2016

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP • CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Design Module Guides & Programmes

Figure 1. Motsiri, L. Downtown Bloem City. 2014. Linocut, Edition of 5, 350 x 510. Phatshoane Henney Attorneys Calendar 2016

2016 UFS | DEPARTMENT OF ARCHITECTURE | BArch

DESIGN MODULE GUIDE DESN3700 LECTURERS:

MODERATOR CREDITS COURSE LOAD LECTURE ROOM & TIME

Mr. Z Wessels wesselszg@ufs.ac.za Achitecture Building: Room 200 051 401 2332 Mr. K du Preez dpreezjl@ufs.ac.za Achitecture Building: Room 105 051 401 2332 To be confirmed 48 on NQF level 7 3 x 170 minute periods per week Architecture Building: Third Year Studio Monday, Wednesday, Friday 10:10 – 13:00 Queries to lecturers per appointment

165

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP • CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Design Module Guides & Programmes

166

DESN3700 THE AIM OF THE MODULE

OBJECTIVES AND LEARNING OUTCOMES

A main challenge for architects, urban designers, and planners is to create recognisable and valued places that people would like to live and work in the city. This module explores the role of the architect as place-maker in the urban environment. The programme evolves around the premise: to occupy or take ownership of a space (phenomenological dwell or as Christian Norberg-Schulz describes it on an urban level settle), one needs to identify and orientate oneself within that space. To attempt place-making (identified and orientated space) the architect is required to examine and show empathy for the human ecological landscape. In other words, the architect needs to be an empathetic insider to the specific interrelationship, that every project offers, between man (whether individual or as a social group), environment (whether natural or manmade), culture (both local and universal) and time (both historical and contemporary). The aim of this module is to promote students as place-makers for different social groups within the urban environment. Students are expected to familiarise themselves with the urban place phenomena (human ecological landscape) and to develop their role as empathetic designers. The different assignments and projects are designed to cultivate an understanding of and respect for the urban human ecological landscape. The latter is explored through the urban spatial structure and urban narrative in the group experience of a place. The spatial structure describes the abstract geometric space, time and definitions of culture that an individual or group navigates and occupies through their everyday activities. The term urban narrative expresses the factors imbedded in sensual space, urban history and social culture. The urban narrative is the urban world in which man subjectively lives, man's life-world. Ernst Cassirer might even argue that between the urban spatial structure and the urban narrative man creates an imagined space orientated by the city’s cultural mythology. On completion of this module the student should be able to: ▪ express, analyse, critically reflect on and address complex and specific design problems taking into account all relevant aspects, in order to conceptualise and implement fitting and responsible design solution to a particular architectural situation within the urban environment; ▪ identify, research and construct, according knowledge, why, where and how it could be applied; ▪ meaningfully apply theoretical (further explored in TARC3704) and historical principles (further explored in HARC3704) to such design problems and solutions; ▪ develop alternatives in order to arrive at more responsible and appropriate design approaches and solutions; ▪ take decisions that promote the sense of place within the intrinsic characteristic of both architecture and the built|urban environment; ▪ delineate a concept developed from a well-reasoned well-grounded theoretical or conceptual position or viewpoint to final concrete detail by the responsible and appropriate choice of material, construction method and articulation of detail; ▪ communicate all work in a clear, direct and unambiguous manner, graphically as well as verbally.

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP • CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Design Module Guides & Programmes

ASSESSMENT OUTCOMES

B ARCH FOCUS

ENVIRONMENTAL LEVELS

On completion of this module the student is expected to: ▪ apply and evaluate detailed knowledge of the human ecological landscape and meaning thereof and to apply these concepts and principles pertaining to them, to the different projects in unknown complex urban environments; ▪ formulate clear and precise evidence of architectural and theoretical knowledge in general but also with reference to aspects such as body, place, method, metaphors, tectonics, urban theory, and critical regionalism (further explored in TARC 3704); ▪ relate a range of design and structural methods (further explored in CONS 3706) to address and adapt problems relating to complex multi-storey buildings, sustainable design principles, functional planning, logical programming, services and meaningful place making to mostly institutional buildings in different urban environments; ▪ act as the empathetic insider architect from the perspective of phenomenology & the concept of life-world; and to take responsibility for decisions and actions taken from this viewpoint sensitively addressing the human ecological landscape; ▪ present design solutions in a visually creative and attractive way in a wide variety of media; and to communicate effectively theoretical and other concepts referring to the design; ▪ develop a personal theoretical position with reference to architecture; and apply the methods and theories to an own design in a complex urban, cultural, social and historical landscape. In the first year design programme the emphasis is on the place of the individual (my building/structure) in the natural landscape. In the second year design programme the emphasis shifts towards the place of the individual group within the built environment (our building/structure within the human settlement, i.e. towns, cities etc.). In the third year design programme the focus is on respecting urban complexity and functionality as inside – outside architect. Settlement is the primary goal of existential space and the place where the life of a community takes place. Dwelling does not only mean private shelter but firstly the establishment of a meaningful relationship between man and a given environment through identification. Man finds himself when he settles. On the other hand man is a wonderer, always on his way, which implies possibility of choice. Thus he chooses his place and his fellowship with other men. This dialect of departure and arrival is the essence of the existential spatiality that is set into work by architecture. Settlement functions as a place of encounter, where men exchange products, ideas, and feelings and when accomplished sets other modes of dwelling into play. The urban space is the stage where human beings come together in their diversities and meeting takes place. Urban space is a place where discovery takes place, a milieu of possibilities. In urban space man dwells in the sense of experiencing the richness of a world – collective dwelling. The institution is a forum where the common values are kept and expressed; within the urban space patterns of agreement are established that represent a more structured kind of togetherness than mere meeting. In institutions or public buildings man dwells in the sense of common values and beliefs – public dwelling. The house is the stage where refuge takes place. House represents the withdrawal that is necessary to keep one’s own identity. In houses man dwells in the sense of his/her own memories and personal world – private dwelling.

167

168

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP â&#x20AC;˘ CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Design Module Guides & Programmes

PROGRAMME

ASSESSMENT CRITERIA

DATE PROJECT AND WEIGHT 2016 02 01 PROJECT 01 [100] 2016 02 05 DISTRICT MOVIE 2016 02 08 PROJECT 02 A [500] 2016 03 18 INNER-CITY MULTI-FUNCTIONAL BUILDING 2016 03 29 PROJECT 02 B [100] 2016 04 01 KATSE DAM HOUSING 2016 04 04 PROJECT 03 A [500] 2016 05 20 WHOSE HERITAGE? 2016 05 03 PROJECT 03 B [100] 2016 05 06 KWAZULU-NATAL TOUR ORALS 2016 07 18 PROJECT 04 [500] 2016 08 19 DES BAKER COMPETITION 2016 08 22 PROJECT 05 A [500] 2016 09 23 THABA 'NCHU PROJECT 2016 09 26 PROJECT 05 B [500] 2016 10 21 TERMINUS PROJECT ORALS The following criteria apply to the presentation and assessment of all projects: 1. Knowledge Students are expected to build a broad framework of knowledge with reference to each category and project. Students should therefore read as much as possible. A list of reading sources is given below. Additional reading will also be given from time to time, and students should also on their own initiative consult other sources. For the presentation of projects and its evaluation it will be expected of students to give clear and precise evidence of their architectural and theoretical knowledge in general but also with reference to each project in particular. Therefore all influences pertaining to the particular design should be clearly indicated and articulated: as annotated drawings as well as during oral presentations. 2. Critical Thought It is of the utmost importance that students learn to critically engage with all knowledge accumulated. Knowledge therefore should not simply be assembled and presented but should be judged for why, where and how it could be applied. It is therefore important to question again and again all information, knowledge and solutions (developing alternatives) in order to arrive at a more responsible and appropriate answer. It is therefore more important to illustrate the thought process behind the design solution rather than simply concentrate on the presentation of the final product. 3. Conceptual Clarity At the basis of most good design solutions is a clearly delineated concept developed from a wellreasoned well-grounded theoretical/conceptual position | viewpoint. The more abstract theoretical position | premises | ideas and the eventual real concept should be clearly indicated and illustrated. Student should illustrate that they can carry through the concept from its most abstract theoretical underpinnings to final concrete detail by the responsible and appropriate choice of material, construction method and articulation of detail. 4. Communication All work should be communicated in a clear, direct and unambiguous manner, graphically as well as verbally. Graphic techniques should always support, enhance and clearly illustrate and communicate the design process and eventual solution | product, rather than being used mainly

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP â&#x20AC;˘ CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Design Module Guides & Programmes

PROBLEMS AND COMPLAINTS

PASS & DISTINCTION DECLARATION OF RECEIPT FORM

for graphic virtuosity or effect. Every graphic presentation should also provide enough information to convey and communicate the design proposal without the student having to verbally explain anything. The use of CAD programmes (drawing and modelling) is limited and unsanctioned use will be penalised. Should be handled in the following order and manner: 1) The responsible Lecturer(s) or A5 member for academics 2) The Programme Director 3) The Dean of the Faculty Anonymous complaints will be given no attention. To pass this subject a sub-minimum of 50% is a university requirement; 75% is required to pass with distinction. All information pertaining to the general structure of the programmes in architecture, the progression rules of the department and post graduate selection is provided in the Declaration of Receipt Form. Each student must download and sign the DECLARATION OF RECEIPT FORM during the first week of classes in the fisrt semester. Declarations of Receipt Forms must be submitted to the student guardian|studio master of each year.

169

170

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP â&#x20AC;¢ CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Design Module Guides & Programmes

PART 3 | Appendix D - Design Module Guides & Programmes DESN 3700 | MODULE GUIDE 2017

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP • CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Design Module Guides & Programmes

171

http://www.designindaba.com/sites/default/files/styles/scaledlarge/public/node/news/22893/gallery/screen-shot-2017-01-27-95526-am.png?itok=A7AdEBTw

2017 UFS | DEPARTMENT OF ARCHITECTURE | BArch

DESIGN MODULE GUIDE DESN3700 LECTURERS:

MODERATOR CREDITS COURSE LOAD LECTURE ROOM & TIME

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP • CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Design Module Guides & Programmes

172

DESN3700 THE AIM OF THE MODULE

OBJECTIVES AND LEARNING OUTCOMES

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP • CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Design Module Guides & Programmes

ASSESSMENT OUTCOMES

B ARCH FOCUS

ENVIRONMENTAL LEVELS

173

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP • CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Design Module Guides & Programmes

174

PROGRAMME

ASSESSMENT CRITERIA

DATE 2017 02 08 2017 02 13 2017 02 20 2017 03 01 2017 03 03 2017 03 27-29 2017.04.18 2017.04.25 2017 05 08 2017 05 15 2017 05 26 2017 06.7-8 2017 07 24 2017 07 28 2017 08.14-18 2017 09 04-08 2017 09 11 2017 09 27-29 2017.10.16-20

PROJECT AND WEIGHT PROJECT 01A: Hand-out Thaba N’chu, the good the bad and the ugly PROJECT 01A: Hand-in Sketch Touch Stone [50] PROJECT 01A: Hand-in Analysis seminars and site model [50] PROJECT 01A: Hand-in Urban Furniture [200] [Total 300] PROJECT 01B: Hand-out Thaba N’chu Mixed Use Development PROJECT 01B: Preliminary hand-in [100] PROJECT 01B: Construction development PROJECT 01B: Construction development PROJECT 01B: Main Hand –in [400] [Total 500] PROJECT 02: Hand-out PG Bison Competition CLASS TRIP – JOBURG PROJECT 02: Hand-in PG Bison [Total 300] ORALS nd PROJECT 03: Hand-out City Living 2 Avenue project PROJECT 03: Hand-in analysis and mapping [50] PROJECT 03: Preliminary Crit and Construction Development [100] PROJECT 03: Main Hand-in [450] [Total 600] PROJECT 04: Hand-out Heritage Project: A Conference Facility PROJECT 04: Preliminary hand-in [100] PROJECT 04: Main Hand-in [400] [Total 500]

2017 11.8-10 ORALS The following criteria apply to the presentation and assessment of all projects: 1. Knowledge Students are expected to build a broad framework of knowledge with reference to each category and project. Students should therefore read as much as possible. A list of reading sources is given below. Additional reading will also be given from time to time, and students should also on their own initiative consult other sources. For the presentation of projects and its evaluation it will be expected of students to give clear and precise evidence of their architectural and theoretical knowledge in general but also with reference to each project in particular. Therefore all influences pertaining to the particular design should be clearly indicated and articulated: as annotated drawings as well as during oral presentations. 2. Critical Thought It is of the utmost importance that students learn to critically engage with all knowledge accumulated. Knowledge therefore should not simply be assembled and presented but should be judged for why, where and how it could be applied. It is therefore important to question again and again all information, knowledge and solutions (developing alternatives) in order to arrive at a more responsible and appropriate answer. It is therefore more important to illustrate the thought process behind the design solution rather than simply concentrate on the presentation of the final product. 3. Conceptual Clarity At the basis of most good design solutions is a clearly delineated concept developed from a wellreasoned well-grounded theoretical/conceptual position | viewpoint. The more abstract theoretical position | premises | ideas and the eventual real concept should be clearly indicated and illustrated. Student should illustrate that they can carry through the concept from its most abstract theoretical underpinnings to final concrete detail by the responsible and appropriate choice of material, construction method and articulation of detail. 4. Communication All work should be communicated in a clear, direct and unambiguous manner, graphically as well as verbally. Graphic techniques should always support, enhance and clearly illustrate and communicate the design process and eventual solution | product, rather than being used mainly for graphic virtuosity or effect. Every graphic presentation should also provide enough

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP â&#x20AC;˘ CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Design Module Guides & Programmes

PROBLEMS AND COMPLAINTS

PASS & DISTINCTION DECLARATION OF RECEIPT FORM

175

information to convey and communicate the design proposal without the student having to verbally explain anything. The use of CAD programmes (drawing and modelling) is limited and unsanctioned use will be penalised. Should be handled in the following order and manner: 1) The responsible Lecturer(s) or A5 member for academics 2) The Programme Director 3) The Dean of the Faculty Anonymous complaints will be given no attention. To pass this subject a sub-minimum of 50% is a university requirement; 75% is required to pass with distinction. All information pertaining to the general structure of the programmes in architecture, the progression rules of the department and post graduate selection is provided in the Declaration of Receipt Form. Each student must download and sign the DECLARATION OF RECEIPT FORM during the first week of classes in the fisrt semester. Declarations of Receipt Forms must be submitted to the student guardian|studio master of each year.

176

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP â&#x20AC;¢ CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Design Module Guides & Programmes

PART 3 | Appendix D - Design Module Guides & Programmes DESN 3700 | YEAR PROGRAMME 2016

type

functionality in a complex city

MULTI-FUNCTIONAL INNER-CITY PROJECT

rational & phenomenological investigation

organizing, comparing, translating, interpreting, giving descriptions through investigation

HERITAGE PROJECT

ethics of design

03 ▪ 23

analysis of rational & empirical data relative to complex urban environment

03 ▪ 01

method

application & analysis of elements, relations & organising principles

▪ complexity of human ecological environment

▪ urban mythology

▪ preservasion & heritage

Environmental Mode

Design Principles

Formgiving

shared memory and experience

reactionary clues and semiological responses from the environment should govern the design process

volume, colour material, space & place

observing line, shape, form, texture, scale,

▪ field investigation

Design Principles

section to tissue | urban semiotics

figure & archetype | narrative

human ecology in the urban context

▪ urban section & space syntax

nodes | paths | landmarks

Formgiving

Environmental Mode

design theory

▪ flâneurary

▪ investigation and interpretation

Respect towards urban complexity and functionality as an insider-outsider architect.

type ▪ context interpretation

taxonomy

03 ▪ 14

02 ▪ 08

method

taxonomy

02 ▪ 01 ▪ 05

MOVIE PROJECT

date project

DESN 3700 term ONE programme

UFS Department of Architecture (BArchStud)

Body, Memory, and Architecture - Moore

scale | density | empathy

illustrated and documented in the contexts: multimedia, model &

materiality & texuality

material & structural details use of texture, colour, material, 5 details 1:5 light & meaning

documented section 1:20 Hapticity and Time - Pallasmaa Genius Loci - Schulz | Ideas That Shaped Buildings - Hearn

physical model 1:100

site & context analysis

interpretation of plans | sections | existing field with elevations meaningful design responses

illustrated and docureaction to the mented in the contexts: environment in all multimedia, model & facets perspective collage

space syntax

field theory

scale & tissue

urban legibility

tracing urban use & text

multi media documenurban analysis tation

Haptic Diagrams: Volk & Marcus

Placing Space : Architecture, Action, Dimension - Eisenbach

Body, Memory, and Architecture - Moore

Experiencing Architecture - Rasmussen

The site as project - Hogue | Haptic Diagrams - Volk

Urban form and urban representation - Bergum

The Beauty of data visualization TedTalk McCandless

Spatial Revolution - Dowsett | Invisible Cities - Calvino

Body, Memory, and Architecture - Moore

A Phenomenology of Lifeworld and Place Seamon

Experiencing Architecture - Rasmussen

The map reader: theories of mapping practice and cartographic representation - Dodge et al

The death and life of great American cities Jacobs

Corporate Relations in the Hellenistic Polis Linzey

On Site - Burns | Mappings - Cosgrove

phenomena and short film experience of the city

city sections

Site notation - Fox | The Production of Space - Lefebvre Urban threads - McGaw | Criticism, negation, action - Dorrian

presentation skills

reading

500

100

marks

Year Programme 2016

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP • CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Design Module Guides & Programmes 177

AZA

ethics of design

application & analysis of elements, relations & organising principles

UFS Department of Architecture (BArchStud) ethics of design

HERITAGE PROJECT

UFS Department of Architecture (BArchStud) BRANDING THABA NCHU

STUDENT CONGRESS | AZA | MASTER CLASS

SOPHIA GRAY MEMORIAL LECTURE

strategicASSESSMENT uban intervention | urbanEXTERNAL space DESIGN | MID-YEAR syntax | heterotopia

interpretation, comprehension, application

DESN 3700 term TWO programme

08 ▪ 22

09 ▪ 03

08 ▪ 31

08 ▪ 26

08 ▪ 25

05 ▪ 31

05 ▪ 30method

taxonomy

type ▪ urban objects/interventions

07 ▪ 18 DES BAKER PROJECT method semiology, codex, sense of place & adaptability 08 ▪ 15

taxonomy express, analyse, critically reflect on and 07 ▪ 28 address specific design problems taking into CLASS TRIP - KZN account all complex environmental, social, 07 ▪ 30 cultural and historical aspects date project

▪ re-use an programme existing building with new type term DESN 3700 TWO functions

03 ▪ 23

03 ▪ 01

05 ▪ 30 method DESIGN ASSESSMENT | MID-YEAR EXTERNAL 05 ▪ 31 analysis of rational & empirical data relative to complex urban environment

taxonomy

▪ urban mythology method semiology, codex, sense of place & adaptability ▪ complexity of human ecological environment

type ▪ re-use an existing building with new functions 02 ▪ 08 MULTI-FUNCTIONAL INNER-CITY PROJECT taxonomy express, analyse, critically reflect on and 03 ▪ 14 functionality in adesign complex city address specific problems taking into account all complex environmental, social, type cultural ▪ contextand interpretation historical aspects ▪ preservasion & heritage

03 ▪ 23

method 03 ▪ 01 HERITAGE rational & PROJECT phenomenological investigation

to complex comparing, urban environment organizing, translating, interpreting, giving descriptions through investigation

Environmental Mode

Design Principles

Environmental Mode Formgiving

Design Principles

Formgiving

Environmental Mode

Design Principles

Formgiving

Design Principles

Formgiving

Environmental Mode

design theory

Design and Analysis - Leupen

reading

The Production of Space - Lefebvre

Ideas that Shaped Buildings - Hearn

Performance Surfaces - Rickenbacker

Performance/Architecture - Kahn & Hannah

Body, Memory, and Architecture - Moore

Genius Loci - Schulz | Ideas That Shaped Buildings - Hearn

Hapticity and Time - Pallasmaa

Haptic Diagrams: Volk & Marcus

Placing Space : Architecture, Action, Dimension - Eisenbach

Body, Memory, and Architecture - Moore

Experiencing Architecture - Rasmussen

Ideas that The site asShaped project Buildings - Hogue |- Hearn Haptic Diagrams - Volk The Production of Space - Lefebvre

Spatial Revolution - Dowsett | Invisible Cities - Calvino Body, Memory, and Architecture - Moore The Beauty of data visualization TedTalk Performance/Architecture - Kahn & Hannah McCandless Performance Surfaces Rickenbacker - Bergum Urban form and urban-representation

Body, Memory, and Architecture - Moore

institution & urban Space

interpretation of urban ‘problems’ and design diagnostic solutions. Habrakan and the field as well as Karsten Harries’ the ethical function of architecture.

African cities reader II - mobilities and fixtures

African cities reader I - a creation of Chimurenga and the African Centre for Cities

urban space

reaction to heritage building and theme to formulate design principles, relation to physical location and site

urban responsive, post modern semiology and syntax

shared memory and experience

reactionary clues and semiological responses from the environment should govern the design process

urban responsive, post modern semiology and syntax

shared memory and experience

A Phenomenology of Lifeworld and Place Seamon

Experiencing Architecture - Rasmussen

site analysis based on

block & site models

5 details 1:5

material & structural details

physical model 1:100 As per competition brief documented section 1:20

contextual sensibility

site & context analysis presentation skills

plans | sections | elevations

illustrated and documented in the contexts: multimedia, model & perspective collage

materiality & texuality

material & structural details use of texture, colour, material, 5 details 1:5 light & meaning

5 details 1:5 documented section 1:20

plans | sections | illustrated and docuelevations reaction to the mented in the contexts: environment in all multimedia, model & facets perspective collage site & context analysis interpretation of plans | sections | existing field with elevations meaningful design physical model 1:100 responses documented section site & context analysis 1:20 scale | density | material & structural empathy physical modeldetails 1:100

illustrated and documented in the contexts: multimedia, model & perspective collage

materiality & texuality

5 details 1:5 light & meaning space syntax

500 Year Programme 2016

200

marks

Year Programme 2016

500

178

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP • CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Design Module Guides & Programmes

AZA

▪ civic community upliftment ▪ public space ▪ walk-in & urban framework

type ▪ urban series of thresholds intervention

type ▪urban institution suture

monahano lebenkele Taxi Terminus

BRANDING THABA NCHU

STUDENT CONGRESS | AZA | MASTER CLASS

urban suture

10 ▪ 17

▪ public transport

▪ public space

type ▪ series of thresholds

Taxi Terminus

09 ▪ 26

taxonomy comprehension, application & organisation

method contemporary urban theory

▪ public transport ▪ series of thresholds taxonomy synthesis l evaluating

10 ▪ 17

09 ▪ 19 09 ▪ 26

08 ▪ 22

09 ▪ 03

08 ▪ 31

Environmental Mode Formgiving

Tech. Development

Design Principles Design Principles

Formgiving

Environmental Mode Formgiving

Environmental Mode

Tech. Development

Design Principles

Formgiving

type ▪ urban objects/interventions

▪ series of thresholds

Environmental Mode Design Principles

Formgiving

▪DES walk-in & urban framework BAKER PROJECT

taxonomy comprehension, application & organisation interpretation, comprehension, application taxonomy

08 ▪ 15

07 ▪ 18

date ▪project civic community upliftment

type ▪ institution CLASS TRIP - KZN ▪ urban intervention

07 ▪ 28

07 ▪ 30

monahano lebenkele

09 ▪ 19

design theory The outside is the result of the inside - Schumacher

reading in tectonic culture - Frampton Studies

Archetypes in Architecture - Thiis-Evensen

Warped Space - Vidler

The phenomenon of life - Alexander Archetypes in Architecture - Thiis-Evensen IntuitiveinProcess(es) (Warwick Junction) Studies tectonic culture - Frampton Dobson The outside is the result of the inside - SchuArchitecture of Alienation: The Double Bind & macher Public Close encounters, Withdrawal Effects - Brott Space - Hannah Urban Morphology + The Social Vernacular The Cosmopolitan Canopy - Anderson Cambell

Spatial Configuration of Human Emotional Fulfilment Warped Vidler- Thwaites in UrbanSpace Open -Space

The Tell the Tale detail - Frascari

Construction, Specification & Standards Wegelin

Construction primer for South Africa - Wegelin

Detail | Building | Architect & Specifier

Tectonics of the Unforeseen - Schwarzer

all formgiving element throughout year

townscape | town fragments | multiplicity | urban dynamics

hybrid urban systems

statutory limitations: parking & fire requirements l passive energy | light | mixed concrete and pitched roof construction for climatic and aesthetic design | concrete (piano rustico) and steel (piano nobile column & beam construction

Architecture of Alienation: The Double Bind & Public

Intuitive Process(es) (Warwick Junction) Dobson

The phenomenon of life - Alexander

in Urban Open Space - Thwaites

Spatial Configuration of Human Emotional Fulfilment

The Tell the Tale detail - Frascari

Construction, Specification & Standards Wegelin

Construction primer for South Africa - Wegelin

and rational design methodology SABS & SANS DESIGN ASSESSMENT | MID-YEAR EXTERNAL Detail | Building | Architect & Specifier

passive technology | anthropomorphic

all formgiving element throughout year unique topology, morphology & typology infill | plane | archetypes | balance interpretation of urban narrative and structure adaptation | re-use | sustainability of social, The “Place” of Cosmopolitan balance function | place that Shaped Buildings - Architecture Hearn cultural, |environmental and| typology human ecologies Ideas Benjamin Rappel a l’orde, the case of the Tectonic order | spatial enclosure l scale Palladio’s Children - Habraken Frampton

urban fibre | scale | function

hybrid urban systems

institution & urban Space

Close Withdrawal Designencounters, and Analysis - Leupen Effects - Brott interpretation of urban narrative and Urban Morphology + The Social Vernacular Karsten Harries: The Idea of Utopia urban fibre | scale | liveability | accessability Cambell structure | sustainability | mobility NJ. Habraken: The City as Field balance | function | place | typology Ideas that Shaped Buildings - Hearn interpretation of urban ‘problems’ and deAfrican cities reader I - a creation of ChimurenRappel a l’orde, the case of the Tectonic order | spatial enclosure scale sign diagnostic solutions. lHabrakan and the ga and the African Centre for Cities Frampton field as well as Karsten Harries’ the ethical African cities reader II - mobilities and fixtures passive | anthropomorphic Tectonics of the Unforeseen - Schwarzer functiontechnology of architecture. and rational design methodology SABS & SANS

unique topology, morphology & typology

urban space

space | light | colour | geometry

social | movement | hapticity

urban fibre | scale | function

urban fibre

contextual sensibility

suture elements

figure-ground

detail plans 1:50

human urban ecology

models 1:50 stitching

strategy plan 1;500 fragmentation

plan 1:200

movement

climatic study through thresholds sections and details anthropology

application of panoramic photograph knowledge gained

3 details 1:20

human urban site 1:50 plan passive design detail plans ecology plans 1:100 transparency figure-ground model 1:200 urban thresholds synthesis sketches 4 sections 1:100 precedent study

site analysis based on urban fibre project 4 plan 1:200 suture elements conceptual developstructure strategy plan 1;500 ment fragmentation models 1:50 technology stitching precedent studies

block & site models

movement

climatic study through thresholds sections and details anthropology

application of panoramic photograph knowledge gained

3 details 1:20

4 sections 1:100 precedent study

As per competition brief urban thresholds model 1:200

plans 1:100 transparency

presentation skills design site plan passive

precedent studies technology

conceptual developstructure ment

project 4

200

500

200

marks

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP • CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Design Module Guides & Programmes 179

urban suture

10 ▪ 17

method contemporary urban theory

taxonomy synthesis l evaluating

▪ public transport

▪ public space

type ▪ series of thresholds

Taxi Terminus

09 ▪ 26

Environmental Mode

Design Principles

Formgiving

Tech. Development

DESIGN ASSESSMENT | MID-YEAR EXTERNAL

Palladio’s Children - Habraken

The Cosmopolitan Canopy - Anderson

Space - Hannah

Architecture of Alienation: The Double Bind & Public

Intuitive Process(es) (Warwick Junction) Dobson

The phenomenon of life - Alexander

in Urban Open Space - Thwaites

Spatial Configuration of Human Emotional Fulfilment

adaptation | re-use | sustainability of social, cultural, environmental and human ecologies The “Place” of Cosmopolitan Architecture Benjamin

infill | plane | archetypes | balance

all formgiving element throughout year

townscape | town fragments | multiplicity | urban dynamics

hybrid urban systems

The Tell the Tale detail - Frascari

Construction, Specification & Standards Wegelin

Construction primer for South Africa - Wegelin

Detail | Building | Architect & Specifier

SABS & SANS

Tectonics of the Unforeseen - Schwarzer

and rational design methodology

order | spatial enclosure l scale passive technology | anthropomorphic

Ideas that Shaped Buildings - Hearn Rappel a l’orde, the case of the Tectonic Frampton

balance | function | place | typology

Urban Morphology + The Social Vernacular Cambell

taxonomy comprehension, application & organisation

Close encounters, Withdrawal Effects - Brott

interpretation of urban narrative and structure

unique topology, morphology & typology

Design Principles

▪ series of thresholds

Studies in tectonic culture - Frampton

Archetypes in Architecture - Thiis-Evensen

▪ walk-in & urban framework

space | light | colour | geometry

▪ civic community upliftment The outside is the result of the inside - Schumacher

social | movement | hapticity

▪ urban intervention

suture elements

synthesis sketches

figure-ground

detail plans 1:50

human urban ecology

models 1:50 stitching

strategy plan 1;500 fragmentation

plan 1:200

movement

climatic study through thresholds sections and details anthropology

application of panoramic photograph knowledge gained

3 details 1:20

4 sections 1:100 precedent study

model 1:200 urban thresholds

plans 1:100 transparency

site plan passive design

precedent studies technology

200

180

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP • CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Design Module Guides & Programmes

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP â&#x20AC;¢ CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Design Module Guides & Programmes

PART 3 | Appendix D - Design Module Guides & Programmes DESN 3700 | PROJECTS HANDOUTS

181

182

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP • CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Design Module Guides & Programmes

Figure 1. Umbehr, O. Raving Reporter. 1926. Collage. Rowland, 1990: 144

2016 UFS | DEPARTMENT OF ARCHITECTURE | BArch

DESIGN3700 PROJECT 1 MOVIE PROJECT 100 MARKS PROJECT:

AIM TIMETABLE LIST OF TOPICS AND SITES

This is a group project that investigate an aspect of life in Bloemfontein as well as a district in town. Those are the two components that have to feature prominently – the place as well as the topic. The group has to produce a short film of less than 10 minutes that will link the subject to be investigated with the reality of the district. The short film has to convince interested parties that there is potential in the topic and the site (the site together with its context), and that it would be possible to plan a museum or information centre in the area to disseminate more information about that aspect to a wider audience. An overview and introduction to the theme of the year which is Urban Complexity. To illustrate the influence that the new focus can have on the work to be produced by the class. To set a benchmark for progress for the remainder of the year. To initiate the first investigations for Projects 2 & 3. Project out: 2016 02 01 Project in: 2016 02 05, 10:10 1.1 Queen’s Fort: Sport 1.2 Queen’s Fort: Apartheid 2.1 The Old Market Building: Religion 2.2 The Old Market Building: Economy 3.1 The Reservoir: Water 3.2 The Reservoir: Ecology 4.1 First Raadzaal: Political 4.2 First Raadzaal: Education 5.1 Railway Bureau: Transport 5.2 Railway Bureau: Defence

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP • CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Design Module Guides & Programmes

Figure 2. Umbehr, O. Raving Reporter. 1926. Collage. Rowland, 1990: 144

2016 UV | ARGITEKTUURDEPARTEMENT | BArch

ONTWERP3700 PROJEK 1 FLIEKSKEMA 100 PUNTE PROJEK:

DOELWIT TYDSRAAMWERK TERREIN- EN ONDERWERPLYS

Hierdie is ŉ groepskema wat ŉ aspek van die lewe in Bloemfontein en ŉ gebied in die dorp ondersoek. Dit is die twee komponente wat moet uitstaan – die plek sowel as die onderwerp. Die groep moet ŉ kort film produseer van minder as 10 minute wat die tema wat ondersoek moet word met die realiteit van die area sal verbind. Die kort film moet geinteresseerde groepe oortuig dat daar potensiaal is in die onderwerp en die terrein (die terrein tesame met die konteks), en dat dit moontlik sal wees om ŉ museum of ŉ inligtingsentrum te beplan in die gebied wat inligting oor daardie onderwerp aan ŉ wyer gehoor sal kan oordra. ŉ Oorsig en inleiding tot die tema van die jaar wat Stedelike Kompleksiteit is. Om die invloed wat die nuwe fokus op die uitsette van die klas kan hê, te illustreer. Om ŉ maatstaf daar te stel vir die vordering van die res van die jaar. Om die aanvanklike ondersoeke vir skemas 2 & 3 aan te voor. Skema uit: 2016 02 01 Skema in: 2016 02 05, 10:10 1.1 Queen’s Fort: Sport 1.2 Queen’s Fort: Apartheid 2.1 Die Ou Markgebou: Godsdiens 2.2 Die Ou Markgebou: Ekonomie 3.1 Die Reservoir: Water 3.2 Die Reservoir: Ekologie 4.1 Eerste Raadzaal: Politiek 4.2 Eerste Raadzaal: Opvoeding 5.1 Spoorweg Buro: Transport 5.2 Spoorweg Buro: Verdediging

183

184

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP â&#x20AC;˘ CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Design Module Guides & Programmes

Figure 1. Dewar, D. Uytenbogaardt, R. Et al. S.a. Housing: a comparative evaluation of urbanism in Cape Town. Cape Town: University of Cape Town. p.54 & 55

2016 UFS | DEPARTMENT OF ARCHITECTURE | BArch

DESIGN3700 PROJECT 2A MULTI-FUNCTIONAL INNER-CITY PROJECT 500 MARKS PROJECT:

An inner-city development that accommodates multi-functional components. Commercially rentable space on ground level, rentable office space from first floor up and residential units at the top. The analysis of the context and the precedent studies will be presented in the groups. The lecturers will indicate a site within the area that is being investigated by the group. Each individual student will then design a project on that site.

