25 September 2006
David Niland, Professor Emeritus
Dear David,
First and foremost, we want to express the appreciation of faculty and alumni for your forty-plus years of invaluable service to the Architecture program at UC. As you know, much has changed in the School of Architecture and Interior Design over the past five years or more as a result of new faculty perspectives and curricular initiatives, reflecting their vision of current and future architecture practice. The current direction of the program(s) appears to be in conflict with your teaching philosophy and methods.
When Michaele, Gordon, and Jay met with you last Thursday, we explained that your involvement as an adjunct faculty member was no longer in the best interest of our current student body and faculty. You were unwilling to accept this and spent a great deal of time during that meeting railing against the program, as you have upon countless other occasions. it appears that you are determined tointerfere with the future functioning of the program.
It is unfortunate that we have gotten to this point, but you have left us no choice but to advise you that your further participation is only welcomed if and when specifically invited by a member of the faculty for scheduled design critiques attended by those faculty and only when the students have requested your participation. We trust that you will honor these conditions and hope that we are never forced to ask you to leave and/or be escorted out of the building. We also need to convert your office for use by full-time faculty; we will pack up your books and other materials and deliver them to your home within the next two weeks.
We sincerely regret having to take this step, but we believe it is necessary and best for all concerned.
As I said in the other thread (that has already pretty much exhausted this debate), I wasn't going to post the letter because I didn't think it was necessary to the overall discussion, not to mention it's not really everyone's business, if you ask me.
But there it is. And while the situation sucks in general, I take issue with the topic title. I think it is a good school, and is going through some transition time right now, but it will emerge a stronger school for it in the long run. It had better.....my diploma wasn't all for nothing!!
WOnderK : I agree with you that anonymously posting someone else's personal correspondence really isn't appropriate.
Also, I agree that the thread title is ridiculous. DAAP seems to garner scorn from people for all kinds of bizarre reasons, and the whole "my school is better than your school" attitude in these forums is tiring.
Schools change. You could even pull out that old saw about the only constant in colleges is change. A university is a living thing, both physically and programmatically. As a student, when I was trying to be activist about things, I had a hard time understanding that I was such a tiny blip in the life span of the school(s) I attended. Change is hard, usually, but necessary. This true results of this era of change at DAAP won't be known for years - that is why I think the thread title is bitter and short-sighted and sensationalist.
This is indicative of the larger problem. I am a huge advocate of Niland. But there is a series of unfortunate ethical choices leading up to this particular posting. Pride writes an unfortunate, probably hasty, letter. Niland copies the letter to long time friend Vamosi, perhaps with the intention of its release amongst the alumni, perhaps just venting with a colleague. Unfortunately, the letter-personal business-is quickly copied to hundreds of alumni. Wonder K, fortunately, exercises enough discretion to not post the actual letter.
I was told once never to say, and certainly never write, anything unless you are comfortable with it showing up in public, on the front page, but here it is. I do not know what is worse: the letter’s content, the copying of the letter, or its posting here. I certainly do not support the school’s action here, but posting this letter is also inappropriate and I believe hurts, rather, than supports Niland. It characteristic that basic error propagates itself. However, one indiscretion does not demand another.
Well, lb, it's clearly bitter. We in the school are aware that many of the alumni seem to be trying to create some kind of organized opposition to overthrow the school or something.
One needs to look at this letter as the last resort in a long process of trying to deal with a very-well respected man who, because of health and other reasons, was unable to fully participate in a curriculum that he disagrees with anyway. As I mentioned in the other thread, our architecture program has not lost the technical learning that Niland and his supporters so greatly love. It has merely been shifted away from the thesis year to accommodate a greater diversity of foci. DAAP is neither an incredibly technical school nor is it incredibly theoretical. It excells in finding a balance between the two that grounds students in the practical realities of practice while permitting individual exploration.
