“The combination of the course offerings on a regular basis in subject-area courses, housing studios, design-build, as well as programs for both students and the primary faculty involved—that we feel is unique,” says UO architecture professor Michael Fifield. — Association of Collegiate Schools of Architecture, American Institute of Architecture
The University of Oregon Department of Architecture was recognized in January as among the finest in the country for its housing design education.
UO architecture faculty members Michael Fifield, Peter Keyes, and Rob Thallon, who spearhead the UO Housing Specialization Program, received the “Housing Design Education Award-Excellence in Housing Education Course or Activity.” The accolade is given jointly by Association of Collegiate Schools of Architecture (ACSA) and the American Institute of Architecture (AIA).
The three professors oversee a variety of subject-specific courses. Thallon teaches Design Build and Residential Building Construction courses, including Oregon BILDS (Building Integrated Livable Designs Sustainably); Keyes instructs a thesis studio and a Housing Design course; and Fifield, the program’s director, teaches housing design studios and subject-area courses including Housing Prototypes, Community Design, and Minimal Dwelling.
“Very few other—if any—housing programs address housing design education in a comprehensive manner,” says Fifield, whom ACSA recognized as a Distinguished Professor in 2015. “And there are very few other programs. Most schools offer housing studios and a course, but few have programs.”
The program’s two core courses—Housing Prototypes and Housing Design—provide overviews to common housing design issues. Community Design examines smart growth and alternatives to urban sprawl, while Minimal Design looks at how small-scale living situations can be conducive to improved energy efficiency, sustainability, affordability, and residential construction.
The program offers a two-term thesis studio on housing each year. Boot Camp Housing Studio gets its name for the intensity of the curriculum, which assigns numerous short projects, each on a different housing type.
“The combination of the course offerings on a regular basis in subject-area courses, housing studios, design-build, as well as programs for both students and the primary faculty involved—that we feel is unique,” says Fifield.
The program’s electives have included Affordable Housing, Site Planning for Cluster Housing, Real Estate Development, Post-Occupancy Evaluation, Intentional Communities, and various history of housing courses that focus on a specific architect or location.
The award application noted these benefits, among others, that the program provides:
• Placement after Graduation: Students are assisted in placement in offices that specialize in housing. Two students in the past ten years have gone on to become Rose Fellows and work in affordable housing.
• Research: Faculty members doing funded, and non-funded, research hire students in the housing program as research assistants.
• Funding and Studio Support: Nationally recognized firms have provided financial support for student and faculty travel, consultants for studios, and guest lecturers on housing.
• Visiting Faculty: Nationally known housing designers teach a studio and subject-area course one term during the year.
• Relationship to Local Constituencies: The program has a strong relationship with local municipalities and affordable housing agencies in regard to housing matters.
Fifield says he and the other professors hope to expand the housing program’s courses to feature Affordable Housing Policy, Residential Real Estate Development, and History of Housing. While the topics are included in the current curriculum, Fifield says, more specialized courses would provide a greater emphasis.
26 Comments
Let this become a model for architecture programs everywhere.
It's good they are offering such courses.
Is it accredited for licensure?
If not, why not?
No jack studs, no cripple studs, no double top plate, no eye protection, some with no hard hats, leaning step ladders, no construction fence and the APA rating goes on the inside with the on center marks on the out side... who's teaching this class?... an Architect?...... bwa-hahahahaha...
SneakyPete,
The UO architecture program is NAAB accredited so if it is part of the courses either as core degree requirements or as electives, it's fine. I would recommend it as courses that can be part of satisfying core major degree requirements.
It is really good for aspiring architects to have a little hands-on construction experience and seeing that side of things not only in the degree but also in the experience requirements.
Wurden Freo,
It's taught by an architect who has a little bit of construction experience but I would not say is necessarily a builder being his primary trade.
Some of those can be installed after the wall is tilted up into place.
The top header of the double headers can and is often installed after the wall is tilted into place as they are suppose to lap. They are not completed walls. Some of those things are not installed to lighten up the weight of the wall to be tilted by students who are not builders by trade and likely do not have the muscles.
As for construction fencing, you would not need them and are not usually involved unless there is heavy equipment being used. You may see an area taped off but you don't see that with light frame single family residential construction such as these one story residential structures.
As for not having the eye protection and all the OSHA required stuff, well.... and some other issues... okay. The type of ladder used in such leaning fashion is improper. There is a type of ladder that should be used that way but that type is not the proper ladder. It can do the job if you are stable but this is a single floor and chances of serious fall injury is minimal being only 3-4 feet above the ground.
I may not always wear a hard hat if the situation and risk is not there. It all depends. I've always have it with me. As far as eye protection, it depends on the situation and the risk. I usually wore some form of eye protection of some level but sometimes, it is mostly a pair of shades if the risks are low because the shades are for dealing with lighting conditions. Sometimes, they are basically the kind of eye gear you use on the shooting range with tinted or shaded lenses of some kind to deal with glaring light. Other times, it was basically goggles. It depends on what I am dealing with.
Then there is the ear protection. I wore anything from ear muffs designed for dampening the sound of gun fire and other loud noise to more basic ear plugs.