AIM

The aim of this project is to create the opportunity for students to illustrate the contribution that functional buildings make to the city. The design also includes a prescribed construction component. Basement parking and a concrete frame and slab structure form part of the project. The analysis of the city environment as Dewar and Uytenbogaardt demonstrate it in Housing: A Comparative Evaluation of Urbanism in Cape Town is applicable to this design. Only if you can make it clear that you react to the environment in all its facets, will you be able to succeed with this project.

TIMETABLE

Project out: 2016 02 08 Project in: 2016 02 12, 10:10 Analysis of the context [40] and precedent study [20] 2016 02 29, 10:10 Preliminary hand-in [40] 2016 03 14, 10:10 Final evaluation [400]

LIST OF SITES

Group 1: Queenâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Fort Group 2: Old Market Building Group 3: Reservoir Group 4: First Raadzaal Group 5: Railway Bureau The context analysis is to be handed in on Friday 2016 02 12, 10:10 and must comprise the following:

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP • CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Design Module Guides & Programmes

ANALYSIS OF CONTEXT

PRECEDENT STUDIES

ACCOMMODATION

1. A context model on scale 1:1000 that show contours and roads (one layer of hardboard lower than the sidewalk) in grey hardboard and existing buildings in white triplex, but only block models. Indicate also the trees in the area with white painted Vaalbos flowers on scale. 2. A series of sturdy (foam board or hardboard) black-and-white A4 posters (horizontal, in landscape format) that display the following analyses and headings (Arial 20): • Functions: Ground level • Functions: Above ground level • Parking • Section through street 1:200 • Perspective of environment • Sun angles • Views • Traffic patterns of vehicles • Circulation of pedestrians • Public, semi-public and private space The A4 posters must contain the minimum text and must rather make use of diagrams as explanation. The precedent studies that have to be handed in on Friday 2016 02 12 at 10:10, must analyse two multi-functional inner-city buildings. One in the inner-city of Bloemfontein and one from an innercity area from the rest of South Africa. It must be presented once again on sturdy A4 (landscape format) posters but can be done in colour. There is no limit to the number of posters. Use again Arial 20 for the headings. Once the group has decided on the two precedent studies, their choice must be placed on the lecturer’s list to avoid duplication. Use the Harvard method to indicate sources of especially the visual material in the captions. The design has to provide for a concrete frame and slab construction that must be taken from the basement up. All municipal requirements must be met, for example parking, coverage and height restrictions. All national building regulations must be met, for example regulations that prescribe fire escapes and circulation.

Provide entrance hall areas that would enable vertical circulation. It must link to cleaners’ facilities and ablutions that would be able to accommodate disabled persons. The building must be able to allow for sub-divisions and sub-letting. The lettable commercial space on ground floor must be provided with storage space, kitchenette and wc with whb included. Investigate the possibility to have deliveries from the back for these commercial spaces. The lettable office area above ground floor should be able to take a variety of divisions. It must allow for different lay-outs. Indicate at least the lay-out of two different businesses on your plans. Take into account each time the staff rooms, tea kitchens, receptions areas etc. The residential units must number at least five lettable units. Decide on the most appropriate type of unit for your specific building and design accordingly.

EVALUATION

The presentation must explain your point of view, precedents and any other influences clearly, complete with sources of the information – particularly the illustrations of precedents. A list of the minimum drawings that is required:  Context and Site plan 1:500  All plans (except repeating plans) 1:200  2 x Sections 1:200  4 x Elevations 1:200  Detail section 1:50 (at least A2 size)  Physical model of 1:500 Any specifically listed items that is missing, will be penalised with 2.5%. No late hand-ins will be accepted.

185

186

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP â&#x20AC;˘ CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Design Module Guides & Programmes

Figuur 1. Hellman, L. 1984. Architecture for Beginners. New York: Writers and Readers. P.206

2016 UFS | DEPARTMENT OF ARCHITECTURE | BArch

DESIGN3700

PROJECT 3A (Revision I)

HERITAGE PROJECT

500 MARKS

PROJECT:

A centre for information on a given subject in central Bloemfontein that will re-use an existing building. The lecturers will indicate a site within the designated area that is investigated by the group. Each student will then design their own project on the site

AIM

To learn to assess the value and potential for reusing the building stock To examine how our built environment can be safeguarded To understand principles of conservation To learn how to use old buildings as part of a new design in a way that has empathy for the historical character of original building. To reinterpret existing built-work conceptually in a new way and present it as such. To understand the single building as part of the greater settlement.

TIMETABLE

Project out: 2016 04 04 Project in: 2016 04 08, 10:10 Analysis of the context [40] and precedent study [20] 2016 05 09, 10:10 Preliminary hand-in [40] 2016 05 23, 10:10 Final evaluation [400]

LIST OF SITES

Group 1: Queenâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Fort, Group 2: Old Market Building, Group 3: Reservoir, Group 4: First Raadzaal & Group 5: Railway Bureau

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP • CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Design Module Guides & Programmes

ANALYSIS OF CONTEXT

1. A model on scale 1:200 of the existing building and the whole site that show contours and roads (one layer of hardboard lower than the sidewalk) in grey hardboard and existing buildings in white triplex in detail. Indicate also the trees in the area with white painted Vaalbos flowers on scale. 2. A series of sturdy (foam board or hardboard) colour A2 posters that display the following analyses and headings (Arial 20): • The character of the environment in a photo essay • Plans of the existing building (measure up at least 100 square meters of the building)

PRECEDENT STUDIES

The precedent studies that have to be handed in on Friday 2016 04 08 at 10:10, must analyse two heritage projects. One international example and one in South Africa. Once the group has decided on the two precedent studies, their choice must be placed on the lecturer’s list to avoid duplication. Use the Harvard method to indicate sources of especially the visual material in the captions.

ACCOMMODATION

While all groups to a particular historical building are encouraged to propose more nuanced accommodation, subject to staff approval, the generic brief comprises: • a foyer space that will invite visitors in and introduce them immediately to the subject; • a museum-shop off the foyer; • an exhibition space for more or less permanent exhibitions; • an smaller exhibition space for temporary exhibitions; • a raked auditorium to seat 80; • three break-away rooms to seat 20-30 each, capable of being used in combination to e.g. accommodate an exhibition; • dining or multi-purpose space for 80; • an associated kitchen, scullery, store and service yard; • 10 staff offices and a board room to seat 15; & • landscaped external space capable of receiving larger groups. • Ablutions as per NBR and 10 staff/visitor parking bays, preferably under cover. • Any appropriate lettable spaces to accommodate private enterprise.

EVALUATION

All proposals must engage with the following: (a) All conservation tenets, in particular that the additions should complement rather than parody the old; that each should be distinct yet enhanced by the contrast; and that new work should be clearly distinguishable from the old. (b) Urban regeneration: the intervention is to have a greater impact on the area the building is located in. (c) Universal accessibility: the disabled must be catered for in every way, not just in the provision of dedicated ablution facilities. (d) Use of passive energy: while we know that the thick walls of structures of old are often cooler in summer and warmer in winter, the additions must demonstrate energy efficiency. Assessment will be based on the quality of your design in meeting with the conditions of the brief and having regard for the character of the original building.

PRESENTATION

The presentation must explain your point of view, precedents and any other influences clearly, complete with sources of the information – particularly the illustrations of precedents. A list of the minimum drawings that is required:  Context and Site plan 1:500  All plans (except repeating plans) 1:200  2 x Sections 1:200  4 x Elevations 1:200  Detail section 1:50 (at least A2 size)  Physical model of 1:200 Any presentation that does not show the context in detail cannot be regarded as complete. Any specifically listed items that is missing, will be penalised with 2.5%. No late hand-ins will be accepted.

187

188

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP â&#x20AC;˘ CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Design Module Guides & Programmes

189

presented KdP & ZW

Desn 3 Âˇ project five | not an institution

This project allows students to work in an exis5ng system and to challenge the status quo. The town of Thaba Nchu is expanding and development toward the West requires a design proposal to sustain the development. The aim is to design a Kgotla as an ins5tu5on(not) that provides social upliCment through an integrated program of public and private spaces whilst strengthening the exis5ng systems around the site. The social ins5tu5on must be a public interven5on â&#x20AC;&#x201C; and inves5gate the sites topology, morphology, typology, hap5city, materiality, spa5al composi5on, cultural spirit or all of the above together.

190

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP â&#x20AC;˘ CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Design Module Guides & Programmes

STAGES OF PRIVACY | THRESHOLDS BETWEEN PUBLIC AND PRIVATE | SOCIAL INTERCATIVE SPACES vlakke van privaatheid | drempels tussen publiek en privaat | sosiale interaktiewe ruimtes

ORIENTA(sie)TION

TYPOLOGIES TO BE QUESTIONED AS SOCIAL UPLIFTMENT | INSTITUTIONAL TYPOLOGY RATIONAL DESIGN METHODOLOGY | STATUTORY LIMITATIONS 5pologieë moet bevraagteken word as sosiale bevordering | ins5tusionele 5pologie rasionele ontwerpmetodiek | statutêre beperkings

MOR(f)PHOLOG(IE)Y

TY(i)POLOG(ie)Y

WHAT | wat

HOW | hoe

WHERE | waar

URBAN & NATURAL TOPOGRAPHY + LESSONS FROM PROJECT 1: URBAN NARRATIVE & STRUCTURE stedelike & natuurlike topograﬁe + lesse voortspruitend uit projek 1: stedelike narra5ef & struktuur

TOPOGRAPH(fie)Y

DESIGN PRINCIPLES | ontwerpbeginsels

IDENTIFI(k)CA(sie)TION

SPATIAL SKETCHES & MODELS + SITE INFORMATION ruimtesketse & modelle + terrein inlig5ng

2 x SECTIONS SHOWING CONSTRUCTION, PASSIVE and OTHER CLIMATE CONTROL & NATURAL LIGHT FILTRATION 2 x sniee s //1:50 ELEVATIONS & 8xDETAILS aansigte & 8xdetails s //1:200

MODEL s //1:200 PLANS – s//1:100 SITE PLANS – s//1:500

x PERSPECTIVE COLLAGE ILLUSTRATING THE DESIGN PROPOSAL IN THE CONTEXT collage in perspek5ef wat die ontwerpvoorstel in konteks illustreer x ALL SKETCHES, CONCEPT & BLOCK MODELS ILLUSTRATING THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE DESIGN TO BE INCLUDED IN THE PRESENTATION alle sketse, konsep & blokmodelle waardeur die ontwerpontwikkeling geΪllustreer word moet by die aanbieding ingesluit word

DATES l datums SITE ANALYSIS + PRECEDENT STUDY + SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK x HANDOUT - uithandiging - - - - - - - - - - - - - › 22 | 08 | 16 x HAND-IN - handiging - - - - - - - - - - - - - › 29 | 08 | 16 PRESENTATION | aanbieding x HANDOUT - uithandiging 22 | 08 | 16 x PRELIMINARY- voorlopige 12 | 09 | 16 x HAN-IN - inhandiging 19 | 09 | 16

URBAN SPACE; INSTITUTION; ecological and social spaces stedelike ruimte; instelling; ekologiese en eksistensiële en sosiale ruimtes

FORMGIVING | formgewende FA(k)CTOR(e)S

Omgewingsvlakke

presented KdP & ZW

desn 3 · project five | not an institution

ENVIRONMENTAL LEVELS

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP • CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Design Module Guides & Programmes 191

presented KdP & ZW

the space between

desn 3 · project 5.2 |

THEME: The design – structure to place: man as form-giver (natural and man-made)

Sustainability and the urban ensemble

THE SPACE BETWEEN 192

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP • CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Design Module Guides & Programmes

presented KdP & ZW

the space between

desn 3 Âˇ project 5.2 |

Focus should be placed on the seamless integration (Alexander | Lynch) of different spatial rooms (Thwaites) and sensations through texturality and materiality (Hapticity).

Students should explore ways in which the left-over urban space can become a playful and sociable catalyst (park | sidewalk | street | square) within a layered urban area and within contemporary society.

The brief requires students to act as surgical sutures: investigating elements of spatial design that will be able to stitch urban fibre together. Students are asked to design a convivial urban space to define | bind |weave the proposed project 5 and subsequently contribute to urban regeneration.

assignment

URBAN SPACE

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP â&#x20AC;˘ CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Design Module Guides & Programmes 193



presented KdP & ZW

the space between

desn 3 · project 5.2 |

sustainability through adaption and re-use

datum | reference, transformation

Design principles: concept / order natural order | man-made order infill, suture & articulation combination: archetypes. axis, symmetry, hierarchy, rhythm | repetition,

Environmental levels (settlement; urban space; institution; dwelling) stitching settlement together | suture of city fragments identification: place-making orientation: centre, path, domain, boundaries, thresholds

theory

URBAN SPACE 194

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP • CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Design Module Guides & Programmes

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP â&#x20AC;¢ CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Design Module Guides & Programmes

PART 3 | Appendix D - Design Module Guides & Programmes DESN 6800 | MODULE GUIDE

195

196

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP â&#x20AC;˘ CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Design Module Guides & Programmes

year theme: Urban Renewal as Multi-Faceted Process:

Understanding the transforming African City

Urban transformation viewed as a multi-dimensional concept to effect

social change in South African society in the post-apartheid era.

Bachelor of Architecture Studiorum Honours

MODULE GUIDE : 2016

Department of Architecture, University of the Free State Lecturers: Contact: Credits:

Aim:

Martie Bitzer, Jako Olivier Department of Architecture, 051 4012332/4013486 48 on NQF level 8

South Africaâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s urban landscape still suffers from the spatial legacy of Apartheid. Many problems need to be addressed in order to reshape our cities. Unemployment, rapid urbanisation and an

expanding population are problems which all affect the provision of housing, and the quality of our cities (Dept. of Housing. 2008: 2).

The socio-spatial problematique of the Apartheid City influences to a great extent the rate of change in South African society, particularly after the inauguration of the first democratic

government in 1994. This means, amongst other things, that the future of South Africa is

inextricably linked with the future of its cities. It would, therefore, be no exaggeration to suggest that the South African city reflects the state of the nation and the welfare of its people.

February 2016

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP • CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Design Module Guides & Programmes

Urban transformation is viewed as a multimulti-dimensional concept to effect social change in South

African society in the postpost-apartheid era. The policy implications implications of such a variegated

understanding of social change are examined with special reference to planning principles such

as holism, capacity building, selfself-reliance, community integration, participatory democracy and

so forth. (Williams)

The process of urban transformation is changing how and where people live in cities. Local governments are carrying out principal tasks. First, they are making efforts to integrate separate

residential areas and promote mixed land use types by the adoption of multi-functional zoning as opposed to mono-functional zoning.

Second, local authorities are also promoting densification programmes in residential areas which are accessible to employment opportunities. This course of action allows for people of different socioeconomic backgrounds to interact socially, thus contributing significantly to the

elimination of the fears and suspicions among people from different “walks of life”. Thus, pursued, densification programmes are giving rise to a tapestry of human relations across the

urban landscape, where the quality of interpersonal relationships is more important than the accidents of colour, ethnic origin and any other seemingly important social attributes.

This programme aims to equip the post-graduate honours student with an understanding and

insight into Transformation in the African city, as well as the roles of the architect and others in

the building profession within this process. The two major projects of the year will rely on the

student’s ability to access, understand and contribute within the above scenario in a meaningful way.

Focus:

As backbone of the B Arch Hons programme, DESN6800 focuses on the application of

discipline-specific knowledge, skills and competencies in architectural design, with specific emphasis on urban and sustainable levels. The module aim to develop independent research

abilities relating to sensitive, sustainable and appropriate designs within the built environment. The programme relies on an empathetic and responsible attitude towards the social, cultural, natural, urban and historical environments.

This module contains fundamental knowledge, theories, principles, practices and processes of

Architectural Design explored through the themes: urban design, environment responsible design (environmental impact, earth construction, alternative technologies, etc.), conservation and housing. A group investigation of each theme precedes the individual critical research of

this theme, which then extends to reports and design projects. Every project has its own specific criteria to which it must adhere.

Learning Outcomes:

At the end of the module, the student is expected to be able to:

structure and construct appropriate research pertaining to specific design problems taking into

examine, deduce and evaluate specific design problems taking into account all complex

account all relevant aspects and addressing the relevant theme in a responsible manner;

environmental, social, cultural and historical aspects specific to the relevant theme, in order to generate and propose a fitting and responsible design solution to a particular architectural situation within the wider context of the built environment;

197

198

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP â&#x20AC;˘ CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Design Module Guides & Programmes

4. 5. 6. 7.

integrate and arrange universal design principals and individual project criteria applicable to

urban design, environmental responsible design, conservation and housing within complex human ecologies;

design spaces on different environmental levels and public artefacts concerned with functional planning, structural integrity and meaningful shaping;

identify, research and construct why, where and how knowledge could be applied to design problems;

meaningfully apply and integrate historical principles to design problems and solutions and generate a responsible theoretical grounding for the design solutions;

formulate and manage an appropriate design process from concept identification and development to the incorporation of well-reasoned well-grounded theoretical/conceptual

position/viewpoint to the finally design proposal which demonstrates the responsible and 8.

appropriate choice of material, construction method and articulation of detail; justify the thought process behind the design solution;

communicate and integrate all work in a clear, direct and unambiguous manner, graphically as well as verbally;

10. design multi-storey building: required for the appropriate category for which graduates qualify with the South African Council of the Architectural Profession.

Assessment strategy: strategy:

The following criteria apply to the presentation and assessment of all

projects:

Knowledge: Students are expected to build a broad framework of knowledge with reference

to each category and project. Students should therefore read as much as possible. An initial list

of reading sources is provided. Additional reading will also be given from time to time, and students should also consult other sources on their own initiative. For the presentation of

projects and its evaluation it will be expected of students to give clear and precise evidence of their architectural and theoretical knowledge in general but also with reference to each project

in particular. All influences pertaining to the particular design should be clearly indicated and articulated: as annotated drawings as well as during oral presentations.

Critical thought:

It is of the utmost importance that students learn to critically engage

with all knowledge accumulated. Knowledge therefore should not simply be assembled and presented but should be judged for why, where and how it could be applied. Question again and again all information, knowledge and solutions (developing alternatives) in order to arrive

at a more responsible and appropriate answer. It is important to illustrate the thought process behind the design solution rather than simply concentrate on the presentation of the final product.

Conceptual clarity: clarity:

At the basis of most good design solutions is a clearly delineated

concept developed from a well-reasoned well-grounded theoretical/conceptual position | viewpoint. The more abstract theoretical position | premises | ideas and the eventual real

concept should be clearly indicated and illustrated. Students should illustrate their ability to develop the concept from its most abstract theoretical underpinnings to final concrete detail by

the responsible and appropriate choice of material, construction method and articulation of detail.

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP • CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Design Module Guides & Programmes

Communication: Communication:

All work should be communicated in a clear, direct and unambiguous

manner, graphically as well as verbally. Graphic techniques should always support, enhance and clearly illustrate and communicate the design process and eventual solution | product,

rather than being used mainly for graphic virtuosity or effect. Every graphic presentation should also provide enough information to convey and communicate the design proposal without the student having to verbally explain anything.

Assessment policy: policy:

The programme follows the institutional and Faculty of Natural and

Agricultural Sciences assessment policy. The Department of Architecture uses a continuous assessment system: Students will be notified of their marks as soon as projects or parts of projects have been

assessed. The work is continuously assessed internally, leading to an internal mark. A mark of 50% is a university requirement to pass and a mark of 75% is required to pass with distinction.

A student must meet the prescribed subminimum of 30% for all assignments and design tasks

to pass this module. Should a student not submit, or submit an assignment or design task late, or in some or other way fail to receive the subminimum of 30%, the student will not be able to

complete the module and will immediately receive ‘incomplete’ for the module as a final outcome. At the end of each year two external examiners | moderators assess the work as a whole, leading to an external mark. Regulation A14(a) of the UFS year book states that a

minimum year mark | internal mark of 40% is required to enter for the final examination. The mean average of the internal and external marks is the preliminary mark to be discussed at the

moderators’ meeting. In the moderators’ meeting marks may be adapted within certain limits,

leading to the moderated mark. The moderated marks are presented at a staff meeting, and it is possible that some marks may again be adapted as a majority decision. This leads to the final

mark. Regulation A15 (a)(iii) of the UFS year book states that in respect of examinations and where a system of continuous assessment is used, the additional examination does not apply.

HandHand-in:

Projects will be accepted only on the time and date specified. Late hand-ins are

completely unacceptable and will result in a zero mark. Keep in mind that the sub-minimum

for any assignment or design task is 30% to be able to complete the module. If a student is unable to hand in at the required time as a result of illness or other legitimate pressing circumstances, the lecturer concerned is to be notified beforehand or within 24 hours after the time of handing in. Copies of the necessary verification documents, e.g. medical certificates,

should be presented to the lecturer at the same time, while the originals should be handed to the departmental secretary. The lecturer will then, according to the merits of each case, decide

when the project has to be handed in and how much will be deducted for late hand-in. The Departmental policy is -10% per week or part of a week.

It is the responsibility of the student to hand in, exhibit or pin up work for evaluation. The purpose of a hand-in for evaluation and the ritual of a hand-in for evaluation must be

understood as such by both the student and lecturer. Ordinary class crits cannot later be recast

as evaluation crits, and work that has not been handed in as scheduled will not be evaluated.

The ritual of hand-in for ONW600 will involve the student showing all of the work to be handed in to the lecturer and a signature of the student or the lecturer to confirm the written recording of the work.

199

200

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP • CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Design Module Guides & Programmes

Plagiarism:

Any attempt at dishonesty, including the re-use of former projects, will be regarded

as a serious matter to be referred to the disciplinary committee of the UFS. Plagiarism is totally unacceptable.

Students are not allowed to copy work of other authors (published or

unpublished), including fellow students, without the necessary and correct acknowledgement to the source(s). Where applicable (specifically with precedent studies), the Harvard system of

referencing is required. This includes illustrations. Any infringement of this condition will lead to disciplinary action.

Requirements to progress: •

To be admitted to the MArch (Prof) programme:

Applications to this programme, on the prescribed form, must reach the Registrar,

Academic Student Services, University of the Free State, Bloemfontein, on or before 31 May of the year before the intended admission.

•

A candidate must have obtained a BArchStudHons degree or equivalent qualification from any SA Architectural Learning Site.

•

Places will be reserved in the BArchM (Prof) programme for UFS students who have obtained their BArchStud (Hons) degree with a minimum of 65% for ONW600 and an

average of 65% for OGT606, BOW608 and TAR604. This concession will be forfeited if students take one or more years out. •

A research proposal for the extended research essay must be approved by the Head of the Department of Architecture by a date set by the Department.

•

Candidates must (on the discretion of the Department) attend a personal interview,

present a portfolio and provide verified academic records. The final decision will rest with the selection panel.

Problems and complaints:

Problems and complaints should be communicated and

handled in the following order and manner: First discuss the issue with the responsible lecturer or the A5 student member, academic matters.

Should there appear to be no progress in

resolving the problem, the matter should be discussed with the Head of the Department. Problems that are raised first with the Head of the Department are in all cases reverted back to

the responsible lecturer for commentary. This usually takes longer than starting with the person who actually has to provide an answer in all cases, the lecturer.

All complaints will be handled with the required professionalism and fairness – please restrain from anonymous complaints.

Exemption:

The Head and lecturers of the Department of Architecture reserve the right to

change the requirements of this guide from time to time.

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP â&#x20AC;¢ CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Design Module Guides & Programmes

PART 3 | Appendix D - Design Module Guides & Programmes DESN 6800 | PROJECT

201

presented MB & JO

desn6800 · project one | Gorée Urban Laboratory

The institute requires a building complex that re-joins and sustains the existing urban practices, this real phenomenon constitutes the element of analysis and experimentation to which the artists and writers’ laboratory responds and expands. Although the complex should change as little as possible to the existing networks on street level, it should be open to the prospect of exploring and developing new networks. As a mediating but core agent the complex should provide for artists and writers’ laboratories, a middle world (reception, administration, galleries, one-on-one consultation rooms, studios, workshops, and research facilities) for dialogue and experimentation. Finally, moving towards the semi-private and private functions the complex should provide micro-living units for artists and writers in residency, doctoral exchange students, permanent mentors as well as caretaker facilities. The latter spaces are required to be units with fixed designed elements that can connect and adapt to the different needs of the different occupants.

In 2015 the institute’s directorate uniformly decided to create satellite campuses in different African cities to function under the legal status of the institute. The campuses, better term urban laboratories, are to fall under the institute’s Peace by Force Programme. This programme cultivates artistic and literary creativity. The urban laboratories are designed to create urban placespecific meeting points of difference, exchange and cognitive understanding. The writers and artists’ laboratory is to engage with the urban real as a qualitative fact open to creative analysis and experimentation. Analysis and experimentation with the urban flux and flow becomes the bases for artistic and literary engagement. Mangaung Metro was nominated as one of the urban centers for assignation.

The client, the Gorée Institute: Centre for Democracy, Development and Culture in Africa, is ‘committed to promoting peace and development on the continent.’ Situated on Gorée Island, outside the Harbour of Dakar, Senekal, the institute ‘is an independent, pan-African Organization with a legal status’ forming an enclave of freedom and democracy. www.goreeinstitut.org

BRIEF | This project challenges students to design a hybrid building complex that actively engages the streetscape and urban lived experience. As a micro representation of the complex networks of the urban real, the building should incorporates the fluid interchange between living, working and playing in difference. VIGILISM. CARDBOARD CITYSCAPES, 2014 STEPHEN HOBBS. BE CAREFUL IN THE WORKING RADIUS, 2013

Wherever its uncitizens are, there the Middle World is. I don’t have complete a topography because cities and countries may change their coloring on the map and the forces of conformism are voracious. Once more, I’ll not argue the nuances. It should be pointed out that Middle Worlders paradoxically have a sharpened awareness of place (topoi, locus) – as with nomads, the environment may be constantly changing and one does not possess it, but it is always a potensially dangerous framework with which you must interact – and therefore they will know cloud and well and star and fire better than sedentary citizens do. BB : 147

202

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP • CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Design Module Guides & Programmes

An echo of the found urban environment, its thresholds, the body’s experience in urban space confronted with the objects of commerce … but also an echo of the city and its dwellers’ ritual, stories, fears and memories, the fake and the re-real, and networks between …. And then the MORIAN as outsider to and participant in these spaces, their nomadic understanding of topos, their lack of clear thresholds, their bodies questioning categorization through commodification and pretence. Their spirits build on memories and narratives and networks… Low cost, low technology building materials and constructions promoting environmental and economic sustainability – designed around the power, water and construction needs of bloemfontein

MORPHOLOGY

MIKHAEL SUBOTZKY AND PATRICK WATERHOUSE. PONTE CITY, 2008–2010. WINDOWS.

HOW?

TECTOLOGY

HOW?

WHERE?

urban topography + lessons from mapping + historical logic of place + commercial logic of place + south african lived logic of place

a multi-storey building that unite urban seamlessly with public flowing into institutional and formulating private dwelling as an urban act | the building experience equated to the south african urban experience | re-representing the city

not of absolutes but of questioning truths not inside the borders but engaging the peripheral not of the inside but living in margins not of fear of edges but alive on the edges not of be longing alone but of belonging and not belonging not north, south east or west, but in the middle of nowhere and yet everywhere not of the intentionally familiar but of the unintentional estrangement not freed by a master but self-enforced freedom not up but down | not of the tree but on the rhizome not of hierarchy but of equality not of home alone but of asylum and refuge and exile not of involved and sameness but of indifference and difference

TOPOLOGY

WHAT?

