Duration
108h Pr
Number of credits
| Bachelor in architecture | 10 crédits |
Lecturer
Martina Barcelloni Corte, Michaël Bianchi, Daniel Delgoffe, Anne Dengis, Marijke Maes, N..., Sebastien Ochej, David Peleman, Etienne Schillers, Guillaume Vanneste, Cédric Wehrle, Nicolas Willemet, Karel Wuytack, Alexis Zimmer
Coordinator
Language(s) of instruction
French language
Organisation and examination
Teaching in the first semester, review in January
Schedule
Units courses prerequisite and corequisite
Prerequisite or corequisite units are presented within each program
Learning unit contents
Introduction Workshop Q5 aims to develop the ability to integrate the complexity associated with the multiplicity of situations, actors and sometimes contradictory tensions that surround contemporary space. It explores open space as a place where architects have great power to create a more habitable world for all living beings.
Opposing the concept of systematic theory or doctrine, the project is defined in terms of strategy, becoming an open process in constant transformation. It does not aim to make a clean sweep, but to insert itself into reality, working from the bottom up rather than on top down, from and through its constraints, which are central to any project.
The Q5 workshop recognises the urgent need to consider environmental and societal issues as drivers of new practices, attitudes and concerns, far beyond the performance trajectory (the paradigm of sustainable architecture).
This attention to environments and ecosystems invites a systemic practice of architecture and the study of space that interacts with, and even thinks of itself as, an environment.
Theme
- describing on a large and small scale
- raising issues, putting forward hypotheses
- testing a hypothesis through the project
Deindustrialisation: late industrialism
For more than 50 years, the economic territories of the Meuse Valley have been undergoing profound changes. Since the advent of the industrial era, infrastructure and various methods of resource exploitation have gradually produced a highly fragmented and damaged landscape.
Continuing the work carried out by this workshop on the territory leading to the Netherlands and attempting to link up with the Meuse-Rhine Euroregional structure, this year's focus will be on the various upheavals taking place downstream from Liège. These are exerting increasing pressure on the soil and water that make up the region and on the ecosystems that nourish it.
The open space project is an opportunity to rethink the spatial relationship between artificial and natural rationalities, in order to imagine strategies for regeneration and adaptation to climate and societal change.
Open space is at the heart of this workshop.
Open spaces are territorial structures, sometimes weak or discreet, which must now be reimagined to respond to the challenges posed by the ongoing ecological, social and economic transition.
It is a question of observing, describing and rethinking space by reversing our habits and paying attention to the negative aspects of our built environments: starting from the unbuilt, we must focus on what structures, constitutes and could reinvent space - this includes buildings and infrastructure, but also ecological networks, the expression of the soil, topography, flows, the productive landscape, and the habits of living beings, both human and non-human.
These structures will be approached from the perspective of continuity.
The workshop aims to address the issue of continuity in the existing open space (artificial and natural) in the city and regional development project for the Meuse Valley.
Its precise description will enable us to identify potential continuities within this heritage, the systems and common denominators of the territory under study, and to consider their reinforcement, regeneration or transformation on the basis of project hypotheses. The main themes covered by the course will concern the development of natural ecosystems, the restructuring of cultural/natural landscapes, the adaptation of artificial/natural infrastructure, and the densification/regeneration of buildings to meet the challenges of transition.
A detailed knowledge of the territory will be developed during the semester, in particular through immersion, reading and representation of the territory, and drawing. Field visits and educational excursions outside the faculty are an integral part of the course.
Based on the positions taken by the students, the study of the main issues will lead to the formulation of a strong and well-founded problem statement. This will guide reflections for the future, open up avenues of research, and clarify the various arguments needed to develop a project.
A spatial translation of the hypotheses put forward, using a synthetic approach and linking the different scales, will be developed to propose and offer concrete configurations for the changes underway, questioning the conceptual and operational tools needed to imagine and design them.
Through an examination of the ecological issues related to open space at different scales, the workshop aims to raise students' awareness of contemporary societal challenges and help them to reflect on and argue for architectural approaches that are positively and actively engaged in their specific context.
Learning outcomes of the learning unit
Skill 1: Understanding issues related to the territory (knowledge)
The readings, visits and lectures accompanying the workshop enable participants to understand the issues related to the territory studied from the perspective of multidisciplinary expertise. Surveying the sites, cartographic studies and historical research help to anchor convictions in a place. These different points of view will be the catalyst for the project proposal, which must be based on a systemic approach that takes into account the entire living world.
