I was wondering...has anyone else had the various studio sections for any one studio in a semester present at the same time, or are reviews performed (normally) section-by-section?
The problem with the group dynamic at our school stems from lack of space. When we all get together to present, there is no location suitable to pin up and present work where all of the students, professors, outside critics (jurors) and other spectators can fit. It's not a matter of comfort; this is a matter of physical and practical logistics. Everyone can't be in the same physical space at the same time with the ability to hear or see the work being presented.
I think this problem is compounded at our school because we don't yet have dedicated studio space for the students. Work is everywhere, being carted in on the subway for reviews. We get small lockers for storage, but these can't hold models, or even 36" rolls of plotter paper.
There's also the matter of time...how can you expect to reasonably finish a jury of 40+ works in a matter of 3.5 hours? I wasn't surprised or upset that I couldn't present under these circumstances. I was just frustrated that anyone believes this format is acceptable or effective. I think it's a complete failure.
was this your school's first attempt at such a thing? Was there any particular reason why they felt the need to cram it into 3.5 hours?
At USC we did this twice a semester, and while it was a bit of a pain, because frankly sometimes it was boring and we were sleepy, they'd worked all of this stuff out. They made sure that there were no gallery shows running during midterms and finals, and we got those rooms to pin up in. Two studio sections (30 first year students or 20-24 upper year students) would review together, and we would either get one full day (sixish hours) to do it, or two studio days (4 hours a piece). Each person got a good-length critique by their professor, the other studio's professor, and whatever visitors they'd invited, usually five to seven people in total. There was time wasted with pinning up, pinning down, a break in the middle, but in the end everyone got a decent 15 to 20 minute review.
They also tried to do the whole year (125 first years, 60 fifth years, anything in between for the other years) at once a couple of times. Once they did this by having us all pin up on walls everywhere, then each professor choosing two students to have a real critique. Another time we all pinned up and were asked to stay close to our work for the first half hour, so that our studio instructors could have a few words if they wanted to talk about anything.
The 3.5 hours is the allotted time for a studio meeting, and these times are held pretty strict because other studio years have classes before and after.
I wish this was the first time this happened. It began in design 3 and 4 (last year). Some of us complained, both in person during the studios and in the class evaluation sheets at the end of the semester. Apparently those comments fell on deaf ears. We made comments on this at the beginning of the semester, too, but to no avail.
The strict format for this type of review is as follows: all students pin up for the start of class, then anywhere from one to 4 students present projects for about 5 minutes each. Then the critics respond. There is no time limit on critic responses. But the expectation is that all students should follow along in this small space to both the current presentations and critiques. We are not guaranteed a critique under this format.
The approach of this format (and subsequent adoption) doesn't strike me as an attempt; we aren't trying it out at this point. The school is moving towards this untenable format in the last 2-3 years of studio.
I suppose that it could work as you described, but we just don’t have the space. Is your exhibit space large? Also, it seems like we are trying to cram in more students (~40 or so) into less time. Sounds like they are trying to break this up over 2 days, but we all were required to pin up last time.
At UNCC we review about 20 students in 3.5 hours and even this takes serious discipline to do right. Profs sometimes announce that the student gets five minutes to present and then its the jurors' turn. Sometimes a student is assigned as time keeper. That's an organized crit. Other times, we are reviewing for five hours (with breaks). I admit, these are graduate school ratios, and we have enough space here for pin ups.
You're right, 40 or more crits in that time is impossible. They should break it up over multiple days -- that is not unheard of here.
actually, because we do this by pairing two studios to crit together, and there are six to ten studios per year, and five years, we take up EVERY decent sized space in the school at once. Crits are staggered so that first years (who crit more frequently for shorter projects) crit first and have more time for their portfolios, then second years, third, and fourth/fifth year studios actually crit during finals week. It's a big hairy production of a thing that's hard to pull off. Invariably there are a few studios that end up crit-ing until 9pm. We try the timekeeper thing sometimes, but it never works like it's supposed to.
Thanks for the feedback. How amenable were professors, outside jurors, and students to strict timekeeping? I'd like to suggest such a thing, because frankly it's often mentioned, but never practiced. I would even accept the role of the "heavy" - I wouldn't be afraid of politely but firmly enforcing the time (as I'm often pinned up and prepared to go for any crit from the get-go). Has the timekeeping approach been ignored and/or resented by anyone involved with the crit?
ignored... the timekeeper will say "Time!", and the instructor will then say, "Ok, last call for comments", at which point each juror feels the need to take an additional five minutes. [rolls eyes]
Feb 16, 07 12:01 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.
group design reviews in studio
I posted the problems with my last review here.