DESIGN PRINCIPLES TYPOLOGY

FORMGIVING FACTORS IDENTIFICATION & ORIENTATION

SETTLEMENT; URBAN SPACE; INSTITUTION; DWELLING

HANDOUT HAND-IN

2 x section showing basement, urban canopy, passive and mechanical (low technology) climate control & natural light filtration s //1:100 detailed model, 1 x interior elevation, 2 x sections & details of micro-living units s //1:50 2 x perspective collage illustrating the design proposal in the context from the lived-perspective

x x

IMISO CERAMICS. DOCKS TABLE, 2013

all sketches, concept & block models illustrating the development of the design to be included in the presentation

plans of urban space S//1:100

plans – all floors NOTE: only computer drafting permitted s//1:200

model & site model s //1:100 & s ///1:500

x x

all sketches, concept & block models illustrating the development of the design at least three concept models

01 | 02 | 16 29 | 03 | 16

spatial sketches & models + site information

-------------› -------------›

FINAL PRESENTATION

x x

SEE SEPARATE HAND-IN DATES (1a, 1b, 1c, 1d) ON YEAR PROGRAMME

DATES

presented MB & JO

desn6800 · project one | Gorée Urban Laboratory

ENVIRONMENTAL LEVELS

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP • CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Design Module Guides & Programmes 203

MEZZANINE + 1st FLOOR urban laboratory as mediating agent  5 admin office spaces | max 12m² each  micro service entities to accommodate 50 people in total, w|c + kitchenette  5 artist laboratories (paint-|ceramic-|sculpture-|2xprint -studios) | max 60m² each for 4 people per lab + services + wall storage  material store | max 25m²  multi function print room | max 25m²  ceramic oven | max 25m²  5 writer laboratories - dialogue and discussion rooms | max 25m² each for 4 people per lab  1 general workshop | conference room | to accommodate 60 people  research facilities  5 one-on-one consultation rooms | max 12m² each  reference library| max 80m²

IKIRÉ JONES. OUR AFRICA 2081 A.D. NAIROBI 2081

presented MB & JO

desn6800 · project one | Gorée Urban Laboratory

GROUND + MEZZANINE  existing networks re-joining current occupants + services + deliveries  new networks recognising the potential of an urban canopy as a platform for the acting of live, death tragedy, ritual, ruin …. in short allowing the magic of the street to meet the magic of MOR  reception, vertical circulation atrium and public gallery ( max 150m²) for the Goree Laboratory that is both a porous threshold and secure, that defines but invites, that holds but allows flow. Associated function to link to mezzanine  w/c 100 people | category institutional + handicapped  small catering kitchen for functions + deliveries | services  curators and assistant office  separate entrance for residence, accommodating services

VIGILISM. WHERE THERE’S GOLD: MINING WAY STATION, 2014

Vigilism, Idumota Market, Lagos 2081A.D., (Our Africa 2081A.D. series), 2013. Olalekan and Walé Oyéjidé Chicoco Radio: Community building designed for urban flooding, Port Harcourt, Nigeria

204

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP • CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Design Module Guides & Programmes

JUSTIN PLUNKETT. CON/STRUCT, 2013. SKHAYASCRAPER

 access from ground level  40 parking spaces

BASEMENT:

2nd + + FLOORS  40 micro-living units @ max 30m²  each unit should accommodate:  sleeping area for 2 people  cooking area for 2 people  recreational area for 4 people  writer | artist station for a person  bookshelves and storage spaces  shower, w|c and wash basin  units must be adaptable to different need  Units must possibility of connecting to each other  Units must form clusters around vertical courtyards and recreational spaces  Clusters must illustrate unique character | neighbourhoods in a city  Units must open to shared spaces, creating defensible and recreational spaces UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP • CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Design Module Guides & Programmes 205

IKIRÉ JONES. …IN PARIS 2081 A.D. THE UNTOLD RENAISSANCE, SPRING/SUMMER 2014 COLLECTION

IKIRÉ JONES. OUR AFRICA 2081 A.D. NAIROBI 2081

presented MB & JO

desn6800 · project one | Gorée Urban Laboratory

VIGILISM. WHERE THERE’S GOLD: MINING WAY STATION, 2014

Vigilism, Idumota Market, Lagos 2081A.D., (Our Africa 2081A.D. series), 2013. Olalekan and Walé Oyéjidé Chicoco Radio: Community building designed for urban flooding, Port Harcourt, Nigeria

206

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP • CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Design Module Guides & Programmes

JUSTIN PLUNKETT. CON/STRUCT, 2013. SKHAYASCRAPER

 access from ground level  40 parking spaces

BASEMENT:

IKIRÉ JONES. …IN PARIS 2081 A.D. THE UNTOLD RENAISSANCE, SPRING/SUMMER 2014 COLLECTION

presented MB & JO

desn6800 · project one | Gorée Urban Laboratory

images: kind courtesy Lente Conradie : unpublished dissertation 2015 + http://www.itsliquid.com/making-africa-vitra-design-museum + http://makingafrica.net + Google Earth

208

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP • CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Design Module Guides & Programmes

The project needs to address three areas of inquiry related to the built environment — urban systems, building systems, and cultural systems •The study of the urban system is the area around a city, in which daily commuting occurs. It is a means for defining an urban region by including the areas from which individuals commute. Therefore, it includes multiple local governments, economies, and demographics. It is also the study of the area around a site in which already established patterns occur. •The study of building systems includes investigation of those component technologies that are required to construct environmentally responsive architecture. •The study of cultural systems requires that natural and building systems be investigated within the complex social and political context of architectural practice.

Choose a client that has already shown a commitment to this new awareness with regards to their mission/vision statements, record of structured processes etc.

Sustainable business initiatives can relate to social, corporate and/or environmental sustainability. Collectively, they involve examining business processes and practices in terms of people, planet and profit, and seeking out ways to create a positive impact in each of these areas. While improving working conditions and protecting the environment are certainly admirable goals, they haven also proven to be good business strategies.

BRIEF | This project challenges students to design a satellite office as part of a complex that aims to make sense of its immediate diverse urban fabric. Amid rising awareness of the impact businesses can have on the environment, companies of every size and type have begun implementing environmental sustainability initiatives. Many organizations have introduced recycling programs and made efforts to reduce their carbon emissions as a way to mitigate the adverse effects of their business processes.

https://www.flickr.com/photos/76340982@N03/15750482652/ /https://www.flickr.com/photos/76340982@N03/15614729826/in/photostream

“...there’s a good reason that ‘green’ or sustainable buildings are also known as ‘high performance buildings’: they not only tend to save on running costs, there is also growing evidence that they can increase productivity and well-being for occupants through improved lighting and air quality.” http://www.morganlovell.co.uk

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP • CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Design Module Guides & Programmes 209

presented MB & JO

desn6800 · project two |the Satellite office in diverse urban fabric

presented MB & JO

desn6800 · project two |the Satellite office in diverse urban fabric

The satellite office complex requires 3 buildings that responds to the Yoxall Street, currently a non-place. Investigate as a group the possibility to dissolve the boundary and extend the street as a pedestrian corridor to allow for visual and physical access, as well as an alternative route for pedestrians. The lack of green space within the CBD presents an opportunity as a dialogue between the 3 buildings. Thus, a non-place is given meaning as a place.

Together with the proposed urban rejuvenation of the adjoining Bloemspruit-corridor, the proposed office precinct aims to be an important node and means of orientation within a complex and multilayered urban environment.

The proposed site is currently not developed to its full potential and has been selected for its location within the network of transport facilities as well as its opportunity to contribute positively to the vibrant context.

The Mangaung Metropolitan Municipality (MMM) has identified Selborne Avenue as an activity corridor for future urban rejuvenation. This rejuvenation includes introducing higher density and mixed-use buildings with numerous nodes of interest, which will attract activities and reactivate the Bloemspruit urban corridor.

The existing building to the east of the site occupies the city block formed by Yoxall street to the north and west, Selborne Avenue to the south and Fraser street to the east. MMM in joined partnership with the Resource Centre for Environment and Sustainable Development (RCESD) will use this premise now in the Municipality’s sustainable awareness campaign. The chosen site for project two must also include this endeavour as part of the development of the bigger urban area. The Resource Centre for Environment and Sustainable Development (RCESD) is a Cameroon based non-profit organisation whose mission is to contribute to a sustainable planet through environmental conservation, scientific research, education and capacity building. They seek partnership with interested individuals and organisations worldwide to contribute towards a sustainable world through their programmes.

The challenges posed by the site include its relation to and within various thresholds: its location as a corner site on two prominent axes and its adjacency to the Bloemspruit activity corridor. Additionally, the site generates challenges regarding the orientation of the site and its unresponsiveness to its urban fabric. The immediate architectural, spatial, cultural and social language and identity also need to be taken into account.

The AfriSam-SAIA Award for Sustainable Architecture

‘The winning and commended projects make a positive contribution to their communities and reduce environmental impacts through strategies such as the reuse of existing structures, connection to transit systems, low-impact and regenerative site development, energy and water conservation and the use of sustainable or renewable construction materials.’

Work towards a proposal that responds to the language of the Bloemfontein CBD in terms of its architectural, spatial, physical, socioeconomic, cultural, historical and social language. Design towards a vision of urban regeneration as an ongoing and ever-evolving process.

210

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP • CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Design Module Guides & Programmes

NOTE: footprint of each individual building to be 200 square meter on ground floor level. rentable office space (including boardrooms and lounges) +- 400sq m

06. PARKING Adequate Basement parking 60 cars

05. SERVICES Male & Female Ablutions All Floors Paraplegic Ablutions All Floors 1 Computer Server Room 1 Storage

04. SERVICE PERSONNEL 1 Staff Cloakrooms (Male) 1 Staff Cloakrooms (Female) 1 Staff Kitchenette 1 Staff Lounge 2 Staff Ablutions 4 Storage for cleaning equipment All Floors

03. COFFEE LOUNGE AND CAFETERIA CUSTOMER FACILITIES 1 Coffee and Snack Bar 2 Entrepreneurial Sales Platform Shop 3 Group Work Stations (with computers)

02. STAFF 1 Staff Lounge Rentable office space 2 Staff Board Room 3 Staff Kitchenette 1 Security Personnel Basement and Ground Floor

01. PUBLIC WAITING AREA & ADMINISTRATION FACILITIES 1 Entrance Foyer & Security Lobby 1 Reception and Information Kiosk 1 Waiting Lounge 1 Exhibition Space 1 Entrepreneurial Sales 3 Storage

ACCOMMODATION LIST

HANDOUT HAND-IN

model & site model (site model to show all three buildings + context)

plans – all floors NOTE: only computer drafting permitted s//1:200 plans of urban space S//1:100 2 x section showing basement, urban canopy, passive and mechanical (low technology) climate control & natural light filtration s //1:100 detailed model showing passive sustainable design 2 x perspective collage illustrating the business precinct in the context all sketches, concept & block models illustrating the development of the design to be included in the presentation

x X x

x x x

s //1:100 & s ///1:500

all sketches, concept & block models illustrating the development of the design at least three concept models

11 | 04 | 16 18 | 05 | 16

spatial sketches & models + site information

-------------› -------------›

FINAL PRESENTATION

x x

SEE SEPARATE HAND-IN DATES ON YEAR PROGRAMME

DATES

07. URBAN DESIGN Yoxall avenue extention to Church Street addressed Pedestrian pause space Integrated urban intervention layout dignified spaces exciting landscapes that provide high-quality experiences community to express its values a local presence within a global network. RCESD incorporated on urban level

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP • CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Design Module Guides & Programmes 211

presented MB & JO

desn6800 · project two |the Satellite office in diverse urban fabric

212

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP â&#x20AC;˘ CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Design Module Guides & Programmes

213

214

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP â&#x20AC;˘ CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Design Module Guides & Programmes

• •

• • • • • •

https://hbr.org/2009/09/why-sustainability-is-now-the-key-driver-of-innovation http://inhabitat.com/tag/green-office/ http://ecowatch.com/2015/06/08/worlds-most-sustainable-office-building/ https://www.thenbs.com/knowledge/five-essentials-for-sustainable-office-buildings http://www.fourfrontgroup.co.uk/Sustainability/SustainableOfficeDesign/ http://www.greenafricadirectory.org/listing/the-resource-centre-for-environment-and-sustainabledevelopment-rcesd/ https://hbr.org/2009/09/why-sustainability-is-now-the-key-driver-of-innovation http://www.afrisam.co.za/sustainability/afrisam-saia-award/

http

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP • CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Design Module Guides & Programmes 215

216

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP â&#x20AC;¢ CAA Validation Visit 2017 | External Examiners

PART 3 | Appendix E - List of External Examiners and

Pro Forma External Examiner Report Sheet | EXTERNAL EXAMINERS

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP â&#x20AC;¢ CAA Validation Visit 2017 | External Examiners

2013 Module Code ONW100 ONW200

Examination JUN/NOV JUN/NOV

ONW300

JUN/NOV

ONW600 SKR791 SKR791 SKR791 SKR791

JUN/NOV NOV NOV NOV NOV

SKR791 SKR791 SKR791 SKR791 SKR791 SKR791 BOW106 BOW106

NOV NOV NOV NOV NOV NOV JUN NOV

BOW206 BOW306 BOW608 BOW708

JUN/NOV JUN/NOV JUN/NOV NOV

BOW708 BOW708 BOW708 BOW708

NOV NOV NOV NOV

BOW708

NOV

OGT304 OGT606 NMA622

NOV NOV NOV

Examiner Thinus Venter Christo van der Westhuizen Daniel van der Merwe Ilze Wolff Robert de Jager Phillippe Fouche Humphries Jooste Marianne de Klerk George Eplhick Alta Steenkamp Marga Viljoen Richard Stretton Jon Jacobson Jaco Wasserfall Pieter Venter Sergio Nunes Shaun Moffat Lombard Delport Andre Roodt Jacques Laubscher Hennie Botha Colin Savage Denver Hendricks Albertrum Crowder Clara da Cruz Almeida Paul Kotze Paul Kotze Anton Roodt

Contact Number 0826977691 0834440408

Email Address vthinus@gmail.com christovanderwesthuizen@gmail.com

0832844451

Daniel.VanderMerwe@ppc.co.za

0214474182 0216502366 0214684400 0836531704 0795370724

ilze@oharchitecture.com rodejag@iafrica.com phillippef@saota.com hjooste@gjarch.co.za mmdeklerk@yahoo.com

0824406786 0721961377 0824585087 0837758782 0825703743 0026461230271 0823514123 0721480330

rita@eparch.co.za alta.steenkamp@uct.ac.za marga.viljoen@gmail.com richard@koopdesign.co.za jonathan@metropolisdesign.co.za jonathan@metropolisdesign.co.za p.arc@webmail.co.za sergio@snarchitects.co.za

0713532909 0832886861 0833370702 0722264579

info@colourcc.co.za lombard@inclinearchitects.co.za RoodtA@tut.ac.za LaubscherJ@tut.ac.za

0514511176 0117828188 0833965302 0785237930

hennie@tjabloem.co.za colin@savagedodd.co.za denverh@uj.ac.za albertrum.crowder@uct.ac.za

0837491311

claradacruzalmeida@gmail.com

0824806648 0824806648 0514062108

Paul.Kotze@wits.ac.za Paul.Kotze@wits.ac.za roodt@iafrica.com

217

218

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP â&#x20AC;¢ CAA Validation Visit 2017 | External Examiners

2014 Module Code ONW100 ONW200 ONW300 ONW300 ONW600 ONW600 SKR791 SKR791 SKR791 SKR791 SKR791 SKR791 SKR791 SKR791 SKR791 BOW106 BOW206 BOW306 BOW608 BOW708 BOW708 BOW708 BOW708 BOW708 OGT304 OGT606 NMA622

Examination JUN/NOV JUN/NOV JUN/NOV JUN/NOV JUN/NOV JUN/NOV NOV NOV NOV NOV NOV NOV NOV NOV NOV JUN/NOV JUN/NOV JUN/NOV JUN/NOV NOV NOV NOV NOV NOV NOV NOV NOV

Examiner Inge Wessels Etienne Bruwer Denver Hendricks Yolanda van der Vyver Mike Louw Edna Peres Phillippe Fouche Mark Horner Humphries Jooste Jonathan Noble Marguerite Pienaar Ruben Reddy Anton Roodt Alta Steenkamp Gary White Tascha de Lange Shaun Moffat Sergio Nunes Andre Roodt Marinda Bolt Charl-Pierre Celliers Rakau Lekota Phakamisa Mohaila Brinley Pritchard Paul Kotze Paul Kotze Anton Roodt

Contact Number 0845675068 0829559524 0833965302 0828219259 0823066596 0824106350 0214684400 0828273837 0836531704 0794908277 0824132241 0837752835 0832516094 0721961377 0824116017 0833206691 0713532909 0721480330 0833370702 0832854321 0834590043 0722200034 0835050805 0727512665 0824806648 0824806648 0832516094

Email Address inge@soloarchitect.co.za greenhaus@icon.co.za denverh@uj.ac.za yolanda@ykarchitects.co.za michael.louw@uct.ac.za edna.m.peres@gmail.com phillippef@saota.com mark@designworkshop.co.za hjooste@gjarch.co.za jono.audio@gmail.com marguerite@holmjordaan.co.za Ramona.Yon@rubenreddyarch.co.za roodt@iafrica.com alta.steenkamp@uct.ac.za Gary.White@up.ac.za BremerT@ufs.ac.za info@colourcc.co.za sergio@snarchitects.co.za RoodtA@tut.ac.za marindabolt@gmail.com info@cubefs.co.za rakauw@yahoo.com phakamisa@urbanconcepts.biz brinley@dhkjhb.co.za Paul.Kotze@wits.ac.za Paul.Kotze@wits.ac.za roodt@iafrica.com

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP â&#x20AC;¢ CAA Validation Visit 2017 | External Examiners

2015 Module Code DESN1500 DESN2600 DESN3700 DESN3700 DESN6800 DESN6800 DDIS7900 DDIS7900 DDIS7900 DDIS7900 DDIS7900 DDIS7900 DDIS7900 DDIS7900 CONS1506 CONS2606 CONS3706 CONS6808 CONS7908 CONS7908 CONS7908 CONS7908 CONS7908 HARC2604 HARC3704 HURB6804 RMET6822

Examination JUN/NOV JUN/NOV JUN/NOV JUN/NOV JUN/NOV JUN/NOV NOV NOV NOV NOV NOV NOV NOV NOV JUN/NOV JUN/NOV JUN/NOV JUN/NOV NOV NOV NOV NOV NOV NOV NOV NOV NOV

Examiner Daniel van der Merwe Matteo Frascini Nico Botes Letsabisa Lerotholi Mike Louw Karlien Thomashoff Carin Combrinck Phillippe Fouche Dean Jay Humphries Jooste Jonathan Noble Tunde Oluwa Marguerite Pienaar Alta Steenkamp Shaun Moffat Etienne Bruwer Andre Roodt Hennie Botha Marinda Bolt Sergio Nunes Rakau Lekota Phakamisa Mohaila Brinley Pritchard Erica Moller Yolanda van der Vyver Yolanda van der Vyver Anton Roodt

Contact Number 0832844451 0745032433 0124204600 0730721035 0823066596 0839676655 0117876125 0214684400 0837896439 0836531704 0722024495

Email Address Daniel.VanderMerwe@ppc.co.za matteo.fraschini@uct.ac.za nico.botes@up.ac.za tsabilerotholi@arch-live.co.za michael.louw@uct.ac.za karlien@thomashoffstudio.co.za carin@citicrew.co.za phillippef@saota.com

0824132241 0721961377 0713532909 0829559524 0833370702 0514511176 0832854321 0721480330 0722200034 0835050805 0727512665 0832676486 0828219259 0828219259 0832516094

marguerite@holmjordaan.co.za alta.steenkamp@uct.ac.za info@colourcc.co.za

hjooste@gjarch.co.za jono.audio@gmail.com

RoodtA@tut.ac.za hennie@tjabloem.co.za marindabolt@gmail.com sergio@snarchitects.co.za rakauw@yahoo.com phakamisa@urbanconcepts.biz brinley@dhkjhb.co.za NA yolanda@ykarchitects.co.za yolanda@ykarchitects.co.za roodt@iafrica.com

219

220

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP â&#x20AC;¢ CAA Validation Visit 2017 | External Examiners

2016 Module Code DESN1500 DESN2600 DESN3700 DESN3700 DESN6800 DESN6800

Examination JUN/NOV JUN/NOV JUN/NOV JUN/NOV JUN/NOV JUN/NOV

DDIS7900 DDIS7900 DDIS7900 DDIS7900 DDIS7900 DDIS7900 DDIS7900 DDIS7900 DDIS7900 CONS1506 CONS2606 CONS3706 CONS3706 CONS6808 CONS7908 CONS7908 CONS7908 CONS7908 CONS7908 HARC1504 HARC2604 HARC3704 HURB6804 RARC6808 RMET6822

NOV NOV NOV NOV NOV NOV NOV NOV NOV JUN/NOV JUN/NOV JUN NOV NOV NOV NOV NOV NOV NOV NOV NOV NOV NOV NOV NOV

Examiner Daniel van der Merwe Matteo Frascini Derick de Bruyn Beke Mchunu Dani Reimers Christo van der Westhuizen Humphries Jooste Dean Jay Ludwig Hansen Petria Jooste-Smit Ernst Struwig Magda Minguzzi Carla Taljaard Mark Horner Reiner Fortsch Denver Hendricks Etienne Bruwer Lombard Delport Andre Roodt Thinus Venter Robert Rich Phakamisa Mohaila Brinley Pritchard Marga Viljoen Sergio Nunes Johan Swart Johan Swart Yolanda van der Vyver Yolanda van der Vyver Jonathan Noble Jonathan Noble

Contact Number 0832844451 0745032433 0764543996 0733050750 0790425207 0834440408 0836531704 0837896439 0826009424 0834776468 0415042719 0415042173 0721856697 0828273837 0317522583 0833965302 0829559524 0832886861 0833370702 0826977691 0823677738 0835050805 0727512665 0824585087 0721480330 0790701789 0790701789 0828219259 0828219259 0722024495 0722024495

Email Address Daniel.VanderMerwe@ppc.co.za matteo.fraschini@uct.ac.za Derick.deBruyn@up.ac.za Nokubekezela.Mchunu@wits.ac.za danir@saota.com christovanderwesthuizen@gmail. com hjooste@gjarch.co.za Admin@deanjayarchitects.com ludwig@ludwighansen.co.za smitarg@telkomsa.net Ernst.Struwig@nmmu.ac.za Magda.Minguzzi@nmmu.ac.za carla@maaa.co.za mark@designworkshop.co.za reiner@fdparchitects.co.za denverh@uj.ac.za greenhaus@icon.co.za lombard@inclinearchitects.co.za RoodtA@tut.ac.za vthinus@gmail.com robrich.jr@gmail.com phakamisa@urbanconcepts.biz brinley@dhkjhb.co.za marga.viljoen@gmail.com sergio@snarchitects.co.za Johan.Swart1@up.ac.za Johan.Swart1@up.ac.za yolanda@ykarchitects.co.za yolanda@ykarchitects.co.za jono.audio@gmail.com jono.audio@gmail.com

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP â&#x20AC;¢ CAA Validation Visit 2017 | External Examiners

PART 3 | Appendix E - List of External Examiners and

Pro Forma External Examiner Report Sheet | UFS - MODERATOR AND EXTERNAL ASSESSOR FORM

221

222

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP â&#x20AC;˘ CAA Validation Visit 2017 | External Examiners

MODERATOR + EXTERNAL ASSESSOR FORM

Department of Architecture | UFS

The Moderator + External Assessor Form is to be completed and submitted to the lecturer, facilitator or studio master of the module that was moderated on the last day of moderation or evaluation

Department of Architecture Architecture Building, Dean Street, University of the Free State, 205 Nelson Mandela Drive, Park West, Bloemfontein, 9301, South Africa 8 PretoriusY@ufs.ac.za, www.ufs.ac.za

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP â&#x20AC;˘ CAA Validation Visit 2017 | External Examiners

223

Thank you for your willingness to assist the Department of Architecture and our students by serving as a moderator | external assessor. PART I| PERSONAL + COURSE INFORMATION Moderator | Assessor Title + First Names Surname Academic and Professional Qualifications `

@ If applicable, Academic position held If applicable, Academic Institution affiliated with Dates of Moderation | External Assessment Course Moderated | Assessed Course Code Number of Students Moderated | Marked

Page

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP • CAA Validation Visit 2017 | External Examiners

PART II | EVALUATION SHEET Use the scale to complete MODULE CONTENT 1 2 3 4

Not applicable to module

Unsatisfactory

Satisfactory

Good

The content of the module was applicable to the subject and level

The content of the module was well-organised and communicated in a logical sequence to the moderator | assessor The module study guide provided sufficient information to orientate the learner, describe outcomes and provide course structure The module content and format provided the opportunity to develop the learner’s critical thinking, problem- solving, learning and studying skills

LEARNING RESOURCES 5

Source materials (e.g. PowerPoint/course notes) were specific to and applicable for the subject and level

The module guide|notes were valuable resources or aids to learning.

Study tours provided valuably learner experience

TEACHING AND LEARNING

Appropriate teaching methods and learning aids were used to achieve the stated outcomes.

Practical classes, excursions, examples, illustrations and case studies (as appropriate) increased the learners’ understanding of the subject.

ASSESSMENT 10 Assessment tasks (tests, assignments, reports, projects, etc.) were applicable to the subject and level 12 Assessment tasks and criteria were linked to learning outcomes. 13 Assessment Rubrics were employed and aligned with the learning outcomes 14 Assessment standard was fair, accurate and consistent 15 Marks were distributed fairly based on outcomes reached

Page

224

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP â&#x20AC;˘ CAA Validation Visit 2017 | External Examiners

225

PART IIi | COMMENTS + FEEDBACK + Provide detailed explanations, comments, and recommendations for each aspect in the preceding evaluation table that was marked UNSATISFACTORY + Provide recommendations of aspect to be included in the evaluation table

Moderator | Assessor Signature

Date

Page

226

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP â&#x20AC;¢ CAA Validation Visit 2017 | External Examiners

PART 3 | Appendix E - List of External Examiners and

Pro Forma External Examiner Report Sheet | MArch Prof EXAMINER ORIENTATION

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP â&#x20AC;˘ CAA Validation Visit 2017 | External Examiners

26 October 2016,

Examinerâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Orientation

Dear Examiner, On behalf of the Department of Architecture, University of the Free State (UFS), we extend our appreciation for your willingness to serve as an examiner in the Master in Architecture (Professional) examination. It is an honour for both students and staff to have you on board. The Master in Architecture examination will take place on 15, 16 and 17 November 2016 at the Department of Architecture, Architecture Building, UFS main campus, Bloemfontein. You have been invited as either a Design or Construction Examiner. Design Examiners will examine the Architectural Treatise (ATRE7904) and the Design Dissertation (DDIS7900) components as explained below, while Construction Examiners will examine the Construction (CONS7908) component. The purpose of this document is to orientate examiners into the aspects and process of assessment, as well as to provide the outcome criteria and examination report. On your arrival in Bloemfontein, an orientation session with all internal and external examiners will allow further communication as well as opportunity for questions and answers.

We are looking forward to your visit.

DepartementArgitektuur/Department of Architecture 205 Nelson Mandela Drive/Rylaan, Park West/Parkwes, Bloemfontein 9301, South Africa/Suid-Afrika P.O. Box/Posbus 339, Bloemfontein 9300, South Africa/Suid-Afrika, (+27(0)51 401 2332, 6+27(0)51 444 5108, 8 PretoriusY@ufs.ac.za, www.ufs.ac.za

227

228

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP • CAA Validation Visit 2017 | External Examiners

MASTER IN ARCHITECTURE (Professional)

The Master in Architecture (Professional) is a master’s degree by coursework and involves workshops, studio critique sessions, projects and an investigated design dissertation with an advanced design project. The purpose of the qualification is to facilitate candidates that may register as “Candidate Architect” with the South African Council for the Architectural Profession in terms of the provisions of the Architectural Profession Act 44 of 2000. The main objective of this master’s programme is to afford the master’s candidate an opportunity to demonstrate that she/he can solve an advanced design and technical design problem in an academic, and professionally responsible and comprehensive manner. The aim is to evaluate the candidate’s professional competency in respect of architectural design, a term understood as inclusive of the influences, ideas, concepts and responsibilities considered during the design process, the technical and construction knowledge necessary for the design resolution, the design resolution itself – the sum of which, to borrow from Aristotle, is bigger than the parts. Dissertation Assessment – THREE COMPONENTS The dissertation assessment comprises three separate assessment instances: Examination of the Architectural Treatise (ATRE7904), the Design Dissertation (DDIS7900) and the Construction aspects (CONS7908). The first two components (ATRE7904 and DDIS7900) are examined by the four main design examiners, scrutinising the complete design argument, process and resolution which includes considerations awarded to the technical resolution of the dissertation project. The latter component (CONS7908) is examined in detail by the two main technical examiners. Two separate examination panels in two separate examination sessions evaluate each candidate’s master’s project. One panel examine the Component I (DESIGN DISSERTATION (DDIS7900)) and Component II (ARCHITECTURAL TREATISE (ATRE7904)), the other panel examine Component III (CONSTRUCTION (CONS7908)) of the discourse. Each examination takes 40 minutes. Each candidate’s examination as a whole totals 80 minutes. Each examination session comprises an oral defence and visual exhibition by each candidate. The candidate will be evaluated by a panel consisting of internal lecturers as well as a group of invited external examiners. Four main examiners are appointed for each candidate for Components I and II. Two main examiners are appointed for each candidate for Component III. The final marks will be announced at the Department of Architecture on 18 November 2016. These marks will only be submitted to the Examination office after the edited final Dissertation Document has been submitted by 5 December 2016.

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP • CAA Validation Visit 2017 | External Examiners

MARKS

An average of 50% is the university requirement to pass and an average of 75% is required to pass with distinction. A candidate who has attained a final mark of 45 - 49% for any of the three components is offered special assessment (in the form of an Addendum) at the discretion of the main examiners. The main examiners must justify their recommendation for an addendum in writing in the official examiner’s report stipulating in detail the additional work required. All candidates that received a special assessment will complete all corrections, amendments and comments, whether indicated in the examiner’s report or on any media of the dissertation presentation and documentation. The revised dissertation document will be submitted and examined on 5 December 2016.

ASSESSMENT: CONTINUOUS AND END-OF-YEAR EXAMINATION Master candidates work is assessed in three ways. A)

continuous formative assessment through the year in five review sessions, each assessing Components I, II and III.

dissertation document examination

C) individual oral defence session on 15-17 November 2016 (Component II) D) individual oral defence session on 15-17 November 2016 (Component III)

The continuous evaluations through-out the year occur be means of five scheduled Reviews. Internal and external assessors are present at each Review. A mark is given to each student at the end of each of the Reviews. Although these evaluations do not count towards the final DESIGN DISSERTATION (DDIS7900) MARK or CONSTRUCTION (CONS7908) MARK, a mark of 40% has to be obtained for each Review in order for the candidate to be eligible to submit his/her dissertation for examination. The marks awarded in the five REVIEWS count 50% of the final ARCHITECTURAL TREATISE (ATRE7904) MARK.

