Cross-presentation
Victoria Ereskina
Architecture
BTech3
Activity Description: Provide a brief description of the activity
Upon completion of research and design, students are to comment on, grade, and occasionally present one another's' work.
Learning Goals: What do you aim to achieve with this activity?
In the field of architecture, engineering, building physics, and construction, the work done by someone in the office is always part of a set of other drawings, specifications, or other deliverables. These are presented to stakeholders and colleagues by just one or a small handful of project representatives that usually haven't completed all of the work on the page.
This is radically different from the studio and college environment when work presented is always done by the presenter or someone who is co-presenting shared work together.
The activity aims to point out that work bust speak for itself. Drawings are a form of communication. There are symbols, colors, line weights, dimensional convention, layout, sequence, orientation of views, progressive scale, tabulation, annotation, and information strategically omitted for the sake of clarity.
When these conventions aren't followed, and the person who prepared the work isn't there to clarify questions, it becomes obviously a struggle to communicate the design and tectonics of the scope of constructed work.
Presenters , in turn, learn to take responsibility for the terminology they wield to identify parts of a stair, steel assembly, curtain wall, rainscreen, or full building.
Timing: At what point in the lesson or semester do you use this activity? How much classroom time do you devote to it? How much out-of-class time is expected?
Between 15 and 40 minutes is enough for this. Presentations of work on Miro happened in the beginning of class. Longer presentations, up to 1 hour, would happen when the final iteration of the work would be due.
Logistics: What preparation is needed for this activity? What instructions do you give students? Is the activity low-stakes, high-stakes, or something else?
The activity is low-stakes because the work on the page speaks for itself and is the actual object graded in the end. But presenting it means that students must communicate their work to one another in advance, as they would have to do in their future careers in this industry, no matter the specialization.
Assessment: How do you assess this activity? What assessment measures do you use? Do you use a VALUE rubric? If not, how did you develop your rubric? Is your course part of the college-wide general education assessment initiative?
The activity is assessed based on both the work presented and the student presenting the work. Articulation and knowledge of the building components on the part of the presenter was analogous to the lineweights, drawing organization, clarity of geometry, and technical correctness of the work being presented.
Reflection: How well did this activity work in your classroom? Would you repeat it? Why or why not? What challenges did you encounter, and how did you address them? What, if anything, would you change? What did students seem to enjoy about the activity?
I would say that the challenge was shyness and punctuality. Students started seeing what they would want their classmates' work to look like for it to be clear and internalized the importance of those visual elements for their future work. I would repeat this assignment.
Additional Information: Please share any additional comments and further documentation of the activity – e.g. assignment instructions, rubrics, examples of student work, etc. These can be links to pages or posts on the OpenLab.
https://miro.com/app/board/uXjVGKBSa6I=/
Please share a helpful link to a pages or post on the OpenLab