If I were still a DAAP student, I would request that Niland be in studio every Monday, Wednesday, and Friday to give me a crit. According to the letter, he is allowed at DAAP at the request of students.
mdler, I really don't think it would piss anyone off if he was requested frequently for crits. The problem, such as I understand it, was that he was wandering around the building insulting other professors.
archtopus....if that's what was happening, I really wish somebody would videotape it, because it just sounds funny!
Sorry, don't mean to make light of it. But I agree with switters. I also feel a little bit like a broken record.
And in all seriousness, if you are in senior studio and you have not yet had a critique from Niland, I would recommend it highly. Sometimes there's nothing like a good swift kick in the ass to get things accomplished.
Ladies and Gentlemen. Strategies, Tactics, and Techniques. Trying to finesse around the actual letter is disingenuous. The letter implies that Chatterjee and Simmons were in agreement with the Director (or Dean; not really sure who actually wrote the piece) which according to sources, they were not. Once the letter was sent via email to hundreds of people, it became public. Therefore it was posted in its full ugliness here to reveal how truly insecure the current administration really is. They are not interested in open debate or discussion which is the hallmark of Niland's approach to architecture. Their vindictive defense is as follows: Your wrong, we're top rated, get out of here! The UC DAAP administration takes every opportunity to trumpet that they are a "top rated" school. Unfortunately, most of you have bought into this myth.
Who are you? James Lipton? You've got a flair for the dramatic.....
And if by "buying into the myth" you mean "paid 6 years of tuition and got a quality education in the process", then sure, I bought into the myth. Many people did, mdler and archtopus and aeaa included, are you going to question our worth as designers now, too? Because I think mdler has some photoshop skills he'd like to show you.....
pof79, as I've said before, the changes in the curriculum were put in motion long before the current administration arrived. Hell, Gordon was happily the interim director between Daniel and Michaele.
I'm not sure exactly what you're gripes are with the curriculum now, but I'm willing to bet that my class has had more people study abroad, more co-ops abroad, more co-ops at big-name firms and more competition winners than any class before us. In the process, we have an incredible professionalism and diversity of theoretical interests. Worst/Best class ever? I couldn't say either. That depends on your criteria for evaluation.
Oh I get it. The "school as consumer product" argument which basically supports the rating and marketing system. A history lesson. UC DAAP got its reputation on three component parts: first year design, CO-OP, and Niland's sixth year (senior project + philosophies of architecture). The Moholy/Albers inspired first year was dismantled by 1976. Peterson was tossed out in a similar fashion to Niland, so this isn't new. CO-OP is now watered down from 8 quarters to 6 quarters (if you go the full 4 + 2). And the final leg of the stool, Niland's 6th year was finally phased out. Anyone who had a strong voice in that school was either tossed or left. The current administration, faculty and students are riding on this three-legged reputation. The ride ended on Sept. 25th 2006.
pof79, number 1: who are you? I like your tone though, however tastless it was to post the letter that everyone was talking about, have you yet met with Niland to discus design? Archtopus I never recall Niland wandering around DAAP when I worked with him at DAAP last year. And is AIAS still the biggest joke on campus or is that one of your first objectives of change as president?
really? they just released an album!?!? which I believe was their take on a john lennon album - one he did when he went on hiatus from yoko.....the name is escaping me though.
Nov 28, 06 4:03 pm ·
·
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.
Why DAAP Architecture isn't a top school
25 September 2006
David Niland, Professor Emeritus
Dear David,
First and foremost, we want to express the appreciation of faculty and alumni for your forty-plus years of invaluable service to the Architecture program at UC. As you know, much has changed in the School of Architecture and Interior Design over the past five years or more as a result of new faculty perspectives and curricular initiatives, reflecting their vision of current and future architecture practice. The current direction of the program(s) appears to be in conflict with your teaching philosophy and methods.