Skill 2: Investigating an architectural issue (critical approach)
The issue here extends to that of open space. Based on a critical description of the space and its challenges at different scales, the exercise allows students to experiment with the problem-solving stage that underpins the intentions of the design process. It involves describing, observing, taking a position, developing a hypothesis and proposing ways to transform the problematic situation. The exercise also involves constructing an argument.
Skill 3: Developing a site-specific spatial response (relevance and spatial qualities)
At the site level, this involves proposing ways to transform a specific situation using open space planning tools. It involves composing using formal tools learned in the workshop. It is the detailed description of the specific site chosen by the student that dictates their needs and gives rise to a 'programme'.
Skill 4: Implementing a spatial response (communication, technical expertise and synthesis)
This involves appropriating verbal, written and graphic languages as tools for designing, structuring, verifying and challenging ideas. Integrating structural, technical and material resources and constraints in order to spatially translate hypotheses using a synthetic approach, linking different scales. Environmental, landscape, cultural and socio-political values are included in the reflection.
Prerequisite knowledge and skills
- Courses: Architecture workshops Q1, Q2, Q3 and Q4.
- Theoretical courses: Territory 1, Territory 2, and Territory 3.
Planned learning activities and teaching methods
The workshop is structured like a research team. The work is organized through a series of operations which feed the workshop notebook:
field work, immersion, educational trips,
description by drawing: cartography for the territory of the valley, by the detailed palimpsest plan for the sector, and finally, in three dimensions for the site project
construction of an argued discourse supported by drawing and theoretical references, ranging from description to intentions, across scales.
spatial project and composition on the scale of the site, in axonometry
Workshop notebook
Description :
The workshop notebook is a tool developed by the student to keep track of the various feedback received session after session. This tool can be used by the teacher at each session and/or at the time of the jury. The content of the notebook is not subject to evaluation but is part of the completeness of the documents expected throughout the semester.
Goals :
- Build in students attention to exchanges with teachers (note-taking habit, accountability). - Build a trace of the learning journey and the reflections carried out
- Give a personal and dynamic meaning to learning.
- Allow constructive exchanges with the teacher(s).
Content :
Each week, the documents produced are scanned or photographed and recorded in the workshop notebook. The notebook is the exchange interface between teachers and students.
- This notebook is created on computer support (Miro or In Design type), its layout is careful (see outline of the booklet in ecampus). It is formed in groups of 4 (with two separate chapters for phase 3 in pairs).
- The notebook records the diverse and varied research, graphic and written, accompanying the reflection, it is a witness to the commitment of the group.
- The notebook is also the support for texts, an opportunity to manipulate and tame the vocabulary of open space. Each week it collects comments and objectives stated by teachers to be achieved for the following week. At the same time, the reflection is gradually put into words in short paragraphs depending on what constitutes the theme of the research, the issues which emerge from it and which give rise to in-depth research (step 1-2), the problems and the evolution history opening up hypotheses for the future (step 2) to be tested through a spatial scenario (step 3).
For juries 2 and 3, the Description - Problematization/issues - Scenario approach is summarized in a one-page text integrated into the evaluation.
In jury 2, this summary text is produced in groups of 4.
In jury 3, it is individual.
- At the end of the course, the notebook includes the final presentation documents and is printed and bound in A5 format with dust jacket according to the instructions.
Student Obligations
Workshop presence
In the interest of learning, monitoring and attendance in the workshop is mandatory. Each teacher will take attendance for their assigned group of students.
Conditions in case of absence from the workshop
Any absence must be justified. In the event of absence, the student is required to:
- Notify the referring teacher by email with a copy to the course coordinator in charge of recording absences.
- Update yourself for the next workshop and consult the weekly information provided by teachers via the official course channels (example: email, eCampus, Miro, etc.).
- Submit proof as soon as possible, by email to the person in charge named within the supervisory team. Access to the final evaluation is conditional on an 80% attendance rate. In the event that the student exceeds a rate of 20% through unjustified absences, access to the final evaluation is refused. The student will receive a grade of "0". In the case of justified and admissible absences, access to the final evaluation of the semester is conditional on a rate of 50% attendance.
A prolonged justified absence will be the subject of an exchange between the student, the teachers and possibly the appropriate services.
