Duration
108h Pr
Number of credits
| Bachelor in architecture | 10 crédits |
Lecturer
Martina Barcelloni Corte, Sophie Dawance, Daniel Delgoffe, Anne Dengis, Charles Goossens, Marijke Maes, Chloé Mercenier, Sebastien Ochej, David Peleman, Etienne Schillers, 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
The Q5 studio focuses on reading and developing a project for open space in the Meuse river basin, between the Hoyoux and Ourthe valleys.
Making the Earth Habitable: Late Industrialism
For more than 50 years, the economic territories of the Meuse basin have undergone profound changes. Since the advent of the industrial era, infrastructure and different forms of resource exploitation have progressively produced a highly fragmented and damaged landscape. These transformations are placing increasing pressure on the soils and waters that make up this territory, on the health of the ecosystems that sustain it, and on the energy required simply to inhabit it.
The open-space project provides an opportunity to rethink the spatial relationships between artificial and natural systems, in order to imagine strategies for regeneration and adaptation to climatic and societal changes.
Four themes - land, water, health and energy - form the starting points for the students' studies.
Learning outcomes of the learning unit
Skill 1: Understanding territorial issues (knowledge)
The readings, visits and lectures accompanying the studio provide an understanding of the issues related to the territory studied from a range of multidisciplinary perspectives. Field exploration, cartographic studies and historical research help to ground convictions in a specific place. These different perspectives will inform the project proposal, which must be based on a systemic approach that takes the whole living world into account.
Skill 2: Developing an architectural question (critical approach)
Here, the question is extended to open space. Based on a critical description of space and its issues at different scales, the exercise explores the process of problem formulation that supports the intentions of the design process. It involves describing, observing, taking a position, developing a hypothesis and proposing ways of transforming the problematic situation. The exercise also involves constructing an argument.
Skill 3: Developing a situated spatial response (relevance and spatial qualities)
At the scale of the fragment studied, the aim is to translate spatially the hypotheses formulated at the territorial scale. The project uses the tools of open-space and landscape design to compose a situated response that is attentive to the characteristics of the place, its uses and the systems that structure it.
Skill 4: Implementing a spatial response (communication, technical development and synthesis)
The aim is to use verbal, written and graphic languages as tools for design, structuring and testing ideas. Structural, technical and material resources and constraints are integrated into the design process in order to translate the hypotheses spatially and connect the different scales. Environmental, landscape, cultural and socio-political dimensions are integrated into 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 studio is structured like a research team. Students work in groups of four throughout the semester. The project strategy and overall composition are developed collectively. In the final phase of the studio, each student individually develops one part of the shared project in greater depth.
The studio method moves between scales. It begins with a territorial fragment that can be observed, walked through and described precisely. From this situated knowledge, the view gradually expands in order to identify the relationships that connect this fragment to broader territorial systems. Particular attention is paid to continuities, but also to breaks and forms of fragmentation affecting open space. Reading these conditions makes it possible to formulate a central issue and identify continuities to be preserved, strengthened, restored or regenerated. The project then returns to the fragment to test these hypotheses spatially and develop a composition.
The work is organised through a series of operations that contribute to a studio notebook:
- fieldwork, walking, observation and immersion;
- description and exploration of the territory through drawing, mapping and photography;
- model-making, from understanding the topography to spatial exploration and composition;
- construction of a reasoned argument, moving from description to problem formulation and design intentions across scales;
- development of a spatial proposal for open space through drawing and model-making;
- development of a studio notebook documenting the research, positions taken and graphic work produced throughout the semester.
Requirements for participation in the studio
Attendance is compulsory for studio sessions, field visits and the study trip.
Attendance will be recorded by the teaching team for each assigned group.
Each person must come to the studio with the required work.
The required work is specified in the course schedule. It may be modified at the end of each studio session or through the official course communication channels defined by the teaching team.
If this requirement is not met, the teaching team may refuse to provide feedback.
Conditions for access to the studio
Access to the studio is no longer permitted for students joining the course after 1 October 2026. This provision is notably justified by the progressive and collective nature of the studio work.
Procedures for group work
During the semester, if the teaching team identifies problems that are detrimental to the shared work or to the group's dynamics, it reserves the right to split the group.
Similarly, if the members of a group identify a problem that may affect the continuation of the collective work, they must inform the teaching team by email at least one week before an assessment. Any decision to split a group is made by the teaching team and confirmed in writing by email.
Procedure in case of absence
All absences must be justified.
In case of absence, it is necessary to:
- notify the designated teacher by email, copying the course coordinator responsible for recording absences;
- catch up before the next studio session and consult the weekly information provided by the teaching team through the official course channels (for example: email, eCampus, Miro, etc.);
- submit supporting documentation as soon as possible by email to the designated member of the teaching team.
In the case of justified and accepted absences, access to the final assessment for the semester is conditional on an attendance rate of 50%.
A prolonged justified absence will be discussed with the course coordinators and, where appropriate, the relevant services.
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:
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 collective and individual work produced during the semester forms the basis for presentations and assessment:
- Acquisition of knowledge relating to the complex issues of open space (with reference to the material provided during the semester in the form of texts, visits and lectures, and in relation to the case study). This process requires continuous engagement: regular contribution to teamwork, weekly attendance and active participation, as well as individual research necessary for the significant progress of the group's work.
- A well-constructed and reasoned critical approach; quality and complexity; structuring of the argument, problem formulation and hypothesis; ability to connect scales; understanding of the notion of continuity and of the proposed strategies.
- Progressive mastery of the tools of open-space design; ability to translate a strategy and intentions into spatial relationships and to develop a situated composition. Quality of the spatial proposal, its uses and the relationships established between the elements that make up the space. Relevance of the references used in developing the proposal.
- Ability to implement and communicate a spatial response by integrating dimensions, materials and their technical implementation. Progressive mastery of verbal, written and graphic languages and means of expression, as well as drawing and model-making as tools for designing, testing and communicating the project.
The assessment is organised through a series of jury reviews.
The weighting is as follows:
Assessed studio session, Description of the fragment: 5%
Jury I, Problem formulation at the territorial scale: 15%
Jury II, Strategic proposal and spatial composition (collective work): 40% / Individual development: 40%
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