229

230

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP • CAA Validation Visit 2017 | External Examiners

FINAL REMARKS AND PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT

Examiners are requested to address questions and comments to the candidates in a professional and dignified manner, focussing on the formative assessment of the candidate’s work. The oral examination is hopefully the last academic critique candidates will receive and should aim towards betterment and not bitterment.

Examiners should not question the site selection or project type, as it has been approved by the supervisors. What is at stake is the logical argument towards the design resolution and the holistic design solution in itself.

All examined dissertation documents will be given back to the candidates at the end of each candidate’s exam to enable them to make the corrections before final dissertation document submission on 5 December 2016. Please make sure that the documents examined are present in the exam and that no dissertation document is kept after the examination. Subsequently examiners should make corrections, suggestion and comments regarding editorial mistakes and errors in syntax and morphology in the examined document itself, reserving the oral examination to discover and critique design intent and solution instead.

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP • CAA Validation Visit 2017 | External Examiners

COMPONENT I – ARCHITECTURAL TREATISE (ATRE7904) SYNOPSIS:

Evaluation of the candidate’s ability to identify, apply, syntheses, and evaluate explorative and investigative knowledge to formulate a design strategy pertaining to the chosen design subject and project, set out in an academically rigorous document.

Who examine?

The four main Design Examiners.

What is examined?

The written mini-dissertation/treatise preceding the oral examination

The mini-dissertation/treatise involves explorative and investigative research and critical judgement of the design challenges posed by the specific dissertation project. Research is designed around the exploration of four broad problem statements, relating to the fundamentals of design: §

Typology: What to design for whom?

Topology: Where to design it?

Morphology: How the gestalt of the design is influenced?

Tectonics: How the design is constructed?

From the specific challenges different sources of knowledge is explored in an attempt to develop a design methodology specific to this design project. In general the dissertation document should comprise four parts: §

Part I:

problem statements;

Part II:

collection, analysis, understanding, interpretation of different sources of knowledge

Part III: synthesis of knowledge with design; application of design methodology

Part IV: evaluation of the design solution

For the purpose of the written mini-dissertation/treatise these parts relate to the sources of knowledge that influence the logic of type (typology), topos (topology), form (morphology) and structure/technical design (tectonics). The written mini-dissertation/treatise must elucidate the concepts and ideas behind the design methodology, how the information was processed and how these concepts and ideas influenced the design resolution This component is awarded a separate mark by the four main design examiners. Continuous assessment throughout the year count 50% towards the final Architectural Treatise Mark, and the four main examiners’ mark contribute 50% to the final ARCHITECTURAL TREATISE (ATRE7904) MARK.

231

232

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP • CAA Validation Visit 2017 | External Examiners

EXAMINERS REPORT | COMPONENT I – ARCHITECTURAL TREATISE (ATRE7904)

I – ARCHITECTURAL TREATISE (ATRE7904)for award of the Master in Architecture Candidate’s Name: _________________________________________________________ Dissertation Title: _________________________________________________________ Examiner’s Name:

_________________________________________________________

Date:

_________________________________________________________

CRITERIA

MARK X IN THE APPROPRIATE COLUMN Continuation

The examiner should evaluate the candidate’s ability to:

Pass

45%-49%

50%-74%

Mark below 45%

Addendum

Pass with Distinction 75%-100%

critically identify, apply, organise and integrate the appropriate knowledge (theoretical investigation, precedent and case studies, concrete and abstract site investigation, cognitive mapping, etc.) to a design strategy for a complex building

ii. formulate and take responsibility for a grounded and critical point of view of applicable historical, social, environmental and cultural phenomena and related theory

iii. prepare a criteria for adjudication of own and other theorists’ theoretical position

iv. identify, communicate and evaluate the essence and the extent of complex and challenging design problems within the field of architecture based on the project challenges and aims

v. communicate and defend the aspects of architectural theoretical discourse that is the product of responsible and ethical research developed in a specific human ecological landscape

FINAL ARCHITECTURAL TREATISE MARK

____%

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP • CAA Validation Visit 2017 | External Examiners

EXAMINERS REPORT | COMPONENT I – ARCHITECTURAL TREATISE (ATRE7904)

I – ARCHITECTURAL TREATISE (ATRE7904)for award of the Master in Architecture PASS: For a mark allocated between 50%-100% It is usual that some minor (e.g., typographical; morphological, syntax, grammatical, and editorial corrections) amendments to the mini-dissertation/treatise might be required by the examiners. Minor correction must be made in the written mini-dissertation by the examiners. Candidates will correct and include all amendments before submitting the final mini-dissertation/treatise on 5 December 2016. Please list amendments, or comments and recommendations, not included in the document: __________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________

ADDENDUM: For a mark allocated between 45%- 49% If the submitted written mini-dissertation does not meet the criteria required for awarding the Master’s degree, but the examiner is of professional opinion that a revised written mini-dissertation could meet that standard, an addendum is awarded. An addendum requires the candidate to include substantial amendments and to revise and resubmit the treatise for re-examination on 5 December 2016. Required amendments should be limited to changes that are necessary to ensure accuracy within the treatise and/or for the treatise to reach the criteria necessary for awarding the MArch(Prof) degree. Apart from minor amendments made in the treatise, please provide a list of amendments/corrections to the written mini-dissertation/treatise to be completed. __________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________

233

234

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP • CAA Validation Visit 2017 | External Examiners

EXAMINERS REPORT | COMPONENT I – ARCHITECTURAL TREATISE (ATRE7904)

I – ARCHITECTURAL TREATISE (ATRE7904)for award of the Master in Architecture CONTINUATION: For a mark allocated below 45% If the submitted written mini-dissertation/treatise does not meet the standard required for the award of either the Master’s degree or an Addendum, the candidate is requested to continue with their research for one more year. However, a candidate must complete their masters within a maximum of two years 2015 General Rule A72.3 (b) (i). The decisions as to the whether or not the candidate may continue with his/her current dissertation project will be decided by the supervisors. If a continuation is awarded please write a detailed report as to the reasons for offering a continuation. __________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP • CAA Validation Visit 2017 | External Examiners

COMPONENT II – DESIGN DISSERTATION (DDIS7900)

SYNOPSIS:

Evaluation of the candidate’s ability to syntheses and evaluate explorative and investigative knowledge into an applicable design and technical design strategy. Evaluation of the candidate’s ability to syntheses and evaluate the design strategy into a design and technical design development & resolution pertaining to the chosen design subject and project,

Who examine?

The four main design examiners and the present design examination panel.

What is examined?

The written mini-dissertation/treatise, the oral defence of the complete design dissertation, and the design dissertation exhibition of the final design and technical design resolution.

Component I forms the foundation of the holistic Design Dissertation, which involves: §

concept development, development and setting out of programme (list of accommodation and spatial parameters), the integration of all knowledge analysed, interpreted and synthesised (precedent studies, historical and theoretical premises, contextual and environmental /urban determinants) into an appropriate design and technical design resolution;

communicating the design and technical design development and resolution through the dissertation document with the necessary illustrations, sketches and drawings; and through the visual (concept and developmental models, sketchbooks, developmental drawings, final models,

and

design

and

technical

design plans,

sections,

elevations,

and

visual

representations) presentation and oral presentation of the design and technical design development.

The holistic Design Dissertation (comprising the document, visual presentation and oral defence) is awarded a mark by the four main design examiners, the sum of which counts 66% towards the final DESIGN DISSERTATION MARK. The rest of the examination panel (secondary examiners) contribute to the final mark, the sum of the panel mark counting 34% of the final DESIGN DISSERTATION MARK

235

236

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP • CAA Validation Visit 2017 | External Examiners

EXAMINERS REPORT | COMPONENT II – DESIGN DISSERTATION (DDIS7900)

_________________________________________________________

Date:

_________________________________________________________

CRITERIA

MARK X IN THE APPROPRIATE COLUMN Continuation

The examiner should evaluate the candidate’s ability to:

45%

Addendum

Pass

Mark below

Pass with Distinction

45%-49%

50%-74%

75%-100%

analyse, apply and evaluate suitable design and technical design principles, strategies, methods, theories, techniques, processes, and solutions to a specific architectural problem that attempts to address complex contextual, historical, social and cultural phenomena and/or a theoretical statement

ii. make autonomous and responsible decisions based on contextual, historical, social, theoretical and technical resources and in accordance with architectural practice

iii. identify, communicate and evaluate the essence and the extent of complex and challenging design problems based on comprehensive review of research completed in the Architectural Treatise and Construction modules

iv. integrate all the accumulated skills, from the development of a programme to the detail design into a single architectural solution

v. communicate and defend the aspects of architectural design and technical design solution that is the product of responsible research developed in a specific human ecological landscape

FINAL DESIGN DISSERTATION MARK

____%

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP • CAA Validation Visit 2017 | External Examiners

EXAMINERS REPORT | COMPONENT II – DESIGN DISSERTATION (DDIS7900)

I – ARCHITECTURAL TREATISE (ATRE7904)for award of the Master in Architecture PASS: For a mark allocated between 50%-100% Candidates will correct and include all amendments before submitting the final mini-dissertation/treatise on 5 December 2016. Please list amendments, or comments and recommendations, not included in the document: __________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________

ADDENDUM: For a mark allocated between 45%- 49% If the submitted design dissertation does not meet the criteria required for awarding the Master’s degree, but the examiner is of professional opinion that design dissertation could be revised to meet the required standard, an addendum is awarded. An addendum requires the candidate to include substantial amendments to the design and technical design solution presented and to revise and to resubmit the all parts of the design dissertation for re-examination on 5 December 2016. Required amendments should be limited to changes that are necessary to ensure accuracy within the design dissertation and/or for the design dissertation to reach the criteria necessary for awarding the MArch(Prof) degree. Please provide a detailed list of amendments/corrections/changes to the design dissertation to be completed. __________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________

237

238

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP • CAA Validation Visit 2017 | External Examiners

EXAMINERS REPORT | COMPONENT II – DESIGN DISSERTATION (DDIS7900)

I – ARCHITECTURAL TREATISE (ATRE7904)for award of the Master in Architecture CONTINUATION: For a mark allocated below 45% If the submitted design dissertation does not meet the standard required for the award of either the Master’s degree or an Addendum, the candidate is requested to continue with their research for one more year. However, a candidate must complete their masters within a maximum of two years - 2015 General Rule A72.3 (b) (i). The decisions as to the whether or not the candidate may continue with his/her current dissertation project will be decided by the supervisors. If a continuation is awarded please write a detailed report as to the reasons for offering a continuation. __________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP • CAA Validation Visit 2017 | External Examiners

COMPONENT III – CONSTRUCTION (CONS7908)

SYNOPSIS:

Evaluation of the candidate’s ability to syntheses and evaluate explorative and investigative knowledge into an applicable technical design strategy in support of the design development. Evaluation of the candidate’s ability to syntheses and evaluate the technical design strategy into a technical design development & resolution pertaining to the chosen design subject and project.

Who examine?

The two main construction examiners and the remaining construction examination panel present.

What is examined?

The written dissertation document (stressed focus on technical development and resolution in all four parts of the document), oral defence and visual exhibition of the technical design resolution.

The module comprises the construction theory and technical design investigation (considering: materials, structural systems and construction methods) of the proposed design scheme, including: detailed technical design development of the proposed scheme; presentation of a technical report and a set of technical design drawings enabling the graduates to be employable in the appropriate category for which they qualify with the South African Council of the Architectural Profession. This module takes place parallel to the Design Dissertation module (DDIS7900) but is examined separately. Technical design research is designed around the exploration of a broad problem statement, relating to Tectonics: How the design is technically developed? In general the technical design component in the written dissertation/treatise document should comprise four parts: §

Part I:

technical design problem statements

Part II:

collection, analysis, understanding, interpretation of different sources of knowledge

Part III: synthesis of knowledge with design; application of technical design methodology

Part IV: evaluation of the technical design solution

The construction examiners are required to attentively and critically evaluate the above parts in the written dissertation document before the construction examination. The technical design resolution, technical design drawings and technical report, as well as the visual presentation and oral defence of the technical resolutions,

is awarded a mark by the two main

construction examiners, the sum of which counts 66% towards the final TECHNICAL MARK. The rest of the examination panel (secondary examiners) combined marks contribute 34% of the final TECHNICAL MARK.

239

240

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP • CAA Validation Visit 2017 | External Examiners

EXAMINERS REPORT | COMPONENT III – CONSTRUCTION (CONS7908)

I – ARCHITECTURAL TREATISE (ATRE7904)for award of the Master in Architecture Candidate’s Name:

_________________________________________________________

Dissertation Title: _________________________________________________________ Examiner’s Name:

_________________________________________________________

Date:

_________________________________________________________

CRITERIA

MARK X IN THE APPROPRIATE COLUMN Continuation

The examiner should evaluate the candidate’s ability to:

Pass

45%-49%

50%-74%

Mark below 45%

Addendum

Pass with Distinction 75%-100%

research and validate a range of specialist theoretical and technical sources particular to the identified design and technical design problems

ii. use a wide range of knowledge and specialised skills in identifying, conceptualising, designing and implemental structural methods and construction materials to address complex and challenging design problems within a specific contextual setting

iii. design, select and apply appropriate and creative methods, techniques, processes and technologies to complex architectural and structural problems

iv. use a set of technical design drawings to communicate and defend substantial building construction ideas that are the products of research

independently investigate and arrange technical research and take responsibility for the appropriate technical decisions

FINAL CONSTRUCTION MARK

____%

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP • CAA Validation Visit 2017 | External Examiners

EXAMINERS REPORT | COMPONENT III – CONSTRUCTION (CONS7908)

ADDENDUM: For a mark allocated between 45%- 49% If the submitted technical design resolution does not meet the criteria required for awarding the Master’s degree, but the examiner is of professional opinion that the technical design resolution could be revised to meet the required standard, an addendum is awarded. An addendum requires the candidate to include substantial amendments to the technical design solution presented and to revise and to resubmit the all parts of the technical design for re-examination on 5 December 2016. Required amendments should be limited to changes that are necessary to ensure accuracy within the technical design and/or for the technical design to reach the criteria necessary for awarding the MArch(Prof) degree. Please provide a detailed list of amendments/corrections/changes to the technical design to be completed. __________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________

241

242

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP • CAA Validation Visit 2017 | External Examiners

EXAMINERS REPORT | COMPONENT III – CONSTRUCTION (CONS7908)

I – ARCHITECTURAL TREATISE (ATRE7904)for award of the Master in Architecture CONTINUATION: For a mark allocated below 45% If the submitted technical design resolution does not meet the standard required for the award of either the Master’s degree or an Addendum, the candidate is requested to continue with their research for one more year. However, a candidate must complete their masters within a maximum of two years - 2015 General Rule A72.3 (b) (i). The decisions as to the whether or not the candidate may continue with his/her current dissertation project will be decided by the supervisors. If a continuation is awarded please write a detailed report as to the reasons for offering a continuation. __________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP â&#x20AC;¢ CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Research Outputs

PART 3 | Appendix F -

RESEARCH OUTPUTS

243

244

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP • CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Research Outputs

Research Outputs 2013-2016 (Subsidy earning) 2013 Accredited journal Articles Peters, WH and Kotze, P. 2013. NG kerk Welkom Wes: Reforming unity temple. Part 1: What the building wants to be. Journal of the South African Institute of Architects. Nr. 59. Jan/Feb. pp. 35-43 Peters, WH and Kotze, P. 2013. NG kerk Welkom Wes: Reforming unity temple.Part 2: The noble room for worship. Journal of the South African Institute of Architects. Nr. 60. Mar/Apr. pp. 40-45 Van der Vyver, Y. 2013. Agora of Asia Minor. South African Journal of Art History. Vol. 28. n2. Pp. 275-293 Verster, W. 2013. Converting space: Changes in the liturgical spaces of the Reformed Churches of Bloemfontein. Tydskrif vir Christelike Wetenskap/ Journal for Christian Scholarship. Vol 49. no 1 and 2. Pp. 111-139

Accredited Conference Proceedings Verster, W and Peters, WH. 2013. Demolition versus Adaptation: Cases of re-use of redundant places of worship in Bloemfontein, South Africa. International Conference on Adaptation and movement in Architecture 2013, Toronto Canada. 1112 October 2013. Reyerson University: Toronto

Chapters in Books Bosman, G. 2013. Chapter 25: Earth Construction in Architective: Building construction standards for South Africa. In Architective Publications: Johannesburg.

2014 Accredited journal Articles Bosman, G and Van der Westhuizen, D. 2014. The effects of climatic conditions on attitudinal changes towards earth construction in South Africa. In Acta Structilia. Vol 21 nr 1. Pp.117-141. Bosman, G and Van der Westhuizen, D. 2014. The impact of climate phenomena on attitudes toward traditional earth construction and decoration. South African Journal of Art History. Vol 29 nr 3. Pp.65-76 Peters, WH and Du Preez, JL. 2014. The “wall of flesh” of the Conquered territory: farmhouses and towns established in defense of the eastern boundary of the Orange Free State beginning 1866. South African Journal of Art History. Vol 29 nr 1. Pp 201-223 Peters, WH. 2014. Environmental management as a touchstone of modern identity: Hans Hallen’s St Olav church, Berea, Durban, 1966-68. South African Journal of Art History. Vol 29 nr 3. Pp 1-20 Verster, W. 2014. Observing the city: imagining through faceless figures. South African Journal of Art History. Vol 29 nr 1.pp. 101-118

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP • CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Research Outputs

Accredited Conference Proceedings Auret, H A. 2014. Architecture as the art of care: a Heideggarian augmentation of Christian Norberg-Schulz’s art of place. XXV World Congress of Architecture, Durban 3-7 August 2014 Bosman, G and Steyn, JJ. 2014. Affordable housing opportunities for Southern Africa: Rethinking contemporary earth construction for housing. HF. Cape Town, South Africa, 28 Sept-1Okt Wessels, Z.G and Bosman, G. 2014. The city vernacular in South Africa. CIAV 2013 Vernacular heritage and earthen architecture: Contributors for sustainable architecture. Vila nova de cerveira, Portugal. 16-20 October 2013. Nel, JH and Bosman, G. 2014. Exposing architecture students to vernacular concepts. CIAV 2013 Vernacular heritage and earthen architecture: Contributors for sustainable architecture. Vila nova de cerveira, Portugal. 16-20 October 2013. Peters, WH. 2014. Sasolburg, A South African New Town, 1951. The ‘sasolburg pattern’ at a crossroads. 20th century New Towns: Archetypes and uncertainties, porto, Portugal 22-24 May Wagener, A. 2014. An architecture for marginalised South Africans: the role of education. XXV World Congress of Architecture, Durban 3-7 August 2014

Additional publications Pretorius, HB, Verster, W and Viljoen, M [ed]. 2013. 25 Sophia Gray lectures and exhibitions. UFS Department of Architecture. Bloemfontein (Contributions by all staff members)

2015 Accredited journal Articles Auret, HA. 2015. Architectural phenomenology and the tyranny of the lived experience. South African Journal of Art History. Vol 30 nr 3. Pp. 112 Bosman, G. 2015. Situated neighbourhood safety and fence decoration. South African Journal of Art History. Vol 30 nr 3. Pp7486 Peters, WH. 2015. Max Kirchhofer and the new town of Sasolburg. Creating the spatial and architectural framework. Journal of the South African Institute of Architects. July August. Pp. 55-61 Peters, WH. 2015. Absorbing the influences of Le Corbusier: Roelof Uytenbogaardt and the architecture of the Werdmuller Centre, Claremont, Cape Town, 1969-1973. South African Journal of Art History. Vol 30 nr 2. Pp. 45-68 Stoffberg, M. 2015. Situating through representation: Two community centres investigated through Lefebvre’s Spatial production. South African Journal of Art History. Vol 30 nr 3.pp.99-111

Accredited Conference Proceedings Bosman, G and Salzmann, K. 2015. Contemporary soil-cement and rammed earth in South Africa. Rammed Earth Construction - Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Rammed Earth Construction, ICREC 2015 Peters, WH. 2015. Planned towns in the ‘Conquered Territory’ between Basutoland (Lesotho) and the Boer Republic of the Orange Free State. Proceedings of ISUF, Brisbane, July 2013 Peters, WH and Oliver, A. 2015. Urban morphology & academic writing: A pedagogical experiment. REUSO, 3rd International

245

246

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP • CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Research Outputs

Conference on Documentation and Restoration of Architectural Heritage and Landscape Protection, Valencia Olivier, J.I. 2015. Towards an Ethos of Dwelling with Pre-democratic Things. ArchTheo’15, Istanbul, Turkey. Verster, W.2015. Framing the museum: Urban thresholds and embodied experience. CONTEMPART ‘15. Istanbul, Turkey Chapter in Books Verster, W. 2015. Depicting the Traumatic Past: museums as narrative devices. . In Moerandar, S and Miller, N (editors) 2015. Not Ever Absent: Storytelling in Arts, Culture and identity formation. Oxford: IDP [e-book] 2015

2016 Accredited journal Articles Auret, HA. and du Toit, C. 2016. Welcoming the stranger with intention and architectural edifice: beyond the geopolitical hollowness of crimmigration. International Journal of Public Theology. Vol 10 nr 9. Pp. 443-460 Auret, HA. 2016. . Bloemfontein (1848-2015), mapping eight moments in time: measuring and appreciating that which is nearest. New Contree, 76, Supplement edition, November 2016, pp. 193-212. Pienaar, M. 2016. There is a there there: feminity, place and phenomemlogy in the work of mira fassler kamstra. Journal of the South African Institute of Architects. Sept/Oct. nr81. Pp. 40-53 Peters, WH and du Preez, JL. 2016. The idealism of architectural competitions: The case of the Free State Province. New Contree. December nr77. Pp. 1-24 Van der Vyver, Y. 2016. Temporality in the [re]shaping of the landscape of Pretoria’s Church Square. South African Journal of Art History. Vol. 31 nr 2. Pp.166-186 Verster, W. 2016. Domestic space in the contemporary art gallery: Sven-Harrys Art Museum, Stockholm and Circa on Jellicoe Gallery, Johannesburg. South African Journal of Art History. Vol. 31 nr 2. P49-62.

Accredited Conference Proceedings Peters, WH. 2016. The resilience of the Karoo townscapes of South Africa: conserving what the Group Areas Act, 1950, spared. 17th IPHS Conference, History Urbanism Resilience: The urban Fabric Vol 2. TU Delft. Peters, WH. 2016. Planned towns in the ‘conquered territory’ between Basutoland (Lesotho) and the Boer Republic of the Orange Free State (Free State Province of South Africa), 1867: balancing security with inherited cultural traditions and townscapes. 2013 ISUF Seminar on Urban Form, Brisbane Australia. University of Queensland. Wagener, A. 2016. A Meta-Narrative of social science from pre-enlightenment to meta-modernity. Poster. AZA, Architectural Education at different Scales Symposium 3&4 September. Johannesburg

proceedings Books/chapters in books

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP â&#x20AC;˘ CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Research Outputs

Research Output Dept of Architecture UFS 2013-2016 6

6 5

4 3

1 2013 journal arncles

1 0 2014

2015

conference proceedings

0 2016 books or chapters

247

248

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP â&#x20AC;¢ CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Rubrics and Declaration of Receit Form

PART 3 | Appendix G - Rubrics and Declaration of Receit Form | DESN RUBRIC GENERAL

TOUCHSTONE

CONCEPT &

CONTEXT ANALYSIS

PRECEDENT & CASE STUDIES

DESIGN METHOD

INTERPRETATION & SYNTHESIS

EVALUATION

A thorough analysis of typological, topological and morphological precedent | case studies, and micro contexts, which are logically and comprehensively recorded.

An in-depth and comprehensive analysis of typological, topological and morphological precedent | case studies, which are clearly, logically and comprehensively recorded and communicated through analytical tools.

Shows evidence of in-depth research resulting in a wide range of possible solutions, which are clearly, logically and comprehensively recorded.

Research and record possible design methods to address the typological, topological, and morphological challenges.

MARK 65/100

Evaluation through an a posteriori analysis of the Design Process and Final Design Solution.

Present a complete set of drawings of the selected solution communicating the process in a logical manner.

Select a final solution demonstrating understanding of the design brief. Show evidence that the researched information was synthesised with the final design solution.

A thorough cognitive and quantitative analysis of the macro, mezzo, and micro contexts, which is logically and comprehensively recorded.

An in-depth and comprehensive cognitive and quantitative analysis of the macro, mezzo, and micro contexts, which is clearly, logically and comprehensively recorded.

Evidence of comprehensive evaluation at all stages of the design process is shown.

Evidence of substantial evaluation at most stages of the design process is shown.

All the presentation drawings go beyond the minimum requirements and the drawings are all of very high quality.

Evidence of thorough evaluation at all stages of the design process is shown.

All the presentation drawing requirements are met with and the drawings are all of a good quality.

Thorough evidence of the use of the researched information.

Comprehensive and detailed evidence of the use of the researched information.

All the presentation drawings go beyond the minimum requirements and the drawings are all of exceptional quality.

Substantial evidence of the use of the researched information.

The final solution shows thorough understanding and complies fully with the design brief. The final solution shows substantial understanding of the design brief.

Shows evidence of sound research resulting in a substantial number of possible solutions, which are clearly recorded.

A substantial analysis of typological, topological and morphological precedent | case studies, which are clearly recorded and communicated through analytical tools.

A substantial cognitive and quantitative analysis of the macro, mezzo, and micro contexts, which is clearly recorded.

The concept | touchstone sketches and models show a substantial understanding of the essential design challenge.

STUDENT: 60 - 69%

The final solution shows in depth understanding and complies fully with the design brief.

Shows evidence of thorough research resulting in a range of possible solutions, which are logically and comprehensively recorded.

The concept | touchstone sketches and models show a thorough understanding of the of the essential design challenge.

70 - 79%

The concept | touchstone sketches and models show an indepth and comprehensive understanding of the essential design challenge.

PROJECT: 80 â&#x20AC;&#x201C;100%

Identify a specific concept | touchstone based on initial reaction and referenced historical and theoretical research showing knowledge gained into the design challenge and aim. Analyse and communicate the holistic context through sections, photographs, diagnostic sketches, diagrams, and creative mapping tools to illustrate cognitive and quantitative knowledge of the specific human ecological environment. Analyse precedent or case studies that illustrate knowledge and understanding of the specifications and constraints of the projectâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s typology, topology, and morphology.

UFS | DESN RUBRIC CRITERIA

Evidence of adequate evaluation of most stages of the design process is shown.

All the presentation drawing requirements are met with and the drawings are all of a satisfactory quality.

Satisfactory evidence of the use of the researched information.

The final solution shows satisfactory understanding of the design brief.

Shows evidence of adequate research resulting in a number of possible solutions, which are clearly recorded.

A satisfactory analysis of typological, topological and morphological precedent | case studies, which are clearly recorded and communicated through analytical tools.

A satisfactory cognitive and quantitative analysis of the macro, mezzo, and micro contexts, which is clearly recorded.

The concept | touchstone sketches and models show a satisfactory understanding of the essential design challenge.

50 - 59%

Evidence of moderate evaluation at some stages of the design process is shown.

Some of the presentation drawing requirements are met with and the drawings are of a satisfactory quality.

Some evidence of the use of the researched information.

The final solution shows some understanding of the design brief.

Shows evidence of moderate research resulting in a limited number of possible solutions, which are recorded.

A moderate analysis of typological, topological and morphological precedent | case studies, which are recorded and communicated through analytical tools.

A moderate cognitive and quantitative analysis of the macro, mezzo, and micro contexts, which is recorded.

The concept | touchstone sketches and models show a moderate understanding of the essential design challenge.

40 - 49%

Evidence of limited evaluation at some stages of the design process is shown.

Some of the presentation drawing requirements are met with and the drawings are all of a poor quality.

Limited evidence of the use of the researched information.

The final solution shows limited understanding of the design brief.

Shows evidence of limited research resulting in a possible solution, which is not fully recorded

An elementary analysis of typological, topological and morphological precedent | case studies, which are not fully recorded and communicated through analytical tools

An elementary cognitive and quantitative analysis of the macro, mezzo, and micro contexts, which is not fully recorded

The concept | touchstone sketches and models show an elementary understanding of the essential design challenge.

DATE: 30 - 39%

Little or no evidence of any evaluation.

The final solution is incomplete and the drawings are of a poor quality or no drawings are submitted.

No evidence of the use of the researched information.

The final solution shows no understanding of the design brief.

Shows little to no evidence of any research, or research is irrelevant to the solution.

Shows little to no analysis of typological, topological and morphological precedent | case studies, which are irrelevant to the solution.

Shows little to no cognitive and quantitative analysis of the macro, mezzo, and micro contexts, which is irrelevant to the solution.

The concept | touchstone shows little to no understanding of the essential design challenge.

0 - 29%

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP â&#x20AC;˘ CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Rubrics and Declaration of Receit Form 249

Models extensively employ the specified scale, dimensions, drawing conventions, and orientation information to be legible and readable.

Models communicate a refined staging of the design solution within the context.

Models critically and logically communicate the design solution.

Verbal communication is well-structured, clear, and specific to typology, topology and morphology.

The required models employs the specified scale, orientation information etc. to be legible and readable.

The models are contextualised.

The required models logically communicates the design solution.

Verbal communication is well-structured, clear, and specific to typology, topology and morphology.

MARK 35/100

The required models were all presented

The presentation contains all the required models.

Verbal communication is structured, fair, and reference typology, topology and morphology.

Models adequately communicate the design solution.

Models communicate a clear staging of the design solution within the context.

Models illustrate a good use of the specified scale, dimensions, drawing conventions, and orientation information to be legible and readable.

The majority the required models were included.

The required drawings are developed to show technical and construction understanding and research.

Drawings communicate a clear staging of the design solution within the context.

The required drawings are developed to show critical technical and construction understanding and research.

Drawings communicate a refined staging of the design solution within the context.

The presentation drawings are contextualised.

Drawings illustrate a good use of the specified scale, dimensions, drawing conventions, and orientation information to be legible and readable.

The correct pictorial drawing method has fairly been employed.

The required drawings communicate the design solution.

Drawings extensively employ the specified scale, dimensions, drawing conventions, and orientation information to be legible and readable.

The required drawings employ the specified scale, dimensions, drawing conventions, and orientation information to be legible and readable.

50 - 59%

The majority the required drawings were included.

60 - 69%

Meets minimum requirements

The required drawings critically and logically communicate the design solution.

The correct pictorial drawing method has extensively been employed.

The correct pictorial drawing method has been used.

The required drawings critically and logically communicate the design solution. The required drawings are developed to show critical technical and construction understanding and research.

The required drawings were all submitted.

70 - 79%

The presentation contains all the required drawings (plans, sections, details, elevations, etc.

80 â&#x20AC;&#x201C;100%

UFS | DESN PRESENTATION AND FINAL DESIGN SOLUTION CRITERIA More than minimum requirements

ALL

READ

REQUIRED DRAWINGS

MODELS

VERBAL

ALL

DRAW

READ

SITE

DESN

CONS

SITE

DESN

30 - 39%

Verbal communication is poorly structured with little reference to typology, topology and morphology.

Models poorly communicate the design solution.