Then there is dust masks and full blown respirators.
It all depends on what you are dealing with.
It looks like the ones not necessarily wearing the hard hats for example are a couple of framers who work for a contractor and aren't concern about necessarily wearing the hard hat via risk assessment. Tilting the wall up isn't necessarily going to be something that an experienced builder / framer is going to be concerned about something falling on their head or electricity or anything. They will probably have their hard hat with them in the vehicle.
The lack of eye protection over the students eyes is probably minimal when you are nailing with a regular hammer without using a nail gun. If a nail gun was being used, eye protection would be highly advised.
OSHA can be a PITA and anal about these issues.
OSHA: http://playdosgamesonline.com/hard-hat-mack.html
the death of architecture.
@SneakyPete: This is a program within UO's MArch program, so yes, it's NAAB accredited.
Fifield and Keyes are both amazing educators. I didn't have any interaction with Rob Thallon, but I assume he deserves the recognition as much as the other two.
Thanks for the information.
I met all of them over my time there. I had a class with Fifield and I can certainly second what tduds said of Michael. As for Peter, I haven't directly taken any of his classes but I had overheard class sessions while sitting in hallways and other locations where I happened to be in a position to hear him teaching/instructing students and even overheard some of the studio sessions. He was pretty good.
I have also had overseen and heard even Rob Thallon's classes, too. As a matter of fact, I had helped a student taking one of his courses on construction framing and design. The student did well. I had help the student to see some of the construction/structural design flaws in their design and how to improve the structural design so it would functionally work.
I can vouch for their quality. Generally, a student will always not grasp or understand something regardless of how good the instructor or professor is. I don't hold the professor at fault and I just help a friend understand things better as they go. While, I can not and would not do the work for them, I try to take a little time to understand what the assignment is but ultimately the student will do the work. I provide a little of my background knowledge in structural design and building design knowledge, experience as well as my own experience in the construction and the building codes to help.
It was mostly off and on assistance to understand something. It also was interesting for me because it also kind of gave me an idea about the courses as well.
I'll say that these instructors are overall good. Are they perfect, nah. Who is?
wurdan, the single header member is let into the studs, old school style. The top plate is often added after the walls have been erected. Experienced frames will have better / different techniques. We don't block TJs the way they do here, we block the web solid between the flanges. We typically sheath after erecting and plumbing up the stud walls and we avoid OSB like the plague.
A ladder is more stable leaning against a properly braced wall than it is freestanding, especially on rough ground. I like that serious knee-length framing hammer (looks just like mine, it's all about leverage) and that there is only one air nailer visible.
My one serious complaint is vertical sheathing that doesn't lap the box joist or top plate. This is the kind of construction that necessitated over-the-top (literally and figuratively) strapping of every member.
Miles, yep.
General note to thread:
The reason it is added after walls are erected into place is the top plate laps the adjoining wall.
Rob's a chill dude.
I'm glad we're judging this entire curriculum from what was likely a staged photo op.
tduds,
I'm not really judging it at all. I do see a few minor issues but the student may have been told that they have the OSB panels wrong a little bit but even on a minor structure like what they are building, it is probably over kill in the first place even as is. Some of the other additional framing components in the walls could be added after the walls were erected and were not installed to lighten the wall. Tilting the walls isn't necessarily easy for students who probably haven't really done any real heavy lifting in their entire life.
It doesn't matter.
Appleseed,
I've briefly talked to Rob a few times while not long and only briefly, he had always had a cool and nice demeanor in my experience. If I had an opportunity to, I would have taken one of his classes but such is life.
That was more directed (jokingly) at wurdan, but don't let me stop you from adding a few hundred more words...
tduds:
LOL !
Okay. Probably don't need to but hey.
Isnt it the nature of an Architect to critique? Seriously, kudos to the school, I thought the joke about an architect not knowing how to build was to funny to pass up.
Like it or not, the safety violations I mention are just that and OSHA could fine the school from these photos alone.
wurdan freo,
No argument there. However, OSHA does pick their battles. They don't necessarily go everywhere.
OSHA regulations are what they are but OSHA doesn't have the resource to deal with every knick knack violation and would more than likely give a warning.
In my long, tenured career as a framer second only to larry haun, (3 months) we always built as much of the wall on the ground as possible, including lapping top plates, sheathing and building wrap. Air nailers were 75% of the fun with a solid 21 oz framing hammer still being used frequently. We lifted walls 4 times as long with three guys. Those were fun days.
Good for the school to give students this sort of opportunity. Of course, when I did it, I just took summers off and got paid* for it.
I'm sure this will get copy-pasted to death by Balkins but ... OSHA wouldn't apply here as these students are not employees. OSHA applies to employers with respect to their duty toward their employees' safety in the workplace.
*OSHA did apply in this case because I was an employee. Even then, hardhats were only worn when their was danger of falling objects/someone working above you. So unless we were working in a basement without the subfloor on, or until we started standing trusses, the hardhats stayed in the trailer.
I don't give fucks about means and methods, safety, that's another story.
b3ta, care to elaborate? On either of your two "contributions" to this discussion?
sure.
.
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.