Obligations within the workshop
Each student must go to the workshop with the expected work. The latter will be communicated at the end of each workshop session or via the official course channels predefined by the teachers (example: email, eCampus, Miro, etc.). If the student does not respect this condition, the exchange with the teacher(s) may be refused.
Mode of delivery (face to face, distance learning, hybrid learning)
Face-to-face course
Further information:
Support for students will be provided either by a group of teachers or by a single teacher, depending on the period of the academic calendar.
Course materials and recommended or required readings
Platform(s) used for course materials:
- eCampus
Further information:
Further information:
Information and other content will be accessible on eCampus
Required content: the study and use of certain content is mandatory. These will be specified when they are made available.
A syllabus details the topics and methodology.
Continuous assessment
Other : juries with documents to be produced - see details below
Further information:
The materials produced by the student (in groups, in pairs and individually) will be the basis of presentations which will be evaluated taking into account:
Acquisition of knowledge specific to the complex issues of open space (with reference to content delivered during the four-month period in the form of texts, visits, lectures, and in relation to the case study situation). This process requires ongoing commitment, i.e. regular contribution to teamwork, weekly attendance and proactivity, as well as personal research, which is necessary for the group work to progress significantly.
Critical stance, well-constructed and reasoned, quality and complexity, structure of discourse, problem identification and hypothesis, ability to make connections between scales, understanding of the concept of continuity and proposed strategies.
Gradual acquisition of mastery of project tools in open space, quality of spatial design, uses, and composition. Integration of environmental, technical, and material resources and constraints. Relevance of references used in the development of the work and their suitability to the subjects studied.
Acquisition of vocabulary and specific graphic skills related to open space, quality of manual and digital graphic expression methods used, both written and oral. Sufficient and appropriate use of drawings and models to express an opinion.
The evaluation is carried out in stages by a panel of judges.
The weighting is as follows:
Panel I - Sector: mid-October: 5%
Jury II - Territory: mid-November: 10%
Jury III - Site: mid-December:
- Part 4 student: 35% (booklet)
-
Part 2 student : 60% (spatial scenario in pairs before and after and booklet)
Work placement(s)
Organisational remarks and main changes to the course
Obligations of the student. for awards and juries
The student is required to appear on the day of the jury or submission with the expected and complete documents. In the event of non-delivery, the student must notify the coordinator(s) by email.
Teachers will notify any shortcomings in the expected documents during the evaluation. These deficiencies will influence the rating.
Modalities linked to the evaluation
The juries are constituted as follows:
- Members of the course management team
- Internal members (teachers at the Faculty)
- External members (teachers from other faculties, architects, resource people, etc.)
Jury minutes:
At the end of the end-of-term certification juries, teachers fill out a report. The latter attests:
- Names of the jury members
- The grade assigned to the student
- Evaluation criteria and their assessment
- Comments left by the jury which justify the rating (in case of failure only)
The student can come and consult the minutes during the "copy consultation" sessions organized on dates to be communicated later.
Conditions in case of absence for submissions and juries
In the case of a certification evaluation, an unjustified delay or absence of submission is penalized by the inadmissibility of the work and a rating of "0". A one-off justified absence does not exempt you from the work expected and required.
In the event of justified impossibility for the student to be present on the day and at the time of a certificate presentation, the protocol to be followed is as follows:
- Notify the lead teacher of their group as well as the course coordinator(s) by email before the date and time of submission
- Submit the work (in the state in which it is) by a third party, on the day, at the time and in the place scheduled. AND, transmit the documents in digital version (including scan and/or photos) via the MIRO platform before the date and time of submission.
- Submit proof for the day of absence, maximum the day after the test, to the administration department: administration.archi@uliege.be with a copy by email to the coordinator(s).
The student, who for justified reasons cannot appear before an intermediate or final jury, is bound by the same conditions set out above (with digital copy via the official course channels, email, eCampus if necessary ).
An unjustified delay or absence from the jury, intermediate or final, is penalized by non-admissibility of the work. The student will receive a rating of "0".
In the event that, despite an absence, the work has been submitted, the members of the jury will deliberate on the admissibility or otherwise of the documents, as well as any arrangements that they consider necessary for their examination. If admissible and on the scheduled date of the evaluation, the work will be evaluated on the basis of the documents as they stand without the presence of the student.
Contacts
adengis@uliege.be
sebastien.ochej@uliege.be
karel.wuytack@uliege.be