Models drawings are poorly contextualised.

Models illustrate a poor use of the specified scale, dimensions, drawing conventions, and orientation information and are fairly legible and readable.

Some of the required drawings models presented.

The required drawings show poor technical and construction understanding and research.

The required drawings poorly communicate the design solution.

Presentation drawings are poorly contextualised.

Drawings illustrate a poor use of the specified scale, dimensions, drawing conventions, and orientation information and are fairly legible and readable.

The required pictorial drawing method was poorly employed.

Some of the required drawings were presented.

40 - 49%

Less than minimum requirements

Verbal communication is unclear with no structure or reference to typology, topology and morphology.

Models do not communicate the design solution.

Models illustrate no contextual reference.

Models illustrate no use of the specified orientation information and are illegible and not readable.

Inadequate models were presented

The required drawings show no technical or construction understanding and research.

Drawings do not communicate the design solution.

Presentation drawings illustrate no contextual reference.

Drawings illustrate no use of the specified orientation information and are illegible and not readable.

Incorrect pictorial drawing method has been used.

Inadequate drawings were presented

0 - 29%

No drawing presented

250

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP â&#x20AC;˘ CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Rubrics and Declaration of Receit Form

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP â&#x20AC;¢ CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Rubrics and Declaration of Receit Form

PART 3 | Appendix G - Rubrics and Declaration of Receit Form | ESSAY RUBRIC

251

Subject relatively clear. Relatively focused.

Lack of point to argument. Loses focus

Fair use of sources, most of the time. Correct use of referencing styles in general, but with some small errors.

Evidence used is largely irrelevant, arguments not supported by evidence, use of non-academic sources to an unacceptable level.

Inconsistent and Illogical essay structure, purpose of large sections Is unclear Poor use of sign-posting making the argument very difficult to follow. Ineffective use of introduction and conclusion May be over or under the required word Length.

Unsuitable |no clear application | no precedents

Serious problems with grammar and expression making the argument very difficult or impossible to be understood.

Significant levels of incorrect academic referencing and/or plagiarism.

EVIDENCE | RESOURCES X2

STRUCTURAL ORGANISATION

APPLICATION TO DESIGN x2 STYLE and PRESENTATION

TOTAL

Unsuitable appearance. No or unsuitable examples

Correct English grammar and expression used on the whole. Meaning o f expressions used Is generally clear but with some minor problems. Low level of spelling and typographical errors. Relatively suitable appearance and visual material

Content based on shallow reading, demonstrate a poor understanding of topic. Substantial inaccuracy in knowledge. Paraphrase to an unacceptable level.

KNOWLEDGE AND UNDERSTANDING

CHOICE OF VISUAL MATERIAL/ SKETCHES REFERENCING

Relatively suitable application | precedents

No real attempt at critical analysis of opposing viewpoint. Highly descriptive.

CRITICAL ANALYSIS X2

Evidence used is relevant to the question asked, on the whole, and provides support for the arguments made, but with some weaknesses. Some use of relevant examples. Use of scholarly sources most of the lime. Essay structure is generally logical and consistent but with some weaknesses with coherence and clarity Attempt made to us introduction and conclusion to structure ideas raised but with deficiencies. May be over or under required word length.

Work demonstrating a largely broad and descriptive knowledge of the relevant subject matter but with overall accuracy. Tendency to over-paraphrase in parts.

Analysis at a largely descriptive level. Does makes soma attempts at critical analysis of opposing viewpoints with deficiencies in terms of logic, rigor and fairness.

Does not answer the question asked and/or provide an inadequate answer in terms of relevance, logic and consistency

ARGUMENT Some argument presented, but with weakness in relation to relevance, logic, consistency, coherence and sustainability.

Unclear description of key question.

Poor | Unsuitable title

MINIMAL

TITLE | RESEARCH QUESTION INTRODUCTION AND FOCUS

UNSUITABLE

STUDENT:

CRITERIA

UFS | ESSAY RUBRIC

clear

application

and

Fair use of sources throughout, referencing styles used correctly with rare errors.

Acceptable appearance and applicable visual material

Correct English grammar expression throughout. Meaning of language used clear. Rare spelling and typographical errors.

Acceptable precedents

Majority of the essay organized with logic and coherence. Evidence of linkages | signposting of arguments. Good use of introduction and conclusions structuring tools. Keeps within required word length.

Highly competent work showing a deep and accurate understanding of relevant theoretical concepts. Makes a good attempt to explain using own words. Evidence of relatively wide reading. Also attempts to apply theoretical knowledge. Arguments supported by solid range of relevant academic | scholarly sources. Good use of relevant examples.

Puts forward a competent argument which clearly answers the question asked - logical, consistent, coherent, and sustained throughout the essay. Some attempt to use relevant theoretical concepts Good analysis of opposing views - logical, consistent and fair evaluation of opposing arguments. Attempts to provide some original and creative contribution to debate.

Subject stated clearly. Stays focused on key questions.

Acceptable to describe key question

ACCEPTABLE

PROJECT:

Fair use of sources, no evidence of plagiarism, correct use of referencing styles throughout

Well-chosen visual material that illustrates the argument.

Correct use of English grammar and e11preaslon Language used is clearly understandable, with evidence of creativity and flair.

Logical, coherent and consistent essay structure throughout, supportive of main arguments presented. Purpose of paragraphs | subsections clear through good use of signposting. Developed use of Introduction and conclusion to structure argument made. Keeps within required wordÂˇ length. Correct and interesting application and precedents

Use of a wide range of highly relevant academic sources. Insightful use of relevant examples. Evidence clearly supports the arguments presented.

Strong critical analysis, wall evaluated In terms of logic, rigor and fairness. Attempts to get behind the evidence via engagement with underlying assumptions. Developed an original and creative contribution to debate. Superior work showing In-depth and highly accurate knowledge of relevant subject matter. Evidence of wide reading and understanding of theoretical concepts and a good attempt to apply this knowledge.

Strong argument In terms of complexity, logic, consistency and coherence that clearly addresses the question and which makes good use of relevant theoretical concepts.

Introduction raises interest. Questions are addressed throughout. Good focus.

Strong title that clearly describe the key question.

GOOD

Fair use of sources with no evidence of plagiarism. correct use of referencing styles throughout

Excellent choice of visual material that illustrates the argument.

Correct use of English grammar, clear expression, shows high level of creativity and flair in the use of language

Exceptional creative application innovative precedents.

Highly logical and consistent structure throughout which strongly supports the arguments presented. Content highly purposeful with excellent use of signposting. Excellent use of introduction and conclusion as structuring tools. Keeps within the required word length.

Use of a very wide range of highly relevant academic sources which clearly support the argument presented. Insightful and creative use of relevant examples.

Exceptional in-depth knowledge of the relevant subject matter. Provides a clear and complex explanation of theories and concepts. Evidence of very wide reading and insightful interpretation of evidence.

Sharp and insightful critical analysis, excellent interrogation of underlying assumptions and contested concepts. Highly original and creative contribution to debate.

Introduction is though provoking. Questions is explored extensively with excellent focus. Argument which is highly complex, logical, consistent, and engaging. Shows a strong development of conceptual/theoretical points.

Exceptional creative title that describes key question.

EXCEPTIONAL

DATE:

252

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP â&#x20AC;˘ CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Rubrics and Declaration of Receit Form

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP â&#x20AC;¢ CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Rubrics and Declaration of Receit Form

PART 3 | Appendix G - Rubrics and Declaration of Receit Form | UFS - DECLARATION OF RECEIPT FORM

253

254

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP â&#x20AC;˘ CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Rubrics and Declaration of Receit Form

DECLARATION OF RECEIPT FORM Bachelors of Architecture Programme Code BArch

| BC430114

Bachelors of Architecture Honours BArchHons Programme Code | BC460114

CHECK BOXES: I declare that I received

I have received, read and understand the content of each module guide for each modules registered I acknowledge that a 90% class attendance for all Architecture Modules are compulsory Compulsory Study Tours and Departmental Liability As part of the curriculum, students must attend compulsory study tours. The Department directly manages the tours, acting as an agent for suppliers arranging for transportation, accommodations, and other services. In so doing the Department shall not be held liable for personal injury, death, property damage or accident, delay or irregularity arising out of any act or omission of these suppliers. In addition, there are many risks and uncertainties inherent in any travel tour, including but not limited to the hazards of various modes of transportation, forces of nature, terrorism, war or insurrection, theft, illness, and damage to person or property due to the negligent acts or omissions of others. The Department shall not be held liable for personal injury, death, property damage or loss suffered by a participant in connection with this tour, whether due to the negligence of others.

Concerns in Order and Manner Address student concerns, in the first instance, in writing to the responsible lecturer; if a student is not satisfied with the outcome, students should address the concerns to the Programme Director, followed by the Academic Departmental Head, and lastly the Dean of the Faculty.

Department of Architecture Architecture Building, Dean Street, University of the Free State, 205 Nelson Mandela Drive, Park West, Bloemfontein, 9301, South Africa ď&#x20AC;¸ PretoriusY@ufs.ac.za, www.ufs.ac.za

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP • CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Rubrics and Declaration of Receit Form

ASSESSMENT + MINIMUM MARK INFORMATION +

+ + +

Continuous assessment is used as an alternative to summative assessment. Continuous assessment is a series of assessments which occurs throughout the learning process, and not only after the learning process. Students are thus examined continuously over the duration of a semester or year. It is cumulative and the marks are calculated to produce a final result. Assessment outcomes for each module are provided in the Module Guide. Each assessment instance throughout the year will be introduced by a brief stipulating specific assessment outcomes aligned with the learning outcomes of the module and accompanied by a specific assessment rubric for the assessment instance. The work of all architecture modules are continuously evaluated internally1, leading to an internal mark2. For DESN and CONS (practical) Modules | The Faculty Year Book states that a minimum internal mark (year mark) of 45% is required to participate in the final portfolio assessment which constitutes the last component of continuous evaluation. For DESN and CONS (practical) Modules | The mean average of the internal mark (marks throughout the year) and external assessors’ marks, allocated at the final portfolio assessment, form the preliminary mark to be moderated during the departmental moderator’s meeting. For all other Modules ((Including CONS (theory) Module)) |The mean average of the internal mark (marks throughout the year) constitute the preliminary mark to be moderated during the moderator’s meeting and departmental moderators meeting. Students must obtain a minimum 45% year mark (or semester mark for semester modules) to participate in the final assessment instance (test, assignment, oral). For all architecture Modules | The preliminary marks are presented at the departmental moderators meeting. After moderation the final mark (moderated mark) is confirmed. Regulation A9.3.1 (a)(ii) A28.3 (a)(ii) of the UFS General Rules states that in respect of examinations and where a system of continuous evaluation is used, the additional examination does not apply. All assignments, projects, reports, & mini-dissertations must be submitted by the student in person at the time stipulated on the brief. Late submissions in the modules CONS (theory) TARC, RARC, HARC, RMET, DMET will be penalized by 5% per day or part of a day. DESN, CONS (practical), PTEC, TRIG, PHOT, CDRA, are studio based modules, late submissions constitute an incomplete. An incomplete implies that a student will not be able to continue with her|his studies in the modules. A student must meet the prescribed subminimum of 30% for each assignment, seminar, report and test, as specified in the module guide, to pass any module presented by the Department of Architecture. If a student does not submit an assignment, seminar, report or receive less than a subminimum of 30% for each assignment, seminar, report and test, the student will not be able to complete the module and will immediately receive an incomplete for the module as a final mark.

REQUIREMENTS FOR BArchHONS +

A candidate must have obtained a BArch degree with a minimum joint average mark in their final year of 55% for the following modules or equivalent thereof CONS3706, HARC3704 and TARC3704, as well as a subminimum of 60% for DESN300 or the equivalent thereof. Candidates that did not comply with the above prerequisite must, on departmental recommendation, either repeat selected module(s) (once only) or work in an architect's office for a year in order to be eligible to apply for the BArchHons degree the following year. Places will be reserved in the BArchHons programme for students that obtain their BArch degree with a minimum of 65% for DESN3700 and a joint average of 60% for HARC3704, CONS3706 and TARC3704. This will be forfeited if students take one or more years out. Candidates that obtained the minimum entry requirements but did not qualify to receive a reserved place must attend an interview, present a portfolio of their BArch work (main modules) and provide a piece of work that illustrates independent work. It

1 Student work |class tests, tests, class assignments and assignments| is internally evaluated throughout the year. It is therefore a detailed evaluation. Marks are published after each evaluation session. Marks are published within 2 weeks after the evaluation occurrence. Internal assessors are the class lecturers, studio masters or facilitators evaluating student work. Internal assessors may involve other lecturers, students or experts in the evaluation process. The evaluation is not limited in any way and the result is indicated on a scale between 0% and 100%. Less than 30% constitutes an incomplete. 2 The internal mark is the average mark of all the marks for all the evaluation instances throughout the year. This average mark takes into account that not all projects carry the same weight; evaluation instances are weighted and the weights are communicated in the module guide.

255

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP â&#x20AC;˘ CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Rubrics and Declaration of Receit Form

256

is advised that the latter addresses the aspect most lacking in their portfolio, whether design, construction, theoretical or historical work. The final discretion whether the student is regarded as being ready for the programme will rest with the selection panel. Candidates that intent to continue to BArchHons directly after their final year BArch studies must complete a DV3 form (available on the UFS website, heading STUDENTS, subheading UFS APPLICATION FORMS) and submit the DV3 form before 31 May of the year preceding their intended BArchHons study to the Departmental secretary. Candidates that intent to take a gap year or work year between their BArch final year and starting their BArchHons studies must apply to the BArchHons programme, on the prescribed Application to Admission Form and complete the Department of Architecture PostGrad Selection Form (both available on the UFS website, heading STUDENTS, subheading UFS APPLICATION FORMS). The Application to Admissions Form must reach the Registrar, Academic Student Services, University of the Free State, Bloemfontein, on or before 31 May of the year before the intended admission. The Department of Architecture Post Grad Selection Form must reach the Department of Architecture before or on 31 August of the year preceding intended study.

REQUIREMENTS FOR MArch (professional) +

A candidate must have obtained a BArchHons degree with a minimum joint average mark in their final year of 55% for the following modules or equivalent thereof CONS6708, HURB6804 and RARC6808, as well as a subminimum of 60% for DESN6800 or the equivalent thereof. Candidates that did not comply with the above prerequisite must, on departmental recommendation, either repeat selected module(s) (once only) or work in an architect's office for a year in order to be eligible to apply for the MArch degree the following year. Places will be reserved (subject to preliminary MArch Design Proposal Approval) in the MArch programme for students that obtain their BArchHons degree with a minimum of 65% for DESN6800 and a joint average of 60% for HURB6804, CONS6808 and RARC6808. This will be forfeited if students take one or more years out. Candidates that obtained the minimum entry requirements but did not qualify to receive a reserved place must attend an interview, present a portfolio of their BArch and BArchHons work (main modules) and provide a piece of work that illustrates independent work. It is advised that the latter addresses the aspect most lacking in their portfolio, whether design, construction, theoretical or historical work. The final discretion whether the student is regarded as being ready for the programme will rest with the selection panel. All candidates must submit a MArch Design Proposal to the department before or on 30 November of the year preceding intended study. All selection is subject to the preliminary approval of the MArch Design Proposal. Final approval will only occur after the MArch Design Proposal Presentation during the first week of their MArch study year. Candidates that intent to continue to MArch directly after their final year BArchHons studies must complete a DV3 form (available on the UFS website, heading STUDENTS, subheading UFS APPLICATION FORMS) and submit the DV3 form before 31 May of the year preceding their intended MArch study to the Departmental secretary. Candidates that intent to take a gap year or work year between their BArch final year and starting their MArch studies must apply to the MArch programme, on the prescribed Application to Admission Form and complete the Department of Architecture PostGrad Selection Form (both available on the UFS website, heading STUDENTS, subheading UFS APPLICATION FORMS). The Application to Admissions Form must reach the Registrar, Academic Student Services, University of the Free State, Bloemfontein, on or before 31 May of the year before the intended admission. The Department of Architecture Post Grad Selection Form must reach the Department of Architecture before or on 31 August of the year preceding intended study.

PLEASE NOTE: THE UNIVERSITY FIRST SEMESTER RECESS IS FROM 10 July 2017 TO 21 July 2017 THE UNIVERSITY SECOND SEMESTER RECESS STARTS ON 27 DECEMBER 2017

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP • CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Rubrics and Declaration of Receit Form

PERSONAL + CONTACT DETAILS Complete the Selection Form in clear block letters, using black ink.

CANDIDATE Student Number:

___ | ___ | ___ | ___ | ___ | ___ | ___ | ___ | ___ | ___ …..

Ms | Mr

_________________________________________________

Known as

Surname

_________________________________________________

CANDIDATE

_________________________________________________ _________________________________________________ _____________________________@ __________________

CANDIDATE Residential Address

_________________________________________________ _________________________________________________ _________________________________________________ Postal Code _______________________________________

GUARDIAN

Name ________________ Surname_________________________

GUARDIAN

_________________________________________________ _________________________________________________ _____________________________@ __________________

CANDIDATES SIGNATURE

_______________________

Date

__ __|__ __|__ __ Ensure that you ticked all boxes

257

258

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP â&#x20AC;¢ CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Selection Forms

PART 3 | Appendix H - Selection Forms | B Arch SELECTION FORM

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP • CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Selection Forms

SELECTION FORM Selection Application for

Bachelors of Architecture | BArch Programme Code Submission date

| 40114 | 31 Aug

The Selection From must be delivered in person, or door to door by a private courier company to the physical address of the Department of Architecture: Attention: Selection Committee Department of Architecture Architecture Building Dean Street 205 Nelson Mandela Avenue Park West BLOEMFONTEIN

Department of Architecture Architecture Building, Dean Street, University of the Free State, 205 Nelson Mandela Drive, Park West, Bloemfontein, 9301, South Africa  PretoriusY@ufs.ac.za, www.ufs.ac.za

259

260

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP • CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Selection Forms

INTRODUCTION + SELECTION ORIENTATION Thank you for your interest in our selection program for architecture at the University of the Free State. GENERAL | You will find all information about our programme and selection process on our website: www.ufs.ac.za/architecture, select the link Undergraduate Application, please ensure that you download the Departmental Brochure. Familiarise yourself with each of the application and selection steps as well as submission dates. Be sure to follow the process prudently. In order to participate in the selection process you must have applied for admission to the University of the Free State before 31 May of the year preceding intended study. Download the Application for Admissions Form (DV1A) from the UFS website: search www.ufs.ac.za, select the link Students, then select the link UFS Application Forms. After receiving the complete Application for Admissions Form, the information is captured on the UFS system by Student Academic Services after which you will receive a unique UFS Student number (Reference number). For enquiries regarding receipt of the application for admission form, capturing of candidates’ data, or student numbers, please contact Student Academic Services: applications@ufs.ac.za | 051 401 3696|3693 The Department of Architecture is only responsible for departmental selection processes related to the Selection Form and Selection Interviews. The Department cannot advise on processes related to application for admission to the UFS. SELECTION FORM | Completing and submitting the Selection Form is the first step in the selection process and does not guarantee admission to the BArch programme. You cannot submit the Selection Form unless you have received a unique UFS Student number from Student Academic Services. The Selection Form must be completed and submitted in person or door to door by courier to the physical address of the Department of Architecture - found at the end of this document. Selection Forms must reach the Department of Architecture before or on 31 August of the year preceding intended study. If you make use of a courier company, please track delivery with them. Do not contact the Department in this regard. Selection Forms should not be submitted to any other UFS address. The Selection Form has six parts (Parts I – VI): The first part captures your contact information. Part II enquires into your academic and work experience: Part III attempts to discover more about your personality traits: Part IV provides us with information about the architectural practice you shadowed at: Part V introduces a series of creative exercises through which we learn about each other - we get to know you better and you get to

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP â&#x20AC;˘ CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Selection Forms

understand what skills the Department values: The last part explains the next step in the selection process. Please sign the declaration of authorship form at the end of this document and check the checklist provided. The selection committee critically reviews all the Selection Forms it receives, concentrating especially on the creative exercises of Part V. A background in art, graphic or engineering subjects is not a requirement for completing the Selection Form. Creativity, questioning the ordinary and dexterity are the key ingredients for completing a successful Selection Form. The most resourceful candidates are provisionally selected and will be invited by midSeptember to attend an interview at the Department of Architecture. It is your responsibility to ensure that the Selection Form is complete. Selection Forms will not be presented to the selection panel without a valid UFS student number. Incomplete forms and forms received after the closing date (31 August), will not be accepted or considered for selection. All candidates that submitted a Selection Form will be contacted by the Department to inform you of the outcome of the selection process â&#x20AC;&#x201C; please do not contact the Department. Selection Forms are the property of the Department of Architecture and will not be sent back to candidates. SELECTION INTERVIEW + CREATIVE PORTFOLIO | Please read through the information pertaining to the Selection Interview and the Creative Portfolio in Part VI. If your Selection Form was selected by the selection panel, you will be invited to a Selection Interview, at which time you will have to present a Creative Portfolio. The Selection Interview and Creative Portfolio are the second step in the selection process. Candidates compete for selection based on creativity, design dexterity, and inventiveness; these aspects should be represented in the creative exercises in the Selection Form as well as the extensive Creative Portfolio and Selection Interview. Hard work, commitment and design insight is communicated through the creative exercises of the Selection Form and the Creative Portfolio at the Selection Interview. The Department receives hundreds of applications, and only a maximum of 55 candidates are selected for the programme.

261

262

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP • CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Selection Forms

PART I| PERSONAL + CONTACT DETAILS Complete the Selection Form in clear block letters, using black ink.

CANDIDATE Student Number:

___ | ___ | ___ | ___ | ___ | ___ | ___ | ___ | ___ | ___ …..

Ms | Mr

_________________________________________________

Known as

First Names

_________________________________________________

Surname

_________________________________________________

S.A. ID Number

__ | __ | __ | __ | __ | __ | __ | __ | __ | __ | __ | __ | __…

Non S.A. Passport Number

_____________________________________________

CANDIDATE

_________________________________________________ _________________________________________________ _____________________________@ __________________

CANDIDATE Residential Address

Postal Address

_________________________________________________ Postal Code _______________________________________

GUARDIAN

Name ________________ Surname_________________________

GUARDIAN

_________________________________________________ _________________________________________________ _____________________________@ __________________

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP â&#x20AC;˘ CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Selection Forms

PART II | ACADEMIC + EMPLOYMENT DETAILS Information on the secondary institution from which you will matriculate|matriculated Institution

___________________________________

City

_______________

Province

___________________________________

Year

_______________

Attach a certified copy of Matric Certificate or your most recent Grade 12 after page 22.

List extra-curricular activities participated in from Grade 11 to the year preceding application Cultural and Creative Activities

Community Activities

Leadership Positions

__________________________________________ __________________________________________ __________________________________________ __________________________________________ __________________________________________ __________________________________________ __________________________________________ __________________________________________ __________________________________________

What did you do in the year preceding the year of application? (mark x) School Learner

Post-school College

Working

Unemployed

University of Technology

University

Other

Specify Other ____________________________________

If you studied after Matric, please specify Institution

______________________________________________________________

Qualification

________________________

from year

__ __ __ __ to __ __ __ __

Attach a certified copy of your Institutional Academic Transcript after page 22.

If you worked after Matric, please specify Employer

________________________

from year

__ __ __ __ to __ __ __ __

Attach a certified reference letter by your employer after page 22.

263

264

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP â&#x20AC;˘ CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Selection Forms

PART III | MORE ABOUT YOU What is your personal understanding of creativity? ___________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________ Briefly describe your circle of friends and mention which positive and negative comments they would make about you. ___________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________ What was the bravest, most creative and most experimental decision you've ever made? ___________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________ Who is your superhero (Thor, Silver Surfer or any other superhero) alter ego and why? ___________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________ What is your favorite artwork, or architectural building or structure? ___________________________________________________________________________ Name the title and author of one book that changed your life. ___________________________________________________________________________

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP • CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Selection Forms

PART IV | SHADOW AT AN ARCHITECT’S PRACTICE Visit the practice of an architect for a day. During this visit you may obtain valuable and firsthand experience of the daily life of an architect. The architect is kindly requested to complete the following information as proof of your visit.

ARCHITECT’S DETAILS Name _________________________________________________ Practice_________________________________________________ City

_________________________________________________ _________________________________________________ _________________________________________________ _____________________________@ __________________

List of experiences the candidate was exposed to: _________________________________________________ _________________________________________________ _________________________________________________ _________________________________________________ _________________________________________________ Architect’s Signature

_____________________________

265

266

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP â&#x20AC;˘ CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Selection Forms

creative exercise

A|B|C |D

PART V | CREATIVE EXERCISES As part of the selection process, the UFS Department of Architecture requires all candidates to complete all the following creative exercises (exercises A + B + C + D). The creative exercises offer the selection panel the opportunity to get to know you better, while offering you the opportunity to illustrate your skills and understand the creative aspects valued by the UFS Department of Architecture. Be sure to read the directions for each exercise carefully, take time to consider what is asked and design a plan for executing the exercise. Creativity is not the same as being able to draw or paint, it has more to with the inventive way you look at a problem, in this case an exercise, and the manner in which you solve the problem. We are interested in your thinking process, your critical reflection and how you present your thoughts in a creative manner. Architects and designers from other professions attempt to creatively solve design and construction problems based on a careful reading of their clientsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; needs, as well as the social, cultural, and historical milieu of the clients and the context. Similar to an architect you need to solve these challenges with meticulous attention to the guidelines provided, thoughtfulness, a key sense of creative interpretation, and by ensuring that each exercise is thoroughly complete.

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP • CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Selection Forms

creative exercise

PART V | CREATIVE INTERPRETATION AS A PHOTOGRAPHER Photography, like architecture, communicates more than a mere image. Through the composition (the photographer’s chosen perspective, geometry, rhythm and play of light and shadows) the photographer conveys a message. If you were a photographer, which one of the photographs below would you have taken? Indicate your choice of photograph (1, 2, 3, or 4), and explain the meaning behind your chosen photograph (1, 2, 3, or 4) in the space provided on the next page.

1 2 3 4

267

268

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP â&#x20AC;˘ CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Selection Forms

creative exercise

PART V | CREATIVE INTERPRETATION AS A PHOTOGRAPHER continued Select one of the above four photographs which you as a photographer would have taken, and indicate the photograph you chose with an x below:

In the space provided below, explain the meaning behind the photograph (1, 2, 3, or 4) you took. The explanation is limited to a maximum of 300 words. The explanation should provide the selection panel with a creative and metaphorical reading of the photograph; to say: what does the photograph mean and what is the theme? What feeling did you as the photographer want to communicate through the photograph and how did you do it through the composition? The exercise does not ask for a mere description of what you see in the photograph, and it is also not important to understand where the image is taken. ________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ Limit your interpretation to a maximum of 300 words

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP â&#x20AC;˘ CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Selection Forms

creative exercise

PART V | CREATIVE STORY BOARD FOR A SHORT FILM AS A CINEMATOGRAPHER Cinematic arts translate a written narrative (script, book or even a short passage or poem) into moving images. Architecture does almost the opposite as it captures the daily moving narrative of peopleâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s lives into static and dynamic spaces; as such, architecture interprets the lived narrative into space. As a cinematographer, you are asked to make a storyboard for a short film based on the passage below by the author Zakes Mda. You are given complete creative freedom to interpret the text as you want. You may wish to storyboard all the scenes in the text or to zoom in on only one aspect of the text, and storyboard that aspect into different scenes. You are not asked to read the book or to research the greater context of the storyline; you only need to creatively storyboard the whole or parts of the text into six descriptive movie scenes. A passage from Ways of Dying by Zakes Mda He drifts towards the waiting room, and sits on his bench. He fondly watches his ships sail away. He has sat there many a day, and sailed in those ships. They took him to faraway lands, where he communed with holy men from strange orders that he had never heard of, and took part in their strange rituals, and partook of their strange fair. When he got tired of sailing away in the ships that left the harbour, he came back in those that sailed into the harbour, and was welcomed by throngs of votaries. He sailed mostly during those senseless holidays when people did not bury their dead. When he got tired of sailing, he would just sit and while away time by using his thumbnails to kill the lice that played hide-and-seek in the hems and seams of his costume or home clothes, depending on what he was wearing at the time. Illustrate the film sequences of the above text or parts of the text in the 6-storyboard boxes provided. Focus on bodily movement and sensory (touch, sound, smell, etc.) experiences within each spatial depiction. Give a full picture of the scene as it will appear in the short film. The purpose is to communicate the text or parts thereof to an audience. Keywords: body, senses, and background spaces.

269

270

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP â&#x20AC;¢ CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Selection Forms

creative exercise

PART V | CREATIVE STORY BOARD FOR A SHORT FILM AS A CINEMATOGRAPHER continued

SCENE 1:

Key Narration

____________________________________ ____________________________________ ____________________________________

Background Sounds | Music ____________________________________

SCENE 2:

Key Narration

____________________________________ ____________________________________ ____________________________________

Background Sounds | Music ____________________________________

SCENE 3:

Key Narration

____________________________________ ____________________________________ ____________________________________

Background Sounds | Music CONTEXTUAL SKETCHES

____________________________________

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP â&#x20AC;¢ CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Selection Forms

creative exercise

PART V | CREATIVE STORY BOARD FOR A SHORT FILM AS A CINEMATOGRAPHER continued

SCENE 4:

Key Narration

____________________________________ ____________________________________ ____________________________________

Background Sounds | Music ____________________________________

SCENE 5:

Key Narration

____________________________________ ____________________________________ ____________________________________

Background Sounds | Music ____________________________________

SCENE 6:

Key Narration

____________________________________ ____________________________________ ____________________________________

Background Sounds | Music C

____________________________________

271

272

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP â&#x20AC;˘ CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Selection Forms

creative exercise

PART V | DESIGNING A LIGHT SOURCE AS AN INDUSTRIAL DESIGNER Similar to architects, industrial designers are tasked with solving practical design challenges in creative ways. Making objects for daily use, whether chairs, stools, lamps, a tea-cart, or vases, an industrial designer starts the design process by formulating a concept, then goes through different design problem solving stages to sort out challenges, and finally produces a practical and creative designer object. You are an industrial designer. Two different client pairs, clients XX and YY, approach you to design a light source. However, you can only choose one of the client pairs, either: Client XX Two actors who enjoy entertaining guests and hosting dinner parties ask you to design a standing candelabrum | candle-tree for their dining table. The design should speak of the drama of entertainment, but at the same time be practical and have a contemporary appeal. The clients do not mind the number of candles it can hold as long as it makes enough light to enjoy oneâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s food, but not so much light as to ruin the atmosphere. Lastly, the candelabrum should remind them of one of their favourite places, either dramatic cliffs next to the sea or a forest of tall trees. Any material is acceptable; however, the candelabrum, without the candles, must fit into a cube of 500 x 500 x 500mm. or Client YY Two environmental scientists ask you to design a sustainable table lamp. The lamp should be made of recycled material, make use of an energy efficient light source and its production should have a minimum impact on the earth. The lamp is for their shared office space, filled with frames of preserved examples of indigenous flora. The have one big desk in their office, which they share, with chairs facing each other. The lamp should stand in the middle of the desk to provide light for both of them. The lamp should be able to fit into a cube of 500 x 500 x 500mm. Select one of the above client pairs (either XX or YY) which you as an industrial designer would have chosen, and indicate the client pair you chose with an x below:

Complete the rest of this exercise on the next three pages.

