Assignment 3: Future landscapes: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 51: | Line 51: | ||
*25% Communication of content: structure/logical flow of spoken language and slides; | *25% Communication of content: structure/logical flow of spoken language and slides; | ||
*25% Graphic quality: visual quality, organization, cohesiveness of layout, craftsmanship. | *25% Graphic quality: visual quality, organization, cohesiveness of layout, craftsmanship. | ||
== [[Future Landscapes Group 1|Group 1 - Clemson 1 and Wageningen]] == | == [[Future Landscapes Group 1|Group 1 - Clemson 1 and Wageningen]] == | ||
| Line 62: | Line 59: | ||
== [[Future Landscapes Group 6|Group 6 - Montevideo 3 and Nürtingen 2 (Gabriel, Nemanja + Beate)]] == | == [[Future Landscapes Group 6|Group 6 - Montevideo 3 and Nürtingen 2 (Gabriel, Nemanja + Beate)]] == | ||
== [[Future Landscapes Group 7|Group 7 - Nürtingen 3 (Adham, Giselle, Suranjana) and Tartu 1]] == | == [[Future Landscapes Group 7|Group 7 - Nürtingen 3 (Adham, Giselle, Suranjana) and Tartu 1]] == | ||
[[#toc|'''Back to top''']] | |||
Revision as of 09:12, 10 November 2010
Task
Assigned: Tuesday, Nov. 9
Due: Tuesday, Nov. 29
In this third assignment the focus is on the future of landscapes. You will discuss recent and upcoming approaches, problems, phenomena, policies, and goals. Based on this you will give answers to questions such as:
- What is a desirable landscape for the future?
- How does it look like?
- What is the contribution of the landscape architecture profession to get there?
In order to learn more about differences and similarities between the different participating countries concerning current issues and the future of landscapes, this assignment will be done in internationally mixed groups. There will be groups with students from
- Estonia + Germany
- Germany + USA
- Estonia + USA
- Uruguay + Germany
- Uruguay + USA
- Netherlands + Germany,
etc.
The groups will prepare a short presentation, addressing the above mentioned questions along one case study from each of the countries they represent.
Base your work on literature provided on the seminar WIKI amaong "Resources", given by your instructor and own search for literature and case studies.
Literature:
As one major reference for your reflection look at the following book:
- Sieverts, Thomas. 2003. Cities without cities. An interpretation of the Zwischenstadt. English language ed. London: Spon Press.
Specific literature, maybe related to the discussion in the individual countries, are availabe here.
Deliverables:
- 5-7 minutes presentation briefly introducing case studies and conclusions as input for the joint discussion; please send your presentation (as ppt.zip or pdf) to Ellen ellen.fetzer(at)hfwu.de for upload in Vitero by November 29.
Evaluation criteria:
- 50% Content: depth of analysis and reflection; clear communication of findings, creativity in the process of analysis, delivery of products assigned;
- 25% Communication of content: structure/logical flow of spoken language and slides;
- 25% Graphic quality: visual quality, organization, cohesiveness of layout, craftsmanship.