I was wondering...has anyone else had the various studio sections for any one studio in a semester present at the same time, or are reviews performed (normally) section-by-section?
The problem with the group dynamic at our school stems from lack of space. When we all get together to present, there is no location suitable to pin up and present work where all of the students, professors, outside critics (jurors) and other spectators can fit. It's not a matter of comfort; this is a matter of physical and practical logistics. Everyone can't be in the same physical space at the same time with the ability to hear or see the work being presented.
I think this problem is compounded at our school because we don't yet have dedicated studio space for the students. Work is everywhere, being carted in on the subway for reviews. We get small lockers for storage, but these can't hold models, or even 36" rolls of plotter paper.
There's also the matter of time...how can you expect to reasonably finish a jury of 40+ works in a matter of 3.5 hours? I wasn't surprised or upset that I couldn't present under these circumstances. I was just frustrated that anyone believes this format is acceptable or effective. I think it's a complete failure.
was this your school's first attempt at such a thing? Was there any particular reason why they felt the need to cram it into 3.5 hours?
At USC we did this twice a semester, and while it was a bit of a pain, because frankly sometimes it was boring and we were sleepy, they'd worked all of this stuff out. They made sure that there were no gallery shows running during midterms and finals, and we got those rooms to pin up in. Two studio sections (30 first year students or 20-24 upper year students) would review together, and we would either get one full day (sixish hours) to do it, or two studio days (4 hours a piece). Each person got a good-length critique by their professor, the other studio's professor, and whatever visitors they'd invited, usually five to seven people in total. There was time wasted with pinning up, pinning down, a break in the middle, but in the end everyone got a decent 15 to 20 minute review.
They also tried to do the whole year (125 first years, 60 fifth years, anything in between for the other years) at once a couple of times. Once they did this by having us all pin up on walls everywhere, then each professor choosing two students to have a real critique. Another time we all pinned up and were asked to stay close to our work for the first half hour, so that our studio instructors could have a few words if they wanted to talk about anything.
rationalist -
The 3.5 hours is the allotted time for a studio meeting, and these times are held pretty strict because other studio years have classes before and after.
I wish this was the first time this happened. It began in design 3 and 4 (last year). Some of us complained, both in person during the studios and in the class evaluation sheets at the end of the semester. Apparently those comments fell on deaf ears. We made comments on this at the beginning of the semester, too, but to no avail.
The strict format for this type of review is as follows: all students pin up for the start of class, then anywhere from one to 4 students present projects for about 5 minutes each. Then the critics respond. There is no time limit on critic responses. But the expectation is that all students should follow along in this small space to both the current presentations and critiques. We are not guaranteed a critique under this format.
The approach of this format (and subsequent adoption) doesn't strike me as an attempt; we aren't trying it out at this point. The school is moving towards this untenable format in the last 2-3 years of studio.
I suppose that it could work as you described, but we just don’t have the space. Is your exhibit space large? Also, it seems like we are trying to cram in more students (~40 or so) into less time. Sounds like they are trying to break this up over 2 days, but we all were required to pin up last time.
At UNCC we review about 20 students in 3.5 hours and even this takes serious discipline to do right. Profs sometimes announce that the student gets five minutes to present and then its the jurors' turn. Sometimes a student is assigned as time keeper. That's an organized crit. Other times, we are reviewing for five hours (with breaks). I admit, these are graduate school ratios, and we have enough space here for pin ups.
You're right, 40 or more crits in that time is impossible. They should break it up over multiple days -- that is not unheard of here.
actually, because we do this by pairing two studios to crit together, and there are six to ten studios per year, and five years, we take up EVERY decent sized space in the school at once. Crits are staggered so that first years (who crit more frequently for shorter projects) crit first and have more time for their portfolios, then second years, third, and fourth/fifth year studios actually crit during finals week. It's a big hairy production of a thing that's hard to pull off. Invariably there are a few studios that end up crit-ing until 9pm. We try the timekeeper thing sometimes, but it never works like it's supposed to.
Thanks for the feedback. How amenable were professors, outside jurors, and students to strict timekeeping? I'd like to suggest such a thing, because frankly it's often mentioned, but never practiced. I would even accept the role of the "heavy" - I wouldn't be afraid of politely but firmly enforcing the time (as I'm often pinned up and prepared to go for any crit from the get-go). Has the timekeeping approach been ignored and/or resented by anyone involved with the crit?
ignored... the timekeeper will say "Time!", and the instructor will then say, "Ok, last call for comments", at which point each juror feels the need to take an additional five minutes. [rolls eyes]
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.