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP â&#x20AC;¢ CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Selection Forms

creative exercise

PART V | DESIGNING A LIGHT SOURCE AS AN INDUSTRIAL DESIGNER continued Design and build a light source for one of the above client pairs. Firstly, identify the CONCEPT for your design and make a CONCEPT SKETCH. In the space provided below, make a list of keywords that represent ideas that influenced your design approach. Draw an image (a concept sketch) that illustrates the coming together of these ideas. A concept sketch is a single image that gives expression to many ideas. CONCEPTS Idea one

(only 6 keywords)

__________________________________________ __________________________________________

Idea two

(only 6 keywords)

__________________________________________ __________________________________________

Idea three

(only 6 keywords)

__________________________________________ __________________________________________

CONCEPT SKETCH

273

274

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP â&#x20AC;˘ CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Selection Forms

creative exercise

PART V | DESIGNING A LIGHT SOURCE AS AN INDUSTRIAL DESIGNER continued Secondly, you should document the construction of the model of the candelabrum or table lamp from start to finish in 3 photographs. As it is a model the materials you employ may represent the actual materials you have in mind for the product, however the model of the light source should be on scale 1:1, or life sized. The 3 photographs should clearly illustrate different stages of you building the model of the light source. Document the construction of the model of the candelabrum or table lamp in 3 photographs. Paste the photographs in the blocks provided.

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP â&#x20AC;¢ CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Selection Forms

creative exercise

PART V | DESIGNING A LIGHT SOURCE AS AN INDUSTRIAL DESIGNER continued

275

276

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP â&#x20AC;¢ CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Selection Forms

creative exercise

PART V | EXPRESS THE TRUE CREATIVE YOU IN A SELFIE Take a photograph of yourself that communicates an essential creative part of your personality and interests through the composition of the photograph. Please mount the A5 photograph in the space provided below.

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP • CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Selection Forms

PART VI| TOWARDS THE NEXT STEP IN SELECTION What happens after I’ve submitted my Selection From? The Selection Interview is the second step in the selection process. If your Selection Form was successful, you will be invited to a Selection Interview at the Department. At the Selection Interview, you will be required to present a Creative Portfolio of work. You will also be asked to write aptitude tests during your visit to the Department. You must arrange the aptitude test with Student Counselling & Development – this information will be provided by the Department. It is strongly advised that you start working on your portfolio in advance. You should not postpone working on your portfolio until you have been invited to attend the Selection Interview. Being invited to an interview does not guarantee admission. Interviews take place at the end of September or early October [date to be confirmed by email from the Department– do not contact the Department in this regard], at which time you will present your portfolio to the selection committee. The selection committee is comprised of the Programme Director or Academic Departmental Head, the first year lecturer and a psychologist from Student Counselling & Development. Please make sure that you inform the psychologist of any medical, psychological, or learning challenges you may have. This will ensure that the psychologist can advise us of the best way to assist you in the course of your studies should you be selected. All candidates attending the Selection Interview will be informed of the selection outcome within two weeks of the Selection Interviews being completed – do not contact the Department with enquiries. Candidate selection is still subject to achieving the minimum university entrance requirements as well as a minimum AP of 30 [an AP of 34 and higher is strongly recommended], plus a performance level of 4 in an official UFS tuition language as well as Mathematics. Carefully read through the minimum Creative Portfolio requirements on the next page.

277

278

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP • CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Selection Forms

Although you are more than welcome to bring any creative work along to your interview, the Department of Architecture requires your portfolio to at least include the creative work stipulated in the table below. If you have not included these minimum requirements in your portfolio, your selection will not be successful. THE EXTENSIVE PORTFOLIO OF CREATIVE WORK SHOULD AT LEAST INCLUDE THE FOLLOWING CREATIVE EXERCISES CREATIVE EXERCISE

MEDIUM

SIZE

any

500 x 500 x 500mm

black fine line ink pen on cartridge

collage

any medium

4|A

Think of an interesting client (real, fiction, human, animal, alien or anything else), and describe your client’s personality and interests. Next you should draw, in as much detail as possible, all six elevations|sides (in front, behind, right side, left side, above and below) of the client’s physical body (it may be clothed) to scale 1:10*

any medium

4|B

Build a 1:10 scale model of a distinctive chair that you designed specifically for the client you illustrated in the exercise 4|A. The chair’s design and construction should be based on your client’s physical measurements, personality, and interests. It should fit the client like a metaphorical glove.

any medium

scale 1:10*

The model of the light source (candelabrum or table lamp) you designed and built for creative exercise C in the Selection Form.

Draw a detailed free-hand sketch of your favourite place. In architectural terms a place is a space in which a person orientates her|himself and with which a person identifies.

3|A 3|B

Choose a company (Apple Inc, Bos Ice Tea, or any brand that you personally favour) and a product of that company that you want to promote. Design a poster for your favourite consumer product. The advertisement will be placed in a South African magazine. Explain the rationale behind your design for the advertisement in exercise 3|A

* scale 1:10 means that something is 10 times smaller than real life, in other words if you are 2m tall in real life you will be 200mm tall on scale 1:10 or viewed differently 10mm on a normal ruler will be equal to 100mm on scale 1:10

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP • CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Selection Forms

CHECK LIST + DECLARATION CHECK BOXES: I declare that: Part I

| PERSONAL + CONTACT DETAILS were completed

Part II | ACADEMIC + EMPLOYMENT DETAILS were completed I attached a certified copy of my Matric certificate or latest Grade 12 results after page 22 If applicable: I attached a certified copy of my Institutional Academic Transcript after page 22 I attached a certified letter by my Employer after page 22 Part III | MORE ABOUT YOU, this section was answered Part IV | SHADOW AT AN ARCHITECT’S PRACTICE, I shadowed at an Architect’s practice The architect under whom I shadowed provided her|his signature to confirm my active participation in her|his office for at least a day. Part V | CREATIVE EXERCISES were completed I declare that I produced the creative work submitted in the Selection Form. The creative work is the result of my own original labour and the creative work was not reproduced from any artworks, designs or other creative outputs. I understand that any misrepresentation will result in me not being selected for the architecture programme at the UFS Department of Architecture. By submitting the Selection Form to the Department of Architecture, I accept that the decision of the selection panel is final and that no discussion or correspondence will be entered into regarding the selection outcome. I also accept that the outcome of the Selection Interview is final and not open for comment or feedback. I will not contact the department for career advice or feedback on the selection process. I understand that it is my responsibility to ensure that the Selection Form is complete. Selection Forms will not be presented to the selection panel without a valid UFS student number. Incomplete forms and forms received after the closing date (31 August), will not be accepted or considered for selection. Part VI | TOWARDS THE NEXT STEP IN SELECTION (I carefully read and understand Part VI) Candidate’s Signature ______________________

Date

__ __ __ __|__ __|__ __

279

280

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP â&#x20AC;¢ CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Selection Forms

PHYSICAL ADDRESS OF THE DEPARTMENT OF ARCHITECTURE The Selection From must be delivered in person or door to door by private courier to the physical address of the Department of Architecture: Attention: Selection Committee Department of Architecture Architecture Building Dean Street 205 Nelson Mandela Avenue Park West BLOEMFONTEIN CLOSING DATE FOR THE SUBMISSION OF THIS SELECTION FORM: 31 Aug. No late submission will be considered for selection

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP â&#x20AC;¢ CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Selection Forms

PART 3 | Appendix H - Selection Forms | Post Grad | B Arch Hons | M Arch Prof

281

282

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP • CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Selection Forms

POST GRAD SELECTION FORM Selection Application for

Bachelors of Architecture Honours BArchHons Programme Code

| 45314 (4567)

Master of Architecture MArch |Professional Qualification Programme Code

| 47414 (4711)

Submission date

| 31 Aug

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP • CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Selection Forms

INTRODUCTION + SELECTION ORIENTATION Thank you for your interest in our selection program for architecture at the University of the Free State. GENERAL | You will find all information about our programme and selection process on our website: www.ufs.ac.za/architecture, select the link Postgraduate Application, please ensure that you download the Departmental Brochure. Familiarise yourself with each of the application and selection steps as well as submission dates. Be sure to follow the process prudently. In order to participate in the selection process you must have applied for admission to the University of the Free State before 31 May of the year preceding intended study. Download the Application for Admissions Form (DV1A) from the UFS website: search www.ufs.ac.za, select the link Students, then select the link UFS Application Forms. After receiving the complete Application for Admissions Form, the information is captured on the UFS system by Student Academic Services after which you will receive a unique UFS Student number (Reference number). For enquiries regarding receipt of the application for admission form, capturing of candidates’ data, or student numbers, please contact Student Academic Services: applications@ufs.ac.za | 051 401 3696|3693 The Department of Architecture is only responsible for departmental selection processes related to the Selection Form and Selection Interviews. The Department cannot advise on processes related to application for admission to the UFS. SELECTION FORM | Completing and submitting the Selection Form is the first step in the selection process and does not guarantee admission to the BArch programme. You cannot submit the Selection Form unless you have received a unique UFS Student number from Student Academic Services. The Selection Form must be completed and submitted in person or door to door by courier to the physical address of the Department of Architecture - found at the end of this document. Selection Forms must reach the Department of Architecture before or on 31 August of the year preceding intended study. If you make use of a courier company, please track delivery with them. Do not contact the Department in this regard. Selection Forms should not be submitted to any other UFS address. A Creative Portfolio is submitted as part of the Selection Form and inferred in the term Selection Form. The Selection Form comprises six parts (Parts I – VI): The first part constitutes contact information. Part II enquires into your academic and work experience: Part III, list the certified documents you need to attach at the end of this document. Part IV, attempts to discover more about your personality traits: Part V stipulates what is required

283

284

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP â&#x20AC;˘ CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Selection Forms

from the separate A4 Creative Portfolio which forms part of the Selection Form: The last part explains the next step in the selection process. Please sign the declaration of authorship form at the end of this document and check the check list provided. The selection committee critically reviews all the Selection Forms submitted, concentrating especially on the Creative Portfolio as stipulated in Part V. The most resourceful candidates are preliminary selected and will be invited by mid-September to attend an interview at the Department of Architecture. It is your responsibility to ensure that the Selection Form is complete. Selection Forms will not be presented to the selection panel without a valid UFS student number. Incomplete forms and forms received after the closing date (31 August), will not be accepted or considered for selection. All candidates that submitted a Selection Form will be contacted by the department to inform you of the outcome of the selection process â&#x20AC;&#x201C; please do not contact the department. Selection Forms are the property of the Department of Architecture and will not be sent back to candidates. SELECTION INTERVIEW | Please read through the information pertaining to the Selection Interview in Part VI. If your Selection Form was selected by the selection panel, you will be invited to a Selection Interview, at which time you will have to present the Creative Portfolio you submitted as part of the Selection Form. The Selection Interview is the second step in the selection process.

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP • CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Selection Forms

PART I| PERSONAL + CONTACT DETAILS Complete the Selection Form in clear block letters, using black ink.

CANDIDATE Student Number:

___ | ___ | ___ | ___ | ___ | ___ | ___ | ___ | ___ | ___ …..

Ms | Mr

_________________________________________________

Known as

First Names

_________________________________________________

Surname

_________________________________________________

S.A. ID Number

__ | __ | __ | __ | __ | __ | __ | __ | __ | __ | __ | __ | __ | __ | __ ……..

Non S.A. Passport Number

_____________________________________________

CANDIDATE

_________________________________________________ _________________________________________________ _____________________________@ __________________

CANDIDATE Residential Address

Postal Address

_________________________________________________ Postal Code _______________________________________

GUARDIAN

Name ________________ Surname_________________________

GUARDIAN

_________________________________________________ _________________________________________________ _____________________________@ __________________

285

286

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP â&#x20AC;˘ CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Selection Forms

PART II | ACADEMIC + EMPLOYMENT DETAILS What did you do in the year preceding the year of application (mark x) Working

University of Technology

University

Other

Specify Other ____________________________________

Pertaining to the tertiary institution from which you will graduate|graduated Institution

___________________________________

City

_______________

Province

___________________________________

Year

_______________

Additional Tertiary Education Institution

___________________________________

City

_______________

Province

___________________________________

Year

_______________

List extra-curricular activities participated in during your tertiary studies to the year preceding application Cultural and Creative Activities Community Activities Leadership Positions

If you worked during or after your tertiary studies specify Employer

________________________

from year

__ __ __ __ to __ __ __ __

Employer

________________________

from year

__ __ __ __ to __ __ __ __

Employer

________________________

from year

__ __ __ __ to __ __ __ __

Employer

________________________

from year

__ __ __ __ to __ __ __ __

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP â&#x20AC;˘ CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Selection Forms

PART III | CERTIFIED COPIES

In the following order please attach, at the end of this document, the following documentation: A

a certified copy of your Degree(s) or your most recent Academic Transcript

a certified letter of reference from the person that facilitated your studies as studio master in your last year of study, included must be a reference to your code of conduct

a certified letter of reference from another academic member of staff at your tertiary institution, included must be a reference to your code of conduct

a certified letter(s) of reference from your Employer(s)

a certified copy of any other academic programme, short course, workshop, etc. or your SACAP membership, or any other professional certificate of registration that is relevant to your application

Clearly mark A, B, C, D, and E on the documentation

287

288

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP â&#x20AC;˘ CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Selection Forms

PART IV | MORE ABOUT YOU Complete by hand, do not type answers. What is your personal understanding of creativity? ___________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________ What do you think is the role of an architect and architecture in South Africa? ___________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________ What and where is your favourite place, why? ___________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________ What is your favorite artwork, or architectural building or structure; explain why? ___________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP â&#x20AC;¢ CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Selection Forms

PART V | CREATIVE PORTFOLIO

INCLUDE your Creative Portfolio as a separate A4 document to the Selection Form. The Creative Portfolio comprises TWO sections. Both sections should be bonded together in one document. The following sections should be included in your Creative Portfolio: SECTION A

| DESIGN, TECHNICAL and THEORETICAL WORK

creative work you did as part of your: i

preceding years of study

| COMPULSORY

practise based experience

| COMPUSORY

iii

own creative exploration not forming part of either your studies or practice | OPTIONAL

SECTION B

| MINI-DISSERTATION DESIGN PROPOSAL for BArchHons SELECTION, or | MASTERS RESEARCH DESIGN PROPOSAL for MArch SELECTION

289

290

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP â&#x20AC;˘ CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Selection Forms

PART V | CREATIVE PORTFOLIO | SECTION A SECTION A | DESIGN, TECHNICAL and THEORETICAL WORK As part of the selection process, the UFS Department of Architecture requires all candidates to include a separate Creative Portfolio. The creative portfolio offers the selection panel the opportunity to get to know you better. We are interested in your thinking process, your critical reflection and how you present your thoughts in a creative manner. The extensive Creative Portfolio should demonstrate design, technical and theoretical work, including but not limited to: i

the best design work of each of the preceding years of study: Each selected design project must illustrate the design concept, theoretical underpinning, design development and solution, and key construction details (maximum four projects, limited to a maximum of four A4 pages for each project)

original work in practise: each selected example of practice based work must be accompanied by an Employer Declaration of Involvement Letter (see next page) explaining your involvement on the project. Projects will not be accepted as evidence without an employer letter attached to it. (maximum three projects, limited to a maximum of four A4 pages for each project)

iii

original work not forming part of either your studies or practice: An example of creative architectural work that you conceptualised and executed by yourself and that you regards as applicable to your selection. (limited to a maximum of four A4 pages)

NOTE THE FOLLOWING: Clearly indicate SECTION A (Part i, Part ii OR Part iii) in your portfolio. Parts i and ii are compulsory, but Part iii is optional. Candidates compete for selection based on creativity, design dexterity, inventiveness and academic performance; these aspects should be represented in the portfolio and interview. The portfolio is the property of the department and will not be kept for auditing purposes.

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP • CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Selection Forms

PART V | CREATIVE PORTFOLIO | SECTION A | DECLARATION OF INVOLVEMENT LETTER

Each selected example of practice based work must be accompanied by this Employer Declaration of Involvement Letter explaining your involvement on the project. Print this page for each example of practice based work you wish to include in your portfolio. The architect is kindly requested to complete the following information as proof of your involvement.

ARCHITECT’S DETAILS Name _________________________________________________ Practice_________________________________________________ City

_________________________________________________ _________________________________________________ _________________________________________________ _____________________________@ __________________

Project Title:

_________________________________________________

Involvement of candidate on the project: _________________________________________________ _________________________________________________ _________________________________________________ _________________________________________________ _________________________________________________ _________________________________________________ Architect’s Signature

_____________________________

291

292

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP â&#x20AC;¢ CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Selection Forms

PART V | CREATIVE PORTFOLIO | SECTION B

SECTION B

| MINI-DISSERTATION DESIGN PROPOSAL for BArchHons SELECTION, or | MASTERS RESEARCH DESIGN PROPOSAL for MArch SELECTION

The summary of your Mini-Dissertation Design Proposal or Masters Research Design Proposal should include the following Headings:

+ INTRODUCTION An introduction of 300 words, explaining: the project rational, the client and type of project (typology), the site (topology), and aspects that might influence your approach to form giving (morphology). + PART ONE: UNIQUE CHALLENGES In 300 words specify and describe possible challenges relating to the following subheadings: Typology | Topology | Morphology (see table below for more information) + PART TWO: PRELIMINARY RESEARCH In 500 words specify and describe sources of knowledge that you have investigated relevant to some of the challenges you identified in PART ONE. Order your research into subheadings relating to: Typology | Topology | Morphology (see table below for more information) + CONCLUSION

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP â&#x20AC;˘ CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Selection Forms

PART V | CREATIVE PORTFOLIO | SECTION B Structure the summary of your intended research according to the typological,

topological, and morphological CHALLENGES inherent to your proposed research project and the SOURCES OF KNOWLEDGE you have preliminarily investigated. The following table may serve as a diagrammatical explication of the Typological, Topological, Morphological and Structural information your written summary should include. You are welcome to structure your proposal according to the information provided in the table, but do not place your information in the table format. The table only serve to orientate your summary and is not the only format your research proposal may take. Do not contact the department regarding the table.

Diagrammatical Representation

PART ONE: Challenges

Specify and describe possible challenges relating to:

Typology

Client, user, and type of building

Topology

Historical, cultural, natural, and/or urban context.

Morphology

Form-giving elements of the building.

Who is the Client? Who is the unique user of the building? What is the type of Building?

Where is the project sited?

How is the buildingâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s form-giving determined?

PART TWO: Sources of Knowledge

Specify and describe sources of knowledge that you have investigated relevant to some of the challenges you identified in PART ONE .

+ + +

+ + + + +

Illustrate Client/user brief Mapping of client/user phenomenon Precedent/Case studies of type of building, accommodation lists and flow diagrams.

Illustrate Cognitive/quantitative context analysis; Site mapping; Precedent/Case studies Illustrate Theoretical & Historical reading relating to the form-giving elements Precedent/Case Studies of form-giving elements

293

294

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP • CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Selection Forms

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP â&#x20AC;˘ CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Selection Forms

CHECK LIST + DECLARATION CHECK BOXES: I declare that: Part I

| PERSONAL + CONTACT DETAILS was completed

Part II | ACADEMIC + EMPLOYMENT DETAILS was completed Part III | I attached a certified copy of the required documents at the end of this document Part IV | MORE ABOUT YOU, this section was answered Part V | CREATIVE PORTFOLIO were completed as a separate A4 document and include Section A and Section B as requested. I declare that I produced the creative work submitted in the Selection Form, the creative work is the result of my own original labour and that the creative work was not reproduced from any artworks, designs or other creative outputs. I understand that any misrepresentation will result in me not being selected for the architecture programme at the UFS Department of Architecture. By submitting the Selection Form to the Department of Architecture, I accept that the decision of the selection panel is final and that no discussion or correspondence will be entered into regarding the selection outcome. I also accept that the outcome of the Selection Interview is final and not open for comment or feedback. I will not contact the department for career advice or feedback on the selection process. I understand that it is my responsibility to ensure that the Selection Form is complete. Selection Forms will not be presented to the selection panel without a valid UFS student number. Incomplete forms and forms received after the closing date (31 August), will not be accepted or considered for selection. Part VI | TOWARDS THE NEXT STEP IN SELECTION (I carefully read and understand PartVI) Candidates Signature _______________________ Date __ __ __ __ __|__ __|__ __

295

296

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP â&#x20AC;¢ CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Selection Forms

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP â&#x20AC;¢ CAA Validation Visit 2017 | RPL Portfolio Applications

PART 3 | Appendix I -

RPL Portfolio Applications | RPL REPORT EXAMPLE

297

298

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP • CAA Validation Visit 2017 | RPL Portfolio Applications

8 December 2015,

RPL REPORT – E.L. Collen

To whom it may concern, INTRODUCTION: The Department of Architecture recognised the potential in developing a RPL programme for admission of candidates to the MArch (Professional) programme. The following summary outline the candidate focus group, the need for an RPL programme and a diagram explicating the relationship between professional categories of registration and the required tertiary diploma/degree. The RPL programme is developed for candidates: with at least 2 years of professional mentorship under a South African Council for the Architectural Profession (SACAP) registered architect • who have successfully completed their SACAP Professional Practice Examination (PPE) for a Professional Senior Architectural Technologist. • who have been practicing as a SACAP Registered Professional Senior Technologist for at least 5 years. • who have a portfolio of evidence of formal and non-formal learning which shows their ability to demonstrate the outcomes set for the BArchHons degree. The need for this RPL programme emerged from the following: •

• •

•

The MArch requirement set by SACAP for registration as a Professional Architect. Enquiries from a number of candidates holding a Diploma or Bachelor degree (see grey highlighted ALS degrees) and practice as registered professional senior architectural technologists while taking on the duties and responsibilities of a professional architect, but not recognised for their professional abilities. The possession of an honour degree as required for admission to a Master degree. These candidates (see grey highlighted SACAP categories) have already achieved the professionally aligned HEQF outcomes set for the BArchHons degree and were formally examined on these outcomes through the SACAP PPE. The responsibility of RPL directed by SACAP to the 11 Architectural Learning Sites (ALS’s); the Department of Architecture, UFS, is a national and international validated ALS.

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP • CAA Validation Visit 2017 | RPL Portfolio Applications

ALS DEGREES and SACAP PROFESSIONAL CATEGORIES: Each ALS degree is both aligned with the SACAP professional outcomes and the HEQF level degree learning outcomes. ALS DIPLOMAS & DEGREES

National Certificate Advanced Certificate National Diploma PG diploma Non-accredited BTec/BArch Accredited BTec & BArchHons MArch

SACAP PROFESSIONAL CATEGORIES FOR REGISTRATION Candidates can only be registered in a category after a two year documented professional mentorship as a registered candidate and successful completion of the SACAP PPE Professional Draughtsperson Professional Architectural Technologist

Professional Senior Architectural Technologist Professional Architect

Given the professional and academic position of this candidate focus group, the department with close support of the UFS RPL office, developed a RPL programme through which these candidates can be considered for admission to the MArch (Professional) programme. MArch (Professional): The Master in Architecture (Professional) is a master’s degree by coursework and involves workshops, studio critique sessions, projects and an investigated design dissertation with an advanced design project. The purpose of the qualification is to facilitate candidates that may register as “Candidate Architect” with the South African Council for the Architectural Profession in terms of the provisions of the Architectural Profession Act 44 of 2000. The main objective of this master’s programme is to afford the master’s candidate an opportunity to demonstrate that she/he can solve an advanced design and technical design problem in an academic, and professionally responsible and comprehensive manner. The aim is to evaluate the candidate’s professional competency in respect of architectural design, a term understood as inclusive of the influences, ideas, concepts and responsibilities considered during the design process, the technical and construction knowledge necessary for the design resolution, the design resolution itself. 2015 RPL APPLICATIONS: In 2015 three candidates, meeting the above minimum requirements applied for the RPL programme, completed the PRL portfolio of evidence and attended the Masters examination of the current MArch students, and lastly presented their Portfolio of Creative Work to a selection panel on 4 December 2015. The selection panel consisted of Mr Henry Pretorius (ADH: Department of Architecture), Mr Jako Olivier (Programme Director: Department of Architecture, Dr Gerhard Bosman (Unesco Earth Unit: Department of Architecture), Ms Anamarie Wagener (Subject head of Construction: Department of Architecture), Mr Jan-Hendrik Nel (Lecturer: Department of Architecture), Mr Kobus du Preez (Subject Head: Architectural History: Department of Architecture), and the external adjudicator Prof Jonathan Noble (WITS: Department of Architecture). Below follows the report of the selection panel.

299

300

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP • CAA Validation Visit 2017 | RPL Portfolio Applications

COMPONENT I – DESIGN APTITUDE

SYNOPSIS:

Evaluation of the candidate’s ability to syntheses and evaluate explorative and investigative knowledge into an applicable design strategy. Evaluation of the candidate’s ability to syntheses and evaluate the design strategy into a design development & resolution pertaining to the chosen design subject and project,

Design Aptitude involves explorative and investigative research and critical judgement of the design challenges posed by the specific chosen project from practice. The exploration of four broad problem statements, relating to the fundamentals of design should be addressed: § Typology: What to design for whom? § Topology: Where to design it? § Morphology: How the gestalt of the design is influenced? § Tectonics: How the design is constructed? From the specific challenges different sources of knowledge is explored in an attempt to develop a design methodology specific to this architectural project. In general the POE and Panel Presentation of the Portfolio of Creative Work should comprise four parts: § Part I: problem statements; § Part II: collection, analysis, understanding, interpretation of different sources of knowledge § Part III: synthesis of knowledge with design; application of design methodology § Part IV: evaluation of the design solution The candidate’s reflection must elucidate the concepts and ideas behind the design methodology, how the information was processed and how these concepts and ideas influenced the design resolution. § concept development, development and setting out of programme (list of accommodation and spatial parameters), the integration of all knowledge analysed, interpreted and synthesised (precedent studies, historical and theoretical premises, contextual and environmental / urban determinants) into an appropriate design resolution; § communicating the design development and resolution through the POE and Panel Presentation of the Portfolio of Creative Work with the necessary illustrations, sketches and drawings; and through the visual (concept and developmental models, sketchbooks, developmental drawings, final models, and design plans, sections, elevations, and visual representations) presentation and oral presentation of the architectural design work.

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP â&#x20AC;˘ CAA Validation Visit 2017 | RPL Portfolio Applications

CRITERIA The examiner should evaluate the candidateâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s ability to:

ii. formulate and take responsibility for a grounded and critical point of view of applicable historical, social, environmental and cultural phenomena

iii. identify, communicate and evaluate the essence and the extent of complex and challenging design problems within the field of architecture based on the project challenges and aims

iv. apply and evaluate suitable design principles, strategies, methods, theories, techniques, processes, and solutions to a specific architectural project

make autonomous and responsible decisions based on contextual, historical, social, and theoretical resources and in accordance with architectural practice

vi. communicate and aspects of architectural discourse that is the product of responsible and ethical engagement with a specific human ecological landscape

vii. integrate all the accumulated skills, from the development of a programme to the detail design into a single architectural solution

Insufficient evidence

Sufficient evidence

Articulated evidence

301

302

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP • CAA Validation Visit 2017 | RPL Portfolio Applications

COMPONENT II – TECHNICAL APTITUDE SYNOPSIS:

Technical Aptitude involves investigative research and critical judgement of the technical challenges posed by the specific chosen project from practice. The candidate’s reflection must elucidate the investigation behind the technical design and resolution, how the information was processed and how these technical knowledge influenced the technical resolution. § development and setting out of the accommodation and spatial parameters in accordance with client’s needs and regulatory constraints, the integration of technical knowledge gathered through precedent studies and building regulations into an appropriate technical design resolution; § communicating the technical design development and resolution through the POE and Panel Presentation of the Portfolio of Creative Work with the necessary technical documented plans, sections, elevations, and visual representations. CRITERIA The examiner should evaluate the candidate’s ability to:

research and validate a range of specialist technical sources particular to the identified design and technical design problems

iii. design, select and apply appropriate and creative methods, techniques, processes and technologies to complex architectural and structural problems

iv. use a set of technical design drawings to communicate and defend substantial building construction ideas that are the products of research

Insufficient evidence

Sufficient evidence

Articulated evidence

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP • CAA Validation Visit 2017 | RPL Portfolio Applications

PANEL RECOMMENDATION

The Panel found Mr. E.L Collen to be able to undertake MArch studies. His technical capabilities are well advanced beyond the scope of the academic requirements. He showed a concerted effort to engage with the analytical and theoretical ideas in his reflection on his architectural work. Prof Jonathan Noble and Mr Pretorius highlighted concern for the rigour of the academic writing and research required for the Design Dissertation. Mr Collen was provided with compulsory reading: The Ethical function of Architecture by Karsten Harries and Analysing Architecture by Unwin. Mr Collen will attend the master student exhibition the first week in February, at which time the master students will exhibit their Master’s Design Proposal. Although the MArch (Professional) degree is only a one year structured masters, the panel recommends that Mr Collen register for maximum residential period of two years. The HEQFS approved and SACAP validated MArch (Professional) programme will be presented over two years. On selection the student will register in his first year for an academic writing workshops offered by CTL’s Write Site, he will be assisted with Research Methodology in the Architectural Treatise (ATRE7904) course and facilitated with the Master’s Design Proposal in the Design Dissertation Course (DDIS7900). At the same time the Professional Practice modules (BPKR7914 and PARC7904) must be completed. The development of a dissertation proposal will be facilitated in the Architectural Treatise module in the first year. In the second year the candidate will again enrol for the Design Dissertation and Architectural Treatise courses while registering for the first time for the Construction (CONS7908) module. FIRST YEAR MArch Programme

Academic Writing Workshop DDIS7900 Design Dissertation ATRE7904 Architectural Treatise BPKR7914 Professional Practice PARC7904 Professional Architect’s Practice

SECOND YEAR March Programme DDIS7900 CONS7908 ATRE7904

Design Dissertation Construction Architectural Treatise

The Department of Architecture is confident that Mr Collen is a worthy candidate for MArch enrolment and studies. Sincerely, Jako Olivier Department of Architecture e-mail: olivierji@ufs.ac.za

303

304

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP â&#x20AC;¢ CAA Validation Visit 2017 | RPL Portfolio Applications

PART 3 | Appendix I -

RPL Portfolio Applications | RPL MASTERS IN ARCHITECTURE PORTFOLIO OF EVIDENCE

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP • CAA Validation Visit 2017 | RPL Portfolio Applications

For Office Use

Date

RPL Office received POE Submitted to Assessor Received POE and assessment report Database

Responsible person

RPL OFFICE

CENTRE FOR TEACHING AND LEARNING

Recognition of prior learning

Portfolio of Evidence Candidate ID number Student number Learning Programme

Admission into Master’s Degree Architecture (4711)

Assessor’s name Date of submission

I declare this evidence to have been produced by the undersigned. Candidate signature:

________________________________________________

Date:

________________________________________________

Send per courier: Address to: RPL Office; Room 347, SASOL Library, Level 3, Nelson Mandela Road, University of the Free State.

