Jobriel Junifen G.

Gauuan 4ar - 3 RMA: Thesis Reaction Paper

Culinary School After watching the thesis deliberation, I was somewhat in a state of disbelief. I was a bit shocked that the design of the structure was quite simple and in my opinion lacked the proper planning. I was not alone when it came to my observations, the jury which included Arch. Dela Cuesta, Arch. Malaga & Arch. Lee, were also a bit uneasy about the design. The structure was initially a rectangular structure that lacked many characteristics especially aesthetics. To further elaborate on what the jury was trying to imply, the design was "pangit". Not to take anything away from the student who was defending his thesis, but the design did lack a bit of creativity. The structure's flow was way- off. It's interiors had many dead end spaces. Many spaces that should have been utilized were not, the sizes of some rooms were very disproportionate to its functional and standard size. The judges made it clear that the design needed to be improved and thoroughly refined. One of the notable critique of one of the judges was aimed at the logic of space size and function of the grand atrium. The judges said that the grand atrium was disproportionately large in relation to the general function and overall design of the structure. Also the judges suggested that instead of using the majority of the first floor as receiving areas and function rooms, it would be beneficial, not only to the design aspect but also the business aspect, if there was a restaurant integrated in the first floor. Regarding the student's defence skills, it was not very good. The student just stood there absorbing all the criticism of the judges. He had a "poker face" the whole time, and was very emotionless during the defence. I felt somewhat of a sadist because I enjoyed it when the jurors would ask the student questions regarding standards and the student could not answer the questions properly. With regards to the way the jury handled the thesis, I was astonished and amazed at how intellectual they were. I could very well see that the jurors were in a mission to "seek and destroy" lackluster design projects and to only accept " Innovative, top of the line" thesis projects. Sadly the student failed his thesis deliberation. It was just so spine chilling to have witnessed a student fail in his thesis deliberation so bluntly and so cold. My reactions were empathy, but I took in mind that it was practically his fault that he failed, and after watching the deliberation, I felt very motivated in extensively doing my own thesis.