When Michaele, Gordon, and Jay met with you last Thursday, we explained that your involvement as an adjunct faculty member was no longer in the best interest of our current student body and faculty. You were unwilling to accept this and spent a great deal of time during that meeting railing against the program, as you have upon countless other occasions. it appears that you are determined tointerfere with the future functioning of the program.
It is unfortunate that we have gotten to this point, but you have left us no choice but to advise you that your further participation is only welcomed if and when specifically invited by a member of the faculty for scheduled design critiques attended by those faculty and only when the students have requested your participation. We trust that you will honor these conditions and hope that we are never forced to ask you to leave and/or be escorted out of the building. We also need to convert your office for use by full-time faculty; we will pack up your books and other materials and deliver them to your home within the next two weeks.
We sincerely regret having to take this step, but we believe it is necessary and best for all concerned.
With best regards,
Michaele Pride, AIA, NOMA
School Director
Judith Smith Koroscik, PhD
Dean
Ouch!
If you can't beat 'em, get fired.
Well that's a kick in the pants.
40+ Years?
http://www.archinect.com/forum/threads.php?id=47458_0_42_0_C
Well then.
As I said in the other thread (that has already pretty much exhausted this debate), I wasn't going to post the letter because I didn't think it was necessary to the overall discussion, not to mention it's not really everyone's business, if you ask me.
But there it is. And while the situation sucks in general, I take issue with the topic title. I think it is a good school, and is going through some transition time right now, but it will emerge a stronger school for it in the long run. It had better.....my diploma wasn't all for nothing!!
does anybody need a lot extrusion?
WOnderK : I agree with you that anonymously posting someone else's personal correspondence really isn't appropriate.
Also, I agree that the thread title is ridiculous. DAAP seems to garner scorn from people for all kinds of bizarre reasons, and the whole "my school is better than your school" attitude in these forums is tiring.
Schools change. You could even pull out that old saw about the only constant in colleges is change. A university is a living thing, both physically and programmatically. As a student, when I was trying to be activist about things, I had a hard time understanding that I was such a tiny blip in the life span of the school(s) I attended. Change is hard, usually, but necessary. This true results of this era of change at DAAP won't be known for years - that is why I think the thread title is bitter and short-sighted and sensationalist.
This is indicative of the larger problem. I am a huge advocate of Niland. But there is a series of unfortunate ethical choices leading up to this particular posting. Pride writes an unfortunate, probably hasty, letter. Niland copies the letter to long time friend Vamosi, perhaps with the intention of its release amongst the alumni, perhaps just venting with a colleague. Unfortunately, the letter-personal business-is quickly copied to hundreds of alumni. Wonder K, fortunately, exercises enough discretion to not post the actual letter.
I was told once never to say, and certainly never write, anything unless you are comfortable with it showing up in public, on the front page, but here it is. I do not know what is worse: the letter’s content, the copying of the letter, or its posting here. I certainly do not support the school’s action here, but posting this letter is also inappropriate and I believe hurts, rather, than supports Niland. It characteristic that basic error propagates itself. However, one indiscretion does not demand another.
Well, lb, it's clearly bitter. We in the school are aware that many of the alumni seem to be trying to create some kind of organized opposition to overthrow the school or something.
One needs to look at this letter as the last resort in a long process of trying to deal with a very-well respected man who, because of health and other reasons, was unable to fully participate in a curriculum that he disagrees with anyway. As I mentioned in the other thread, our architecture program has not lost the technical learning that Niland and his supporters so greatly love. It has merely been shifted away from the thesis year to accommodate a greater diversity of foci. DAAP is neither an incredibly technical school nor is it incredibly theoretical. It excells in finding a balance between the two that grounds students in the practical realities of practice while permitting individual exploration.
If I were still a DAAP student, I would request that Niland be in studio every Monday, Wednesday, and Friday to give me a crit. According to the letter, he is allowed at DAAP at the request of students.
Might as well try to piss some people off...
mdler, I really don't think it would piss anyone off if he was requested frequently for crits. The problem, such as I understand it, was that he was wandering around the building insulting other professors.
archtopus....if that's what was happening, I really wish somebody would videotape it, because it just sounds funny!