305

306

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP • CAA Validation Visit 2017 | RPL Portfolio Applications

TABLE OF CONTENTS 1

Biographic Information

Certified Copy of ID

3.1 3.2 3.3 3.4

RPL contract Ownership of portfolio RPL Office: Flow diagram Appeal form

4.1 4.2

Declaration of Authenticity Indemnity Declaration

Feedback

Letter of Motivation

Outcome 1 – Formal Learning Reflective report 7.1 Appendix I: Certificates

Outcome 2 – Work Experience and other Non-formal 8.1 Appendix II: Documentation 8.1.1 CV 8.1.2 SACAP registration certificate 8.1.3 Job description as Senior Architectural Technologist 8.1.4 Description of practice 8.1.5 Organogram 8.1.6 Attestation letter from supervisor/partner 8.2 Appendix III: Documentation 8.2.1 Testimonials/ Reference letters & Commendations 8.2.2 SACAP accredited CPD short courses and workshops 8.2.3 Declaration of attendance of Master’s Examination 8.3 Appendix IV: An Example of a completed Architectural Work 8.3.1 Reflective Summary 8.3.2 Evidence of the Architectural Work 8.3.3. Witness Letter 8.4 Appendix V: An Example of a completed Architectural Work 8.4.1 Reflective Summary 8.4.2 Evidence of the Architectural Work 8.4.3. Witness Letter 8.5 INTERVIEW: Full Creative and Technical Portfolio presented during the Panel Interview

The portfolio is the intellectual property of the RPL Office: Centre for Teaching and Learning: UFS

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP â&#x20AC;¢ CAA Validation Visit 2017 | RPL Portfolio Applications

1. BIOGRAPHIC INFORMATION Candidate ID number E-mail address Postal address Residential address Day time contact detail Cell Work Fax Fax to e-mail

The portfolio is the intellectual property of the RPL Office: Centre for Teaching and Learning: UFS

307

308

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP â&#x20AC;¢ CAA Validation Visit 2017 | RPL Portfolio Applications

2. CERTIFIED COPY OF ID

Place a CERTIFIED copy of your ID document here. (Only copies with an original stamp certified by a registered Commissioner of Oaths will be accepted) Please make sure that it is clear and that the photograph can be seen. PLEASE NOTE: If you do not submit a CERTIFIED copy of your ID document we cannot assess your portfolio.

The portfolio is the intellectual property of the RPL Office: Centre for Teaching and Learning: UFS

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP • CAA Validation Visit 2017 | RPL Portfolio Applications

3.1

RPL CONTRACT

Major responsibilities: For the RPL process to succeed, the undertaking of the various participants can be summarised as follows: RPL Office

RPL CANDIDATE

Processes RPL application forms & UFS application form. A recommendation is made to grant a candidate a RPL assessment. Provides the candidate with a portfolio template to complete.

RPL application & UFS application form: Forms completed comprehensively and documents attached Candidate registers for the RPL assessment and pay the RPL fee. Portfolio development fee R750.00 payable with registration of portfolio.

Support of candidates in portfolio development: Tersia Kühne: E-mail kuhnet@ufs.ac.za Tel: 051 401 7327

Reflects on own learning and does self-assessment against the expected outcomes and evidence required. The RPL candidate  Collects evidence  Evaluates own evidence against the principles of quality evidence  Certifies documents were requested.  Provides witness letter regarding evidence  Writes reflective report on each outcome Submission of POE: Please send it by courier since the portfolio gets lost in the university’s postal services: Address to: The RPL Office Room 343 SASOL Library University of the Free State Nelson Mandela Street Please notify us that you have sent the portfolio. Candidate edits evidence according to requirements collects more information

If more information is needed the POE is referred back to candidate. Checks evidence against outcomes and read reflections on outcomes: Identifies gaps: Verifies qualifications/certificates/reference letters/ job description: RPL Office Requests more information if needed

Candidate provides information requested and finally submits portfolio.

Submits to the assessor Receives feedback from assessor to RPL Office RPL Office writes a recommendation letter and gets condonement of assessment recommendation from the Dean of the Faculty and the Registrar Provides feedback to candidate, Programme Manager and lecturer

The portfolio is the intellectual property of the RPL Office: Centre for Teaching and Learning: UFS

309

310

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP • CAA Validation Visit 2017 | RPL Portfolio Applications

As RPL Office we will do our best to support the RPL candidate The Portfolio template gives the RPL candidate guidance on:     

Minimum requirements for RPL for admission into the Master’s Degree in Architecture The RPL assessment process The outcomes and expected evidence The organisation of the evidence against the learning outcomes Writing summaries to link outcomes and evidence of learning.

Declaration: Candidate   

I understand the RPL assessment and the portfolio development process I undertake to read all sections of the portfolio to familiarise myself with what is expected of me. I undertake to discuss problems and queries about the portfolio and the RPL process with the evidence facilitator.

I understand the RPL assessment and the portfolio development process. RPL Candidate:

---------------------------------------

Date:

-------------------------

Evidence Facilitator: Tersia Kühne at 051 401 7357 or kuhnet@ufs.ac.za; Room D 347, SASOL Library, Level 3, Nelson Mandela Road; UFS

The portfolio is the intellectual property of the RPL Office: Centre for Teaching and Learning: UFS

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP • CAA Validation Visit 2017 | RPL Portfolio Applications

3.2 OWNERSHIP OF PORTFOLIO. I accept that the Portfolio of evidence will remain at the RPL Office after assessment for moderation/ audit/ record purposes. Please make a copy of the portfolio for yourself. SUBMISSION OF PORTFOLIO: Practical arrangements: You can directly submit the portfolio at the RPL Office or you can send the portfolio per courier. Since portfolios that are sent to our postal address tend to get lost in the postal system we kindly request you to send the portfolio per courier to our physical address: Address to: RPL Office; Room 347; SASOL Library; Level 3; Main Campus; Nelson Mandela Road; University of the Free State.

Signature:…………………………

The portfolio is the intellectual property of the RPL Office: Centre for Teaching and Learning: UFS

311

312

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP • CAA Validation Visit 2017 | RPL Portfolio Applications

3.3 RPL OFFICE: CENTRE OF TEACHING AND LEARNING FLOW DIAGRAM OF THE RECOGNITION OF PRIOR LEARNING PROCESS AT THE UFS IN THE CASE OF RPL FOR ADMISSION RPL application  Departments and Student Academic Services refer RPL applicants to the RPL Office.  Direct applications to the RPL Office.

7. Moderation  Process moderation is done by the RPL Office.

 2. RPL screening  Consideration of application documents.  Interview with applicants and programme director.  Determine if RPL opportunity will be offered.  Applicant registers for RPL assessment

 8. Feedback to the applicant  Applicant is informed of the outcome of the assessment.  If the applicant is not yet competent he/she will be supported by the RPL Office.

 3. Assessment plan  Formulate an assessment plan in co-operation with assessor.  Assessment method, time schedule and report are finalised.

 9. Appeal  Appeal procedure is followed if necessary.

 4. Support of candidate  RPL Office communicates assessment details to the applicant  RPL applicant is supported in preparation for assessment.

 10. Recommendation: Registrar  A final recommendation is submitted for approval to the Registrar by the RPL Office.  The decision is communicated to the RPL Office and staff of Academic Student Services.

 5. Assessment  Assessor performs assessment and makes an assessment judgement and recommendation.  The department does moderation in the case of exemption with credits.

 11. Final feedback  RPL Office communicates final outcome to the RPL applicant and the department.

 6. Approval of Recommendation.  The Head of the Department considers the recommendation for decision making.  Dean of the Faculty approves the recommendation.  Assessment report is sent to the RPL Office.

  12. Administrative support  Student Academic Services records the RPL assessment outcome and informs RPL applicant on further action and registration detail.

The portfolio is the intellectual property of the RPL Office: Centre for Teaching and Learning: UFS

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP â&#x20AC;˘ CAA Validation Visit 2017 | RPL Portfolio Applications

3.3.1 Definition of RPL According to the new RPL Policy of SAQA RPL is a process, through which non-formal learning and informal learning are measured, mediated for recognition across different contexts and certified against the requirements for credit, access, inclusion or advancement in the formal education and training system, or workplace. RPL processes can include guidance and counselling, and extended preparation for assessment. 3.3.2 Formal Learning Formal learning refers to learning acquired within a formal education and training institution such as a school, university, university of technology, or technical college. Formal learning takes place through planned interventions after which it is assessed and formally accredited.

3.3.3 Non-Formal Learning Non-formal learning refers to learning acquired within a non-formal learning context such as work experience, on the job training, trade union education and civic education. Non-formal learning is sometimes structured and intentional learning that takes place through planned learning interventions. However, certain learning acquired within a non-formal context does not result in the granting of credits or a formal qualification on a specific level of the Higher Education Qualification Framework. 3.3.4 RPL at the UFS In the case of RPL for admission the RPL process at the UFS is done to determine whether a RPL candidate has the required prior learning to be granted admission into the qualification. No assessment is done to grant credits on any NQF level. Furthermore the results of RPL done at the UFS cannot be used for admission purposes at other higher education institutions in South Africa.

3.4 Appeal Form: RPL Office To: Assistant Director The portfolio is the intellectual property of the RPL Office: Centre for Teaching and Learning: UFS

313

314

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP • CAA Validation Visit 2017 | RPL Portfolio Applications

RPL Office PO Box 339 SASOL Library; Level 3 Bloemfontein,9300 Fax: 086 604 8067 I wish to appeal the decision of my RPL assessment. My details are as follows: Name ID number Name of Assessor RPL process for admission in the Master’s Degree in Architecture (MArch) My reasons for disagreeing with the assessor

Additional evidence submitted

I undertake to pay the amount of R300.00 with the submission of this appeal form. You will be informed of the outcome of your appeal in writing within 14 days of it being referred to the Assessor.  You are required to appeal within seven working days of receiving your feedback.  Cost of appeal will be R300.00  Please take note that you may only appeal if you submit additional evidence.

The portfolio is the intellectual property of the RPL Office: Centre for Teaching and Learning: UFS

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP â&#x20AC;˘ CAA Validation Visit 2017 | RPL Portfolio Applications

4.1 DECLARATION OF AUTHENTICITY Instructions: Complete this declaration to tell the assessor that your evidence is all your own. This is part of the validation process. I __________________________________ (Full names) ___________________________________ (ID) declare that the contents of this portfolio are my own evidence and that everything was compiled/completed by me with the exception of the items that are listed below: Signature: ____________________________ Date: ________________________ Please note that group work should also be listed when your contribution cannot be separated by the contributions of others (when the evidence cannot be proved to be your own work).

The portfolio is the intellectual property of the RPL Office: Centre for Teaching and Learning: UFS

315

316

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP • CAA Validation Visit 2017 | RPL Portfolio Applications

4.2 INDEMNITY DECLARATION I hereby authorize verification of all the documents included to determine its authenticity. I hereby authorize Cash Client’s duly authorized verification agent, Kroll Background Screening (Pty) Ltd (“Kroll”), to forward any personal information as well as any information that I have provided in support of my application to verification information suppliers acting on behalf of Kroll (including but not limited to the South African Police Services, the Government of the RSA, and any educational, training, credit bureau and fraud prevention organizations) for the purpose of verifying my personal credentials and records. Authorised credential verification types include, but are not limited to, educational qualifications, professional membership, employment history, employment references, consumer credit, criminal record, drivers’ license, and fraud prevention checks. I authorise Kroll’s verification information suppliers to furnish information regarding my credentials, whether claimed or not, to Kroll and Cash Client. I unconditionally indemnify Kroll and its verification information suppliers against any liability that may result from furnishing information in this regard. I understand that it is a condition of Kroll’s verification information suppliers that this information is furnished by them solely for the purposes of my proposed / continuation of employment via the offices of Cash Client and that any information that is furnished to Cash Client and Kroll will be disclosed to me before a decision is made on my continued employment or application for employment.

______________________________

_______________________

Candidate’s Signature

Date

The portfolio is the intellectual property of the RPL Office: Centre for Teaching and Learning: UFS

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP â&#x20AC;˘ CAA Validation Visit 2017 | RPL Portfolio Applications

5. FEEDBACK ON RPL PROCESS Dear RPL Candidate, RPL comprises hard work and considerable ability to practice self awareness, reflective thought and the description of learning, skills values and attitudes. Please complete this section to assist us to tailor the RPL process better at the UFS. 1.

How did you experience the development of the portfolio of evidence?

___________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________ 2.

What problems did you experience with the development of the portfolio of evidence?

Format of Portfolio: ___________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________ Evidence: ___________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________ Reflective reports: ___________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________

The portfolio is the intellectual property of the RPL Office: Centre for Teaching and Learning: UFS

317

318

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP â&#x20AC;˘ CAA Validation Visit 2017 | RPL Portfolio Applications

Other: ___________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________ 3.

What can be done to improve the portfolio?

___________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________ Format of Portfolio: ___________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________ Evidence: ___________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________ Reflective reports: __________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________ Other: ___________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________

The portfolio is the intellectual property of the RPL Office: Centre for Teaching and Learning: UFS

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP • CAA Validation Visit 2017 | RPL Portfolio Applications

6. LETTER OF MOTIVATION Formulate and type a letter according to the guidelines below. It is your formal request and motivation for seeking RPL. This letter serves as a summary of the purpose of your RPL application

Your address

Date

Mrs. T.M. Kühne REQUEST FOR RECOGNITION OF PRIOR LEARNING 

In this paragraph you must introduce yourself. Indicate who you are.



What do you value about your learning, work experience and your specific competencies?



Describe a peak moment or a high point in your career.



Tell us why you are applying for RPL. Why do you want to make use of RPL? Write a paragraph on the barriers or challenges you have experienced in your education and how did you approach and address it.

What is your dream for the future? 

What opportunity does RPL offer to you in terms of your career planning?



State your short (1-5 months), medium (6-12 months) and long term (1-5 years) learning objectives here and indicate what role does your RPL application for admission into the Masters’ Degree: Architecture (MArch) plays in your objectives.

………………………………………………… Signature

7. OUTCOME 1: FORMAL LEARNING The portfolio is the intellectual property of the RPL Office: Centre for Teaching and Learning: UFS

319

320

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP â&#x20AC;˘ CAA Validation Visit 2017 | RPL Portfolio Applications

. Formal learning refers to learning acquired within a formal education and training institution such as a school, university, university of technology, or technical college. Formal learning takes place through planned interventions after which it is assessed and formally accredited.

Formal Learning

OUTCOMES (What candidate should know and be able to do)

EVIDENCE (Guidelines/ Suggestions) Please list your evidence of learning under the headings provided below (If you have nothing to list under a heading please state NONE)

Outcome 2:

7.1 Appendix I

The candidate must have an academic foundation and must have proof that he/she has completed a diploma/ degree in his/her subject field.

7.1.1 School Education Certified Senior Certificate

CRITERIA:

The candidate must already have obtained a diploma or degree

7.1.2 Formal Learning: Qualifications Certified certificates and academic records 7.1.3 Formal Learning: Qualifications not completed Certified academic records (study record) 7.1.4 Formal Learning: Qualifications current busy with Proof of registration 7.1.5 Short courses that were provided through accredited higher education institutions. Credits on NQF levels 5-7

The portfolio is the intellectual property of the RPL Office: Centre for Teaching and Learning: UFS

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP â&#x20AC;˘ CAA Validation Visit 2017 | RPL Portfolio Applications

Reflective report: Formal learning Write a summary on your formal learning 1.

Formal Learning: Qualifications not completed

For what course/qualification/ did you enrol for? What modules/subjects were included in the syllabi? What contribution did this learning made to your work performance, development or your career?

Formal Learning: Qualifications currently busy with

For what course/qualification/ are you currently enrolled? What modules/subjects are included in the syllabi? What contribution is this learning making to your work performance, development or your career?

SHORT COURSES (CREDIT BEARING)

Short courses that were provided through accredited higher education institutions. Credits on NQF levels 5-7 What short course did you complete? What contribution did this learning made to your work performance, development or your career?

The portfolio is the intellectual property of the RPL Office: Centre for Teaching and Learning: UFS

321

322

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP â&#x20AC;˘ CAA Validation Visit 2017 | RPL Portfolio Applications

7.1 APPENDIX I Certificates (FILE YOUR CERTIFICATES HERE)

Insert CERTIFIED copies of any certificates that you are using to assist your assessment (Only copies with an original stamp certified by a registered Commissioner of Oaths will be accepted)

7.1.1 Appendix I School Education Senior Certificate 7.1.2 Appendix I

Formal Learning: Qualifications

7.1.3 Appendix I

Formal Learning: Qualifications not completed

7.1.4 Appendix I

Formal Learning: Qualifications current busy with

7.1.5 Appendix I

Accredited short courses with credits on NQF level 5-7

The portfolio is the intellectual property of the RPL Office: Centre for Teaching and Learning: UFS

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP â&#x20AC;˘ CAA Validation Visit 2017 | RPL Portfolio Applications

8. OUTCOME 2: WORK EXPERIENCE Non-formal learning refers to learning acquired within a non-formal learning context such as work experience, on the job training, trade union education, involvement in community work and civic education. Non-formal learning also includes structured and intentional learning that takes place through planned learning interventions like short courses and workshops. However, learning acquired within a non-formal context does not result in formal accreditation. Linking Evidence & Learning Outcomes When you present your portfolio of evidence of learning, you will need to demonstrate, to the assessor, that you have reflected on the learning through experiences. Study the learning outcomes and the assessment criteria for each outcome. In this section you have to link the outcomes to your specific evidence. When you reflect on your learning you think back and recreate the situation and the context where learning took place. You need to develop self-awareness, describe the learning experience, how you applied the knowledge and skills you obtained and make a judgment on the value of the knowledge and skills you obtained.

Self-awareness

You need to examine yourself, to be aware of your personality, values, beliefs, feelings, qualities, abilities and limitations. Reflection helps us to know ourselves better and to develop the capacity to look at our own capabilities, skills and learning acquired from experience and formal learning.

Description

It is essential that learning experiences are described accurately and objectively. Being in touch with what all involved, were thinking and feeling, is a key stage towards understanding and learning from the reflection. All aspects need to be included in sufficient, but not too much, detail.

Application

This involves mixing and blending ideas so that we bring together new and previous knowledge, especially where it leads to a change in our concept or perceptions of an event. Example: On the course I gained knowledge on computer skills and I applied it in my job by using MS Word to make address labels for envelopes.

Evaluation

This is about making a judgment on the (applied/synthesised) knowledge gained to date.

The portfolio is the intellectual property of the RPL Office: Centre for Teaching and Learning: UFS

value

the

323

324

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP • CAA Validation Visit 2017 | RPL Portfolio Applications

Quality and Good Evidence It is essential that the evidence you produce in your portfolio of evidence is sufficient, valid, current and authentic. Currency: Evidence is regarded as current if it covers learning from experience from the past 5 years. Currency refers to the applicability of skills, knowledge and understanding in the present circumstances (SAQA: 2001). In assessment for RPL competence must be demonstrated for what the candidate knows and can do now. Evidence has to be up-to-date to convince your assessor that that you have current knowledge and skills that you are applying now in your work place. Evidence is regarded as current if it covers experience from the past 5 years. Questions you need to ask about the currency of your evidence:  

Is the evidence current enough (past 5 years) to be considered appropriate? Do I have the skills, knowledge and competencies now?

Validity: Validity refers to how well the evidence matches what is being assessed. It is important that you match your skills, competencies and knowledge to the outcomes provided and evidence requested. Questions you need to ask about the validity of your evidence:  

Does the evidence you provided match the skills and knowledge that you are required to demonstrate? Will the assessor be able to make a judgement of your competencies when she/he considers your evidence?

Authenticity Authenticity refers to the ownership of the evidence. You need to indicate to and convince your assessor that your evidence is your own work. You need to include declaration statements of authenticity in your portfolio and you need to provide letters of attestation/ witness letters to help with the validation of the authenticity of your evidence. The portfolio is the intellectual property of the RPL Office: Centre for Teaching and Learning: UFS

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP • CAA Validation Visit 2017 | RPL Portfolio Applications

Since a lot of work is done in teams it is important that you clearly make reference to it. If anybody else contributed to perform the work and also contributed to the generation of the evidence document you submit as work of your own, you need to make reference to the roles you and the colleague(s) played. The assessor needs to see clearly what skills and knowledge you demonstrated. Questions you need to ask about your evidence:  

Did I include sufficient attestation and witness letters to assist the assessor to decide that the evidence items I included are authentic and examples of my own work? Did I clearly indicate what role other colleagues played in the generation of the evidence item and the performance of the work?

Sufficiency: Sufficiency relates to the number of evidence items, different types of evidence and relevancy of evidence needed to prove competence. The portfolio provides an indication of what type of evidence and the number of items will suffice as sufficient evidence in relation to the outcomes and assessment criteria. Candidates should try not to provide too much of the same evidence and submit different kinds of evidence. Questions you need to ask about the sufficiency of your evidence: 

Did I comply with the specification in the portfolio regarding the number of evidence items required?



Did I write the summaries and reflective reports as required?



Did I include a variation of work examples as required in the portfolio?



Are the evidence items appropriate and does it matches the criteria and outcomes stated in the portfolio?

The portfolio is the intellectual property of the RPL Office: Centre for Teaching and Learning: UFS

325

326

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP • CAA Validation Visit 2017 | RPL Portfolio Applications

OUTCOME 2: WORK EXPERIENCE & OTHER NON-FORMAL LEARNING OUTCOMES (What candidate should know and be able to do) Outcome 2: The candidate has at least 7 years practical experience in the architectural field and is registered for at least 5 years as a senior architectural technologist with the South African Council for the Architectural Profession. Outcomes relating to Appendix II & III: Candidates should be able to: 



Demonstrate the ability to apply knowledge and skills by using a range of methods, procedures and practices to resolve problems or introduce change within a practice; Demonstrate problem solving skills and the ability to identify, analyse, critically reflect on and address complex problems; Demonstrate skills and competencies in accessing, processing and managing information relevant to the problems you are solving and the objectives in your work;



Demonstrate capabilities of communicating with stakeholders



Demonstrate skills of communicating information, ideas and opinions in well-formed arguments, using appropriate language;



Demonstrate relevant ethics and professional practice in your specific environment.

EVIDENCE (Guidelines/ Suggestions) Learning acquired from work experience 8.1 Appendix II: 8.1.1 CV 8.1.2 SACAP registration certificate 8.1.3 Job description as Senior Architectural Technologist within the practice 8.1.4 Description of practice 8.1.5 Organogram 8.1.6 Attestation letter from supervisor/partner attesting to work experience 8.2 Appendix III: 8.2.1 Testimonials/ Reference letters & Commendations 8.2.2 SACAP accredited CPD short courses and workshops completed and attended in the last 5 years 8.2.3 Declaration of intended attendance of the Master’s Examination of current master’s students at the Department of Architecture, UFS preceding year of intended study.

Outcomes relating to Appendix IV: The portfolio is the intellectual property of the RPL Office: Centre for Teaching and Learning: UFS

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP • CAA Validation Visit 2017 | RPL Portfolio Applications

Candidates should be able to:

8.3 Appendix IV:

 Demonstrate the ability to apply knowledge and skills by using a range of methods, procedures and practices to identify and analyse ecological complexities (environmental, cultural, historical, and social phenomena);

An Example of a completed Architectural Work:

 Demonstrate problem solving skills and the ability to differentiate, synthesise, and critically reflect on human ecological complexities when addressing complex design and construction problems;  Demonstrate skills of communicating design and construction information and ideas in well-presented design, presentation and construction drawings using appropriate presentation and computer tools;  Demonstrate ethical responsibility towards the human ecological landscape.

8.3.1 Reflective Summary Write a reflective summary of 2000 words on an example of a completed architectural work. Candidates must have participated in a leading capacity in the design and documentation of this architectural work. The architectural work must be:  a multi-storey building (incorporating the use of structural concrete or steel);  situated in a complex human ecological environment, where human ecological environment refers to the combined phenomena of man (individual – social), place (natural – man-made), time (historical to contemporary) and culture (homogenous to heterogeneous). 8.3.2 Evidence of the Architectural Work The evidence pages may include any annotated precedent/case studies, site analyses, drawings, presentations, models, documentation, photographs, etc. of the architectural work on which the reflective summary (8.3.1) was written. 8.3.3. Witness Letter

For enquiries please contact:

Outcomes relating to Appendix V:

Jako Olivier Programme Director Department of Architecture, UFS. 051 401 2332 olivierji@ufs.ac.za

The portfolio is the intellectual property of the RPL Office: Centre for Teaching and Learning: UFS

327

328

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP • CAA Validation Visit 2017 | RPL Portfolio Applications

Candidates should be able to:  Demonstrate the ability to apply knowledge and skills by using a range of methods, procedures and practices to identify and analyse ecological complexities (environmental, cultural, historical, and social phenomena);  Demonstrate problem solving skills and the ability to differentiate, synthesise, and critically reflect on human ecological complexities when addressing complex design and construction problems;  Demonstrate skills of communicating design and construction information and ideas in well-presented design, presentation and construction drawings using appropriate presentation and computer tools;  Demonstrate ethical responsibility towards the human ecological landscape.

8.4 Appendix V: An Example of a completed Architectural Work: 8.4.1 Reflective Summary Write a reflective summary of 2000 words on an example of a completed architectural work. Candidates must have participated in a leading capacity in the design and documentation of this architectural work. The architectural work must be:  a residential building (an apartment building or residential complex comprising multiple units);  situated in a complex human ecological environment, where human ecological environment refers to the combined phenomena of man (individual – social), place (natural – man-made), time (historical to contemporary) and culture (homogenous to heterogeneous). 8.4.2 Evidence of the Architectural Work The evidence pages may include any annotated precedent/case studies, site analyses, drawings, presentations, models, documentation, photographs, etc. of the architectural work on which the reflective summary (8.4.1) was written. 8.4.3. Witness Letter

For enquiries please contact: Jako Olivier Programme Director Department of Architecture, UFS. 051 401 2332 olivierji@ufs.ac.za The portfolio is the intellectual property of the RPL Office: Centre for Teaching and Learning: UFS

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP • CAA Validation Visit 2017 | RPL Portfolio Applications

Outcomes relating to the Creative and Technical portfolio of completed work 8.5 Full Creative and Technical Portfolio presented during the Panel Interview presented during the Panel Interview: Candidates should be able to:  Demonstrate the ability to apply knowledge and skills by using a range of methods, procedures and practices to identify and analyse ecological complexities (environmental, cultural, historical, and social phenomena);  Demonstrate problem solving skills and the ability to differentiate, synthesise, and critically reflect on human ecological complexities when addressing complex design and construction problems;  Demonstrate skills of communicating design and construction information and ideas in well-presented design, presentation and construction drawings using appropriate presentation and computer tools;  Demonstrate ethical responsibility towards the human ecological landscape.

A full Creative and Technical portfolio has to be submitted and presented at the Panel Interview. Any architectural work that best illustrate the outcomes specified may be included. The portfolio must be presented in a 30 minute PowerPoint presentation. The Creative and Technical portfolio must include the three architectural works reflected on in Appendix VI Panel Interview is scheduled for 30 October 2015

For enquiries please contact: Jako Olivier Programme Director Department of Architecture, UFS. 051 401 2332 olivierji@ufs.ac.za

The portfolio is the intellectual property of the RPL Office: Centre for Teaching and Learning: UFS

329

330

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP â&#x20AC;˘ CAA Validation Visit 2017 | RPL Portfolio Applications

8.1 Appendix II Description of past work experience and learning acquired: 8.1.1 CV:

File your CV after this page.

The portfolio is the intellectual property of the RPL Office: Centre for Teaching and Learning: UFS

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP â&#x20AC;¢ CAA Validation Visit 2017 | RPL Portfolio Applications

8.1.2

SACAP Registration:

File a copy of your SACAP registration after this page:

The portfolio is the intellectual property of the RPL Office: Centre for Teaching and Learning: UFS

331

332

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP • CAA Validation Visit 2017 | RPL Portfolio Applications

8.1.3

Job Description:

File a copy of your current job description as Senior Architectural Technologist after this page: Notes on job description: 

Job description needs to be signed by your supervisor or division head and his name provided. Remember the job description need to be verified and the supervisor will be contacted.



Job description is a document that states the duties, responsibilities, tasks of the job. Items included in a job description include:



Major duties performed (Key performance areas)



Performance standards to achieve



Working conditions



To whom are reported?

The job specification is also included in the job description.  

Job specification is the minimum acceptable qualifications that a person should possess to perform the specific job. The job specification includes the educational requirements; experience, personality traits and physical abilities.

If you do not have an official job description, write one out and ask your manager to authenticate it by attaching a witness statement. If you cannot get your job description authenticated, still include it but it will need to be substantiated in other ways with additional evidence.

The portfolio is the intellectual property of the RPL Office: Centre for Teaching and Learning: UFS

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP â&#x20AC;˘ CAA Validation Visit 2017 | RPL Portfolio Applications

8.1.4

Description of the organisation employing you:

Write a short summary (one paragraph) about the organisation/company â&#x20AC;&#x201C; the size, architectural market, list of architectural work, structure etc. You may copy information from you website here.

The portfolio is the intellectual property of the RPL Office: Centre for Teaching and Learning: UFS

333

334

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP • CAA Validation Visit 2017 | RPL Portfolio Applications

8.1.5 Organogram and position in organisation

My Position in the Company Draw your organisational structure. Keep the following in mind:  Indicate your position in the organisational structure  if your company is big, include only your department.  If you are a line manger please indicate number of people you manage/supervise Name of Department: Manager’s name: title

Your position

Number of Subordinate(s)

The portfolio is the intellectual property of the RPL Office: Centre for Teaching and Learning: UFS

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP • CAA Validation Visit 2017 | RPL Portfolio Applications

INSTRUCTION: The letter needs to be printed on a letter head of the company and signed 8.1.6

Attestation letter from supervisor confirming the job description and work experience.

Dear Sir/Madam, Title, Initials, Surname ……….. (ID NO: …………….) has applied for the assessment and recognition of prior learning (RPL) to obtain admission into the Master’s Degree in Architecture at the UFS. The RPL candidate whom you know or have worked with in the past is asking you to write a letter on his or her behalf. Your letter is very important to this process because it provides evidence that the candidate does have the learning he or she claims to have. Please note the following guidelines to help you write this letter of attestation: 1.

Send your written evaluation of the candidate’s learning on your letterhead stationery, if possible. If you do not have a letterhead, be sure to include you address, daytime telephone number and e-mail address. We may contact you with questions or ask for further information.

Include a description of your present position, pertinent past experience, and formal education and training.

Mention the candidate by name and identify your relationship to the candidate (e.g., co-worker, supervisor, etc.). Explain the situation in which you have observed his or her work performance.

