Escolar Documentos
Profissional Documentos
Cultura Documentos
1, 2
Synopsis Group/Individual 40% Reaction Paper Paper
(refer to MO)
Synopsis –Readings-Lecture:
1: Week 6: Theories of Urbanism
2: Week 6: Modern & Post Modern Theory
3: Week 7: Phenomenology: of Meaning and Places
4: Week 8: Critical Regionalism: Kenneth Frampton
Introduction
Subsequent to each thematic lecture, students are required to submit a synopsis in the form of a reaction
paper. Its aim is for the students to read a selected reading in relation to the theme that has been discussed in
class for the week and submit a reaction paper to the text. There will be a total to 4 synopses.
A reaction or response paper requires the writer to analyze a text, then develop commentary related to it. It
requires thoughtful reading, research and writing. It should identify the key points highlighted in the text
and then focus on your personal perspective on issues raised through the text. In addition to your
personal perspective, you should identify experiences or insights that have shaped your perspective.
SYNOPSIS
SYNOPSIS
Reminder
It is not a direct summary of the reader but a telling the
important details of the reader in your own words.
Writer may relate to other reader(s) and share related
experience(s) or opinion(s).
Assessment Components
1. Identification of key points from the reading
2. Use of appropriate architectural terminologies and
writing skills in the synopsis
3. Clarity in opinions and reactions
Grades Marks Key points (25%) Appropriateness of Clarity in Opinions and Logical Progression
Terminologies (25%) Reactions (25%) (25%)
D 40-49 Evidence of Some Evidence of Terminologies Weak Clarity in opinions Poor Articulation of
Understanding of Key however poorly communicated and reactions - logical expressions
points through not quite in discussing The Issues/ Supported with Lengthy ending with noticeable
acceptable explanation Concepts/Theories With explanation ambiguous statements
F 0-39 Insufficient Evidence of Insufficient Evidence of Improper opinions and Unable to Articulate /
Understanding of Key Terminologies in discussing the reactions. Not Matching illogical expressions.
points through weak Issues/ Concepts/Theories With the Issues/ Concepts/ Poorly written synopsis.
explanation Theories -Inadequate
Reasons
Project (Part 2): COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS ESSAY
Project Part 2:
Assessment Components
1.0 Introduction to project/ Site Study
1.1 Brief Introduction of the project 1. Critical analysis of architecture and urban forms in
1.2 Asian City (Case Study) relation to relevant architectural theories (Part 1)
1.3 Local City (Analysis)
2. Critical analysis of architecture and urban forms within its
2.0 Comparative Analysis social, cultural and intellectual context (Part 2)
2.1 Similarities
3. Structure, clarity and logical coherence of the arguments
2.2 Dissimilarities
presented (Part 2)
3.0 Conclusion 4. References and research skills (Part 2)
Take note of the following:
• Urban forms, Architecture in relation to relevant
architectural theories/
• Architectural and Urban form within its social and
cultural context.
• Nodes, Activity Centers and Contact Points
3.0 Conclusion
4.0 Referencing
• Publishing
• online reference
Learning
Assessments Type Marks Presentation Submission
outcomes
Project Part 2, requires students to write a comparative analysis essay based on findings from case study
(Part 1) and local site research (Studio). Students are to examine similarities and dissimilarities based on
the patterns of social activities, types of ‘contact points’. And the varying degrees of contact intensity
between the two cities.
A comparative analysis essay is a commonly used type of writing assignment where students are require to
critically analyze any two subjects, finding and pointing out their similarities and/or dissimilarities.
Students are expected to research for information from publications, internet and other relevant
sources. For local site, students are expected to conduct own site observation (Studio 5)
Key References:
1. “Life Between Buildings: Using Public Space”, Jahn Gehl, (1986)
2. http://writingcenter.fas.harvard.edu/pages/how-write-comparative-analysis
Assessment Scheme Project (Part 2)
1 2 3 4 5
No. CRITERIA
Fail Poor Satisfactory Good Excellent
Background/Intro No relationship Little Evidence of Identified theory Identified theory
Critical analysis of between theory relationships some which are which are
architecture & urban and analysis between theory relationships interrelated with clearly linked to
1 forms within its social, and analysis between theory analysis analysis
cultural and intellectual and analysis
context. (20%)
Comparative Essay+ Arrangement of Arrangement of Images and Images and Images and
Illustrated Diagram images and images and illustrations are illustrations are illustrations are
Comparative Analysis illustrations is illustrations is roughly arranged orderly arranged arranged well.
Use of diagrams, confusing. unclear. in a workable with annotations Clarity & with
illustrations, sketches order. annotations.
2 and images to aide
analysis. (50%) Comparison is Comparison is Comparison is Comparison is Comparison is
unclear. often unclear generally clear clear with clearly stated
with minimal minimal and justified.
ambiguity. improvements
Referencing & No evidence of Identified at Uses at least 3 Uses at least 4 Uses at least 5
Research Skills sources. Absence least 2 sources. sources. sources. Clear sources.
3 (30%) of investigation. Lack of Evidence of evidence of showed rigorous
evidence of investigation investigation investigation
investigation.