Sorry, don't mean to make light of it. But I agree with switters. I also feel a little bit like a broken record.
And in all seriousness, if you are in senior studio and you have not yet had a critique from Niland, I would recommend it highly. Sometimes there's nothing like a good swift kick in the ass to get things accomplished.
Maybe he was setting "Deadwood" afire! aka other professors, who just were on the Architectural Cruise Ship Good Hope...
is Stedman still around?
Is he still KooKoo for FUBU?
mdler, did you ever sell your zumthor:works?
Ladies and Gentlemen. Strategies, Tactics, and Techniques. Trying to finesse around the actual letter is disingenuous. The letter implies that Chatterjee and Simmons were in agreement with the Director (or Dean; not really sure who actually wrote the piece) which according to sources, they were not. Once the letter was sent via email to hundreds of people, it became public. Therefore it was posted in its full ugliness here to reveal how truly insecure the current administration really is. They are not interested in open debate or discussion which is the hallmark of Niland's approach to architecture. Their vindictive defense is as follows: Your wrong, we're top rated, get out of here! The UC DAAP administration takes every opportunity to trumpet that they are a "top rated" school. Unfortunately, most of you have bought into this myth.
Who are you? James Lipton? You've got a flair for the dramatic.....
And if by "buying into the myth" you mean "paid 6 years of tuition and got a quality education in the process", then sure, I bought into the myth. Many people did, mdler and archtopus and aeaa included, are you going to question our worth as designers now, too? Because I think mdler has some photoshop skills he'd like to show you.....
pof79, as I've said before, the changes in the curriculum were put in motion long before the current administration arrived. Hell, Gordon was happily the interim director between Daniel and Michaele.
I'm not sure exactly what you're gripes are with the curriculum now, but I'm willing to bet that my class has had more people study abroad, more co-ops abroad, more co-ops at big-name firms and more competition winners than any class before us. In the process, we have an incredible professionalism and diversity of theoretical interests. Worst/Best class ever? I couldn't say either. That depends on your criteria for evaluation.
Oh I get it. The "school as consumer product" argument which basically supports the rating and marketing system. A history lesson. UC DAAP got its reputation on three component parts: first year design, CO-OP, and Niland's sixth year (senior project + philosophies of architecture). The Moholy/Albers inspired first year was dismantled by 1976. Peterson was tossed out in a similar fashion to Niland, so this isn't new. CO-OP is now watered down from 8 quarters to 6 quarters (if you go the full 4 + 2). And the final leg of the stool, Niland's 6th year was finally phased out. Anyone who had a strong voice in that school was either tossed or left. The current administration, faculty and students are riding on this three-legged reputation. The ride ended on Sept. 25th 2006.
pof79, number 1: who are you? I like your tone though, however tastless it was to post the letter that everyone was talking about, have you yet met with Niland to discus design? Archtopus I never recall Niland wandering around DAAP when I worked with him at DAAP last year. And is AIAS still the biggest joke on campus or is that one of your first objectives of change as president?
OH
MY
GOD
its so hot in here, what with all the hot air blowing around....
do you people not have work, either real buildings or otherwise, to get on with?
pathetic, this thread, the other bullshit thread all of it- so terribly and fucking pathetic.
pof79, whoever you (think) you are, maybe you should do something besides bitch and wine like a lil sally and do something about Niland
GET
OVER
YOURSELF
whats up, aeaa????
Harris made it through a weekend without puking all over the place
i thought she had a head cold? or was it the boozing?
BTW, FUBU totally rocks......
switters
going on ebay soon..
$1000 reserve
cause MDLER graduated in 2003...
aeaa
new Walkmen album out tomorrow...
really? they just released an album!?!? which I believe was their take on a john lennon album - one he did when he went on hiatus from yoko.....the name is escaping me though.
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.