Describe the candidate’s specific skills, knowledge and competencies as you have observed them, in your own words.

Please remember that this letter is one of attestation rather than recommendation. We are more interested in verifying the candidate’s learning than in predicting future performance.

Your letter will be most helpful to the candidate and to us if it is an accurate evaluation of his or her learning. Thank you for your participation in the program. Please call us if you have any questions.

The portfolio is the intellectual property of the RPL Office: Centre for Teaching and Learning: UFS

335

336

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP â&#x20AC;˘ CAA Validation Visit 2017 | RPL Portfolio Applications

8.2. APPENDIX: III (File here) 8.2.1

Testimonials/ Reference letters

The portfolio is the intellectual property of the RPL Office: Centre for Teaching and Learning: UFS

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP â&#x20AC;˘ CAA Validation Visit 2017 | RPL Portfolio Applications

8.2.2

Attach proof of SACAP accredited CPD short courses and workshops completed or attended in the last 5 years

The portfolio is the intellectual property of the RPL Office: Centre for Teaching and Learning: UFS

337

338

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP • CAA Validation Visit 2017 | RPL Portfolio Applications

8.2.3

Declaration of intended attendance of Master’s Examination at the Department of Architecture, UFS in the year preceding intended study.

Dear Academic Head of Department, Department of Architecture

Candidate (Title, Initials, Surname) ………………………… (ID NO: ………..………….) commits to attending the masters examination of current master students on 29 October 2015. The attendance form part of the orientation within the MArch (Professional) course structure and assessment methods. The attendance is essential for the process of recognition of prior learning (RPL) to obtain admission into the Master’s Degree in Architecture at the UFS and provides preparation for the portfolio interview to be facilitated on 30 October 2015. Kind Regards, ……………………………………….. Signature Candidate: (Title, Initials, Surname)

The portfolio is the intellectual property of the RPL Office: Centre for Teaching and Learning: UFS

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP â&#x20AC;˘ CAA Validation Visit 2017 | RPL Portfolio Applications

8.3. APPENDIX IV EXAMPLE OF WORK: When choosing an example of completed architectural work, ensure that the architectural work demonstrates: a. Your ability to apply knowledge and skills by using a range of methods, procedures and practices to identify and analyse ecological complexities (environmental, cultural, historical, and social phenomena); e.g.: Typology: analysis and diagramming of client brief/needs; precedent and case studies of typology; flow diagram of accommodation; Topology: qualitative and quantitative site analysis; precedent and case studies of topology; a theoretical treatise on specific historical or contemporary buildings in the context; Morphology: theoretical knowledge and lived experience on phenomena influencing the form-giving, materiality and spatial arrangement of the building); b. Your problem solving skills and the ability to differentiate, synthesise, and critically reflect on human ecological complexities when addressing complex design and construction problems; Which (differentiating) ecological complexities inherent to the project influenced design and construction considerations, how was the complexities integrated with design and construction methods and processes to solve the design and construction problem (integration), and how successful was the complexities integrated (evaluation)?; c. Your skills of communicating design and construction information and ideas in wellpresented design, presentation and construction drawings using appropriate presentation and computer tools; (a series of concept drawings, 2-D and 3-D presentation techniques and modelling, working drawings and documentation drawings, CAD drawings); d. Your ethical responsibility towards the human ecological landscape. Reflect on how the design and construction solutions were responsible towards, and cared for the human ecological landscape. The preceding outcomes must be illustrated in the: 8.3.1 reflective summary on an example of a completed architectural work 8.3.2 evidence of the architectural work 8.3.3 witness letter The portfolio is the intellectual property of the RPL Office: Centre for Teaching and Learning: UFS

339

340

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP • CAA Validation Visit 2017 | RPL Portfolio Applications

8.3.1 REFLECTIVE SUMMARY ON AN EXAMPLE OF COMPLETED ARCHITECTURAL WORK Write a reflective summary of 2000 words on an example of a completed architectural work done in your current position or positions in the past 5 years that demonstrate best that you have gained practical experience in your field through your work involvement.

Candidates

must have participated in a leading capacity in the design and documentation of this architectural work. The architectural work should be:  a multi-storey building (incorporating the use of structural concrete or steel);  situated in a complex human ecological environment, where human ecological environment refers to the combined phenomena of man (individual – social), place (natural – man-made), time (historical to contemporary) and culture (homogenous to heterogeneous). The reflective summary should demonstrate your applied competence. Your applied competence is actually all your learning that is integrated. Applied competence could be well demonstrated in work experience. You use the knowledge and skills you have and apply it in a work context to solve problems and to reach your goals and objectives. Applied competence is important because you learn to handle new situations by applying and adapting your knowledge and skills to enhance your work performance.

The structure of the reflective summary should include the following: 

A brief description of the practice/situation you are/were involved in when designing and documenting the architectural work.



A brief description your role and function.



A summary the typological, topological, morphological, and structural challenges you encountered with the specific architectural work and the design and constructions solutions you reached. The following competencies should be included:

The portfolio is the intellectual property of the RPL Office: Centre for Teaching and Learning: UFS

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP • CAA Validation Visit 2017 | RPL Portfolio Applications

The following table may serve as a diagrammatical exploration of the Typological, Topological, Morphological and Structural information your reflective written summary should include.

Reflective Summary Typology

Who is the Client? Who is the unique user of the building? What type of Building?

Topology

Where is the project sited?

Morphology

How was the building’s formgiving determined?

Structure

What influenced structural practice?

Problem Statement

Specify identified complexities relating to:

Sources of Knowledge.

Comprehension and Application of knowledge

Synthesis

Reflection Evaluation

and

Summarise how the different sources of knowledge, and your comprehension and application thereof was synthesised with the design and construction solutions. Simple diagrams should be incorporated.

Evaluate the success and shortcomings of the architectural solutions. Reflect on the ethical responsibility (considering the social, historical, cultural and natural landscape) of the design and construction solutions.

sources. Research methods may include:

Client, user, and type of building.

 Client/user conversations;  Mapping of client/user phenomenon;  Precedent/Case studies of type of building, accommodation lists and flow diagrams. Historical, cultural,  Cognitive/quantitative natural, and/or context analysis; urban context.  Site mapping;  Precedent/Case studies. Form-giving  Theoretical & Historical elements of the reading relating to the building. form-giving elements.  Precedent/Case Studies of form-giving elements Structural  Precedent/Case studies of components, structural solutions structural design,  Technical report & details.  Council Submission

8.3.2 EVIDENCE OF THE COMPLETED ARCHITECTURAL WORK The evidence pages may include any annotated precedent/case studies, site analyses, drawings, presentations, models, documentation, photographs, etc. of the architectural work on which the reflective summary (8.3.1) was written.

8.3.3 WITNESS LETTER Provide a witness letter that confirms your contribution and role in the architectural work reflected on in 8.3.1. This witness letter will also attest to your competencies.

The portfolio is the intellectual property of the RPL Office: Centre for Teaching and Learning: UFS

341

342

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP • CAA Validation Visit 2017 | RPL Portfolio Applications

8.3.1 Reflective Summary Write a reflective summary of 2000 words on an example of completed architectural work done in your current position or positions in the past 5 years that demonstrate best that you have gained practical experience in your field through your work involvement.

Candidates must

have participated in a leading capacity in the design and documentation of this architectural work. The architectural work should be:  a multi-storey building (incorporating the use of structural concrete or steel);  situated in a complex human ecological environment, where human ecological environment refers to the combined phenomena of man (individual – social), place (natural – man-made), time (historical to contemporary) and culture (homogenous to heterogeneous).

The portfolio is the intellectual property of the RPL Office: Centre for Teaching and Learning: UFS

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP â&#x20AC;˘ CAA Validation Visit 2017 | RPL Portfolio Applications

8.3.2 EVIDENCE OF THE ARCHITECTURAL WORK The evidence pages may include any annotated precedent/case studies, site analyses, drawings, presentations, models, documentation, photographs, etc. of the architectural work on which the reflective summary (8.3.1) was written.

The portfolio is the intellectual property of the RPL Office: Centre for Teaching and Learning: UFS

343

344

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP • CAA Validation Visit 2017 | RPL Portfolio Applications

8.3.3 WITNESS LETTER Provide a witness letter that confirms your contribution and role in the creation of the evidence item. This witness letter will also attest to your competencies. WITNESS LETTER (use this format/letter) Title, initials, surname Address Contact telephone number In the capacity as ………………………………………………………… (give your job title) I am aware that the RPL candidate is using this work related document as evidence in a RPL process. I state with this letter that the document is the contribution/work of …………………………………… This document demonstrates the following knowledge and skills of the candidate: 

Knowledge of ……………..



Skills in performing ………………..

If the document you are attesting to has been generated as a team effort, please specify the responsibility the candidate took and the role that the candidate played in completing the task. The above mentioned candidate has assisted me in the following way:   

Signed: Title, initials, surname

The portfolio is the intellectual property of the RPL Office: Centre for Teaching and Learning: UFS

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP â&#x20AC;˘ CAA Validation Visit 2017 | RPL Portfolio Applications

8.4 APPENDIX IV EXAMPLE OF WORK: When choosing an example of completed architectural work, ensure that the architectural work demonstrates: e. Your ability to apply knowledge and skills by using a range of methods, procedures and practices to identify and analyse ecological complexities (environmental, cultural, historical, and social phenomena); e.g.: Typology: analysis and diagramming of client brief/needs; precedent and case studies of typology; flow diagram of accommodation; Topology: qualitative and quantitative site analysis; precedent and case studies of topology; a theoretical treatise on specific historical or contemporary buildings in the context; Morphology: theoretical knowledge and lived experience on phenomena influencing the form-giving, materiality and spatial arrangement of the building); f. Your problem solving skills and the ability to differentiate, synthesise, and critically reflect on human ecological complexities when addressing complex design and construction problems; Which (differentiating) ecological complexities inherent to the project influenced design and construction considerations, how was the complexities integrated with design and construction methods and processes to solve the design and construction problem (integration), and how successful was the complexities integrated (evaluation)?; g. Your skills of communicating design and construction information and ideas in wellpresented design, presentation and construction drawings using appropriate presentation and computer tools; (a series of concept drawings, 2-D and 3-D presentation techniques and modelling, working drawings and documentation drawings, CAD drawings); h. Your ethical responsibility towards the human ecological landscape. Reflect on how the design and construction solutions were responsible towards, and cared for the human ecological landscape. The preceding outcomes must be illustrated in the: 8.4.1 reflective summary on an example of a completed architectural work 8.4.2 evidence of the architectural work 8.4.3 witness letter The portfolio is the intellectual property of the RPL Office: Centre for Teaching and Learning: UFS

345

346

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP • CAA Validation Visit 2017 | RPL Portfolio Applications

8.4.1 REFLECTIVE SUMMARY ON AN EXAMPLE OF COMPLETED ARCHITECTURAL WORK Write a reflective summary of 2000 words on an example of a completed architectural work done in your current position or positions in the past 5 years that demonstrate best that you have gained practical experience in your field through your work involvement.

Candidates

must have participated in a leading capacity in the design and documentation of this architectural work. The architectural work should be: 

a residential building (an apartment building or residential complex comprising multiple units);

 situated in a complex human ecological environment, where human ecological environment refers to the combined phenomena of man (individual – social), place (natural – man-made), time (historical to contemporary) and culture (homogenous to heterogeneous). The reflective summary should demonstrate your applied competence. Your applied competence is actually all your learning that is integrated. Applied competence could be well demonstrated in work experience. You use the knowledge and skills you have and apply it in a work context to solve problems and to reach your goals and objectives. Applied competence is important because you learn to handle new situations by applying and adapting your knowledge and skills to enhance your work performance. The structure of the reflective summary should include the following: 

A brief description of the practice/situation you are/were involved in when designing and documenting the architectural work.



A brief description your role and function.



The following table may serve as a diagrammatical exploration of the Typological, Topological, Morphological and Structural information your reflective written summary should include. The portfolio is the intellectual property of the RPL Office: Centre for Teaching and Learning: UFS

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP • CAA Validation Visit 2017 | RPL Portfolio Applications

Reflective Summary Typology

Who is the Client? Who is the unique user of the building? What type of Building?

Topology

Where is the project sited?

Morphology

How was the building’s formgiving determined?

Structure

What influenced structural practice?

Problem Statement

Specify identified complexities relating to:

Sources of Knowledge.

Comprehension and Application of knowledge

Synthesis

Reflection Evaluation

and

Summarise how the different sources of knowledge, and your comprehension and application thereof was synthesised with the design and construction solutions. Simple diagrams should be incorporated.

sources. Research methods may include:

Client, user, and type of building.

8.4.2 EVIDENCE OF THE COMPLETED ARCHITECTURAL WORK The evidence pages may include any annotated precedent/case studies, site analyses, drawings, presentations, models, documentation, photographs, etc. of the architectural work on which the reflective summary (8.4.1) was written.

8.4.3 WITNESS LETTER Provide a witness letter that confirms your contribution and role in the architectural work reflected on in 8.4.1. This witness letter will also attest to your competencies.

The portfolio is the intellectual property of the RPL Office: Centre for Teaching and Learning: UFS

347

348

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP • CAA Validation Visit 2017 | RPL Portfolio Applications

8.4.1 Reflective Summary Write a reflective summary of 2000 words on an example of completed architectural work done in your current position or positions in the past 5 years that demonstrate best that you have gained practical experience in your field through your work involvement.

Candidates must

The portfolio is the intellectual property of the RPL Office: Centre for Teaching and Learning: UFS

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP â&#x20AC;˘ CAA Validation Visit 2017 | RPL Portfolio Applications

8.4.2 EVIDENCE OF THE ARCHITECTURAL WORK The evidence pages may include any annotated precedent/case studies, site analyses, drawings, presentations, models, documentation, photographs, etc. of the architectural work on which the reflective summary (8.4.1) was written.

The portfolio is the intellectual property of the RPL Office: Centre for Teaching and Learning: UFS

349

350

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP • CAA Validation Visit 2017 | RPL Portfolio Applications

8.4.3 WITNESS LETTER Provide a witness letter that confirms your contribution and role in the creation of the evidence item. This witness letter will also attest to your competencies. WITNESS LETTER (use this format/letter) Title, initials, surname Address Contact telephone number In the capacity as ………………………………………………………… (give your job title) I am aware that the RPL candidate is using this work related document as evidence in a RPL process. I state with this letter that the document is the contribution/work of …………………………………… This document demonstrates the following knowledge and skills of the candidate: 

Knowledge of ……………..



Skills in performing ………………..

Signed: Title, initials, surname

The portfolio is the intellectual property of the RPL Office: Centre for Teaching and Learning: UFS

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP â&#x20AC;˘ CAA Validation Visit 2017 | RPL Portfolio Applications

8.5 INTERVIEW Full Creative and Technical Portfolio presented during the Panel Interview: Summary A full Creative and Technical portfolio has to be submitted and presented at the Panel Interview. Any architectural work that best illustrate the outcomes specified may be included. The two architectural works identified, summarised, reflected on, and evidence provided for in Appendix IV: 8.3 and Appendix V: 8.4, should be included amongst other creative and technical work comprising the full Creative and Technical Portfolio. The portfolio must be presented in a 30 minute PowerPoint presentation. Panel Interview is scheduled for 30 October 2015 When preparing the Creative and Technical Portfolio, consider how the architectural work you included demonstrate the following applied competencies? a. Your ability to apply knowledge and skills by using a range of methods, procedures and practices to identify and analyse ecological complexities (environmental, cultural, historical, and social phenomena); e.g.: Typology: analysis and diagramming of client brief/needs; precedent and case studies of typology; flow diagram of accommodation; Topology: qualitative and quantitative site analysis; precedent and case studies of topology; a theoretical treatise on specific historical or contemporary buildings in the context; Morphology: theoretical knowledge and lived experience on phenomena influencing the form-giving, materiality and spatial arrangement of the building); b. Your problem solving skills and the ability to differentiate, synthesise, and critically reflect on human ecological complexities when addressing complex design and construction problems; The portfolio is the intellectual property of the RPL Office: Centre for Teaching and Learning: UFS

351

352

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP â&#x20AC;˘ CAA Validation Visit 2017 | RPL Portfolio Applications

Which (differentiating) ecological complexities inherent to the project influenced design and construction considerations, how was the complexities integrated with design and construction methods and processes to solve the design and construction problem (integration), and how successful was the complexities integrated (evaluation)?; c. Your skills of communicating design and construction information and ideas in wellpresented design, presentation and construction drawings using appropriate presentation and computer tools; (a series of concept drawings, 2-D and 3-D presentation techniques and modelling, working drawings and documentation drawings, CAD drawings); d. Your ethical responsibility towards the human ecological landscape. Reflect on how the design and construction solutions were responsible towards, and cared for the human ecological landscape).

For enquiries please contact: Jako Olivier Programme Director Department of Architecture, UFS. 051 401 2332 olivierji@ufs.ac.za

The portfolio is the intellectual property of the RPL Office: Centre for Teaching and Learning: UFS

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP â&#x20AC;¢ CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Practise Based PhD DArch HEQSF Application

PART 3 | Appendix J -

Practise Based PhD DArch HEQSF Application

353

354

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP • CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Practise Based PhD DArch HEQSF Application

ADDENDUM A Ins+tu+onal Curriculum Review & HEQSF Alignment

Programme )tle

Exis)ng Programme

Reviewed Programme

Doctor of Architecture

Abbreviated )tle

DArch

Faculty

Natural and Agricultural Sciences

Department/academic unit

Architecture

Programme coordinators

Mr Jakobus Olivier ; Elzmarie Oosthuizen

For administra+ve use only - Do not edit HEQSF Reference

4910

SAQA Iden4ﬁca4on

8727

DIRAP Teach-out date HEMIS Qualiﬁca4on Type

50 - Doctorate

HEMIS minimum total 4me

HEMIS minimum experien4al 4me

Total subsidy units

HEMIS Funding Level

4 Funding level 4 – Doctoral and equivalent

CESM codes see table with modules:

January 2014

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP • CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Practise Based PhD DArch HEQSF Application

1. PROGRAMME INFORMATION Mode of Delivery

Contact x Distance

Campus or sites where this qualiﬁcaAon is oﬀered

Bloemfontein

Programme Type

Professional

Non-professional

Teacher EducaAon Programme If this is a professional programme, please indicate N/A the professional body involved HEQSF QualiﬁcaAon Type

Higher cerAﬁcate

Advanced cerAﬁcate

Diploma

Advanced diploma

Bachelor’s degree (3 years)

Bachelor’s degree (4 years)

Postgraduate diploma Bachelor Honours degree Master’s degree

Doctoral degree x NQF Exit Level of the qualiﬁca)on

(e.g. Level 5,6,7,8,9 or 10)

3 !

355

356

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP • CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Practise Based PhD DArch HEQSF Application

Qualiﬁca)on Designa)on: (This only applies to

Art

degree programmes)

Commerce

EducaAon

Engineering

Law

Medicine

Science Social Science Other-AlternaAve Designator Alterna)ve designator (This only applies if Other-

Architecture – Exis)ng designator

A l te r n aA ve D e s i g n ato r wa s s e l e c te d a s QualificaAon DesignaAon above) CESM Classifica)on (e.g. EducaAon) (refers to DOE 02 Architecture and Building Environment CESM classificaAon) F i rs t Q u a l i fi e r : ( e . g . 0 7 0 3 – Ed u c a A o n N/A Management and Leadership) (refers to DOE CESM classificaAon) Second Qualifier (e.g. 070305 Higher EducaAon)

N/A

(refers to DOE CESM classiﬁcaAon) Total Number of Credits

360

Total number of research credits

360

(for postgraduate programmes only) Minimum duraAon for compleAon - Full Time

3 years

(number of years) Minimum duraAon for compleAon - Part Time

5 years

(number of years)

4 !

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP • CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Practise Based PhD DArch HEQSF Application

Admission requirements for this programme

Admission to the Doctor of Architecture is subject to the General Ins)tu)onal Rules a n d Re g u l a) o n s fo r A d va n c e d a n d Postgraduate Qualiﬁca)ons, as well as speciﬁc requirements for the Faculty of Natural and Agricultural Sciences. A prospec)ve candidate may apply for admission if the adhere to the following criteria: •

He/she is in possession of a relevant Master’s qualiﬁca)on

Specify the selecAon criteria for this programme

All Doctorate degrees are selec)on programmes, to allow for programme speciﬁc admission criteria and module prerequisites, and admission to these degrees is subject to approval of the Academic Departmental Head.

Provide details on how RecogniAon of Prior Recogni)on of prior Learning will be allowed Learning (RPL) will be applied to this qualiﬁcaAon.

according to ins)tu)onal policy where applicants do not qualify for the admission requirements. In special cases, admission will be considered by the Department of Architecture for students who graduated with former qualiﬁca)on types (pre-2009), providing the necessary prior learning is in place.

1. PROGRAMME DESIGN 1.1.Provide a ra)onale for this programme, taking into account the envisaged student intake and stakeholder needs. The aim of the Doctor of Architecture (DArch) is to provide an opportunity to for candidates who have already obtained a professionally orientated or structured Master’s qualifica)on (NQF 9) to enrol for this professionally orientated qualifica)on. The aim is to enroll students who are already prac)cing in the field of Architecture and provide them with the opportunity to a_ain advanced exper)se in the prac)ce and scholarly ac)vi)es of Architecture. This course-based doctorate 5 !

357

358

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP • CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Practise Based PhD DArch HEQSF Application

includes a 240 credit thesis, along with specialized modules to equip students with advanced levels of knowledge, exper)se and skills in rela)on to architectural ethics, design and research methods. 1.2.Purpose and outcomes of programme 1.2.1. Specify the programme purpose The purpose of the DArch is to equip current architectural professionals with advanced skills, exper)se and knowledge in the ﬁeld to further their professional careers or contribute to the body of knowledge. 1.2.2. List the intended learning outcomes of the programme The intended outcomes of the DArch include the following: •

Delivering work of outstanding merit and excellence in professional architectural services by a_aining an advanced level of knowledge, skills and exper)se related to processes, methods and procedures in the ﬁeld of architecture.

•

Providing leadership in the architectural profession in the advancement and development of knowledge.

•

Ini)a)ng research and applying advanced research methodology in a professional environment or scholarly ac)vi)es.

1.3.Discuss the integrated assessment strategy and clearly indicate the construc)ve alignment 1 of the programme design, teaching and learning strategy and assessment procedures. Indicate how the curriculum, learning outcomes and assessment methods are appropriate for the NQF level at which the qualifica)on is offered. Assessment approach Students are required to complete a 240-credit thesis rela)ng to the field of architecture as approved through the formal process of the UFS as s)pulated by the policy on Master’s and doctoral disserta)ons. In addi)on, the qualifica)on comprises 4 compulsory components, which will be assessed on a con)nuous basis. Students will be required to write and present extensive reports in the structured modules as part of the assessment. Assessment documents are moderated to ensure that they conform to the scope and context of the competency as s)pulated in the qualifica)on as well as constructed in such a way that the

1 Construc4ve alignment refers to the alignment of learning outcomes for a module, the student’s learning

ac4vi4es to achieve the set outcomes, and the assessment of the student’s learning to demonstrate the degree to which the outcomes have been achieved

6 !

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP • CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Practise Based PhD DArch HEQSF Application

Assessor assesses the outcomes applied, during the Learner's ac)vity performances, towards achieving an outcome. Exit level outcomes in rela4on to the NQF Exit level and purpose of the qualiﬁca4on Ager awarding the DArch graduate would have a_ained the following competencies: •

Apply and implement original and expert knowledge of the area of architecture and the built environment.

•

Iden)fy, deﬁne and provide solu)ons to complex problems, and advise authorita)vely on such problems.

•

Accurately assess and cri)cally evaluate literature and original contribu)ons (new knowledge) pertaining architectural study, prac)ce and processes

•

Conﬁdently deploy expert skills and methods, implemen)ng the newest technology in the area of study.

•

Lead and mo)vate others in the specialised area of research, working with and within a group towards deﬁned outcomes.

Year Level

Assessment purpose

Assessment methods

The purpose of the assessment Students are required to of the Doctor of Architecture is produce a 240-credit thesis to assess the student’s ability assessed in accordance with to demonstrate their expert the rules and regula)on knowledge in architectural s)pulated by the UFS. In prac)ce and research by addi)on, students have to providing evidence of built successfully complete the p r o j e c t s a n d a c a d e m i c c o m p u l s o r y m o d u l e s . scholarship.

Assessment in the modules will include extended reports and presenta)on

1.4.Describe the ar)cula)on possibili)es of this programme. A Doctoral Degree, including the Higher Doctorate is the highest qualiﬁca)on type awarded within HEQSF. 1.5.Provide the names of the modules/courses which cons)tute the programme. A_ached 7 !

359

360

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP • CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Practise Based PhD DArch HEQSF Application

1.6.Specify the rules of combina)on for the cons)tuent modules/courses and, where applicable, progression rules from one year to the next. The DArch comprises 5 modules. Students have to successfully complete all four course work components as well as the thesis to be awarded the degree. 1.7.Learning ac)vi)es Contact Distance

Types of learning ac)vi)es

Hours % Learning )me

yes

N/A

Direct contact Ame

600

20%

600

20%

(Lectures, face-to-face, limited interacAon or technology assisted tutorials, etc.) yes

N/A

Work-integrated Learning (WIL) (This secAon of will does not include workplace-based learning, but accounts for PracAcal experienAal learning, simulated learning, laboratory work, pracAcal sessions, etc.)

N/A

Work-integrated Learning (WIL)

N/A

(PracAcal workplace experience) Yes

N/A

Independent self-study of standard and/or speciﬁcally 2400

60%

prepared materials, texts and references n/a

N/A

Assessment

N/A

Other (Specify)

N/A

1.8.Work placement for experien)al learning N/A 1.9.Describe how the curriculum of this programme has been redesigned so that it aligns with the HEQSF. The amendments should clearly illustrate that the proposed curriculum does not differ from the original programme design by more than 50%. The principles underlying the curriculum review process include the following: 1. Fewer but broader basic qualifica)ons with specific fields of interest within the one broader qualifica)on e.g. Bachelor of Sciences as the broad qualifica)on with the 8 !

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP • CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Practise Based PhD DArch HEQSF Application

following fields of interest such as, biological sciences, physical and chemical sciences, computer and informa)cs sciences, geosciences, building sciences and agricultural sciences. 2. Well-structured programmes which will allow for meaningful focused and relevant interna)onal benchmarked qualifica)ons. 3. The promo)on of effec)ve communica)on, applica)on of knowledge within different context, cri)cal reasoning and deba)ng, scien)fic thinking, problem solving and independent researching skills and the delivering of competent graduates. 4. Limita)on on the possible elec)ves within a prescribed programme. 5. Programmes must provide a broad general base for postgraduate studies. 6. Each programme and module must be unique and differ substan)al from other programme and module to ensure the con)nuance of the programme. Programmes must on final year level differ with at least 64 credits form any other programme. 7. A general first year curriculum where it is made possible to make portability within the field of interest even in the second year. 8. Sustainable economic viability of programmes without neglec)ng the need for niche programme that is economically less sustainable 9. Certain developmental modules could be included to build founda)onal required knowledge and skills without including them as part of the credit bearing modules. 10. Removing credit overload and duplica)on of content, concepts and skills. Despite the challenge to apply all these principles sensibly, the focus of the redesign was rather to restructure the exi)ng classical scien)fic content knowledge, big concepts and required skills in such a manner that the changes to the exis)ng programmes and modules were less than 50%; but the programme and modules content were be_er aligned and benchmarked with the demands of the changed student body, the na)onal and interna)onal standards and requirements, and the latest developments and tendencies with the special fields of interest. The redesign included major re-packaging of exis)ng content and outcomes into new combina)ons and structures, the removal of duplica)on in content within modules and programmes and minor addi)on in terms of total new content. The focus was rather on the restructuring of classical concepts and skills to ensure alignment with the recent tendency within the different fields. 2. TEACHING, LEARNING AND ASSESSMENT STRATEGIES Please note that the following ques4ons should be answered for each mode of delivery employed in this programme, separately. !9

361

362

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP • CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Practise Based PhD DArch HEQSF Application

2.1.Explain the teaching methods and the materials development for the achievement of the stated outcomes of the qualifica)on. Provide for the mode of delivery (Contact and/or Distance). The DArch is a contact qualifica)on. The qualifica)on has a strong focus on independent work done by the students and contact sessions are limited to the regular and agreed upon sessions scheduled. The course-work components also rely on independent study and interac)on is limited to the block sessions offered. 2.2.Outline the internal and external modera)on procedures to ensure the quality of teaching and learning, and specifically the assessment of this programme. The Faculty of Natural and Agricultural Sciences’ policy prescribes that all test and examina)on papers must be internally moderated (before it is submi_ed to the examina)on department). The approved modera)on form must be completed and filed in the applicable module file. According to UFS policy, ten percent (10%) of all marked examina)on scripts must be internally moderated using the applicable standardised modera)on form. This form is also filed in the applicable module file and used for developmental and remedial purposes. The exam scripts will be kept for at least 3 years. External modera)on is also done in accordance with the procedures of the University of the Free State. Ten percent (10%) of all exam scripts (as well as all exam papers) will be externally moderated by appointed external moderators. Feedback on the internal and external modera)on of papers and scripts are also used for developmental purposes to improve the programme and to rec)fy possible deficiencies in the delivery of the programme, as well as to iden)fy at-risk situa)ons in the delivery at off-campus sites that might arise. Aligning with the UFS Policy on Master’s and Doctoral Studies, clear selec)on and appointment criteria for postgraduate supervisors/co-supervisors and assessors are determined by the Faculty of Natural and Agricultural Sciences. The selec)on criteria include relevant qualifica)ons, experience in the field of study, exper)se, peer recogni)on and a research track record. External supervisors and/or interdisciplinary supervision, where applicable, are involved when sufficient exper)se in the specific field of study does not exist. In rela)on to the assessment of the thesis, one assessor internal to the university (excluding the supervisor) is appointed. As per UFS policy, at least two assessors external to the university who have exper)se in the field will be appointed to evaluate the disserta)on. ! 10

UFS, Department of Architecture | SACAP • CAA Validation Visit 2017 | Practise Based PhD DArch HEQSF Application

3.3 Interna)onal Comparability The Doctor of Architecture is the highest qualiﬁca)on awarded to students na)onally and interna)onally. This professionally orientated doctorate. The development of this standard also involved the following: •

The SAQA Level Descriptors for NQF exit Level 10 were used to design this qualiﬁca)on standard. These Level Descriptors are interna)onally benchmarked criteria based upon published work of the Na)onal Quality Assurance bodies in England, Scotland, Northern Ireland, New Zealand, and Australia.

•

This qualifica)on employed the Qualifica)on Descriptors for the Doctoral qualifica)on, as outlined in the HEQSF.

! 11

363

Department of Architecture 205 Nelson Mandela Dr. Park West, Bloemfontein 9301 P.O. Box 339 Bloemfontein 9300 South Africa T: 051 401 2332 F: 051 401 7139 E: pretoriusy@ufs.ac.za www.ufs.ac.za/architecture