Unit Outline

Studios in the Master of Architecture develop capacities essential to the discipline and practice of architecture. With Integration Studio, Proposition Studio is one of two final-year Studio units that provide keystones to architectural learning at university. Proposition Studio culminates the design–research stream within the Master of Architecture degree, and requires students to apply synthesised design, technology, and theory knowledge learned at undergraduate level and in the first year of the course. It is the unit in which students formulate their own relation to the discipline of architecture in an applied Architecture proposition.

Proposition Studio sees students work under Studio Leaders to address a key Lead ranging from the practical (e.g., a specific site or typology) to the theoretical (e.g., a provocative text or contentious concept). Following their Leader’s methodological program, students individually develop a clear and justified position relative to the field of Architecture, and a coherent and intentional Architecture proposition. Proposition Studio culminates with each student presenting their Architecture and defending their position and proposition.

Intended Learning Outcomes

As per the Assessment and Results Policy 1.3, your results will reflect your achievement against specified learning outcomes.

On completion of this unit, you will be able to:


1.	Defend positions and propositions of Architecture by framing them within discursive contexts.
2.	Use intentional processes and methods to develop coherent and compelling Architecture.
3.	Design Architecture that is conceptually and materially meaningful.
4.	Convince domain experts of the validity of a proposition using verbal and visual presentation techniques.

Requisites


REQUISITE TYPE	REQUISITES
Pre-requisite	KDA408 KDA714 KDA715

Alterations as a result of student feedback

How will I be Assessed?

For more detailed assessment information please see MyLO.

Assessment schedule


ASSESSMENT TASK #	ASSESSMENT TASK NAME	DATE DUE	WEIGHT	LINKS TO INTENDED LEARNING OUTCOMES
Assessment Task 1:	AT2: Exposition	See the MyLO site for the due date	20 %	LO1, LO2, LO4
Assessment Task 2:	AT1: Architecture Concept	Refer to Assessment Description	20 %	LO1, LO2, LO3, LO4
Assessment Task 3:	AT3: Developed Architecture	Refer to Assessment Description	60 %	LO1, LO2, LO3, LO4

Assessment details

Assessment Task 1: AT2: Exposition

Task Description:

A presentation of your positioning in relation to the discipline of architecture. Your positioning should have a logical link to the Architecture Proposition being developed.
Due week 7–9.

Task Length:

A document composed of text and figures (images, diagrams, drawings) that carries the weight of a 2,500-word essay.

Due Date:

See the MyLO site for the due date

Weight:

20 %

CRITERION #

CRITERION

MEASURES INTENDED

LEARNING OUTCOME(S)


1	Justify a Proposition based on independent research into objects of a sub-field of Architecture.	LO1
2	Apply methods and processes that align with positions, decisions, and agendas underwriting the Proposition.	LO2
3	Compose a document that will convince a discipline-specific reader of the Proposition’s validity and significance.	LO4
4	Practise academic integrity in writing, creating and composing figures, and referencing content.	LO4

Assessment Task 2: AT1: Architecture Concept

Task Description:

A verbal and visual presentation of your Architectural Proposition, in conceptual and schematic terms. The presentation should establish the foundations of the Proposition.
Due week 5–7.

Task Length:

A 5–10-minute verbal presentation and 5–10-minute discussion with Unit staff and invited guests.

Due Date:

Refer to Assessment Description

Weight:

20 %

CRITERION #

CRITERION

MEASURES INTENDED

LEARNING OUTCOME(S)


1	Develop a Proposition with a position relative to the discipline of Architecture.	LO1
2	Use controlled research processes and methods to progress an Architecture Proposition.	LO2
3	Propose Architecture that is conceptually meaningful and present arguments of intellectual value.	LO3
4	Use drawings, models, and spoken and written words to communicate a schematic Architecture Proposition to a discipline-specific audience.	LO4

Assessment Task 3: AT3: Developed Architecture

Task Description:

The final assessment task comprises two parts, formative (working) and summative (final): the formative task is a verbal and visual presentation of your Architecture Proposition; the summative task is the submission of the visual / physical representations of your Architecture Proposition, finalised after advice from the Assessment Panel.
Formative part due week 14–16; summative part due week 15–17.

Task Length:

Formative outputs: 1 x A0 landscape panel and ≥1 physical model(s); and a verbal presentation (5–10 minutes) and viva voce (5–10 minutes). Summative outputs: 1 x A0 landscape panel and 1 physical model.

Due Date:

Refer to Assessment Description

Weight:

60 %

CRITERION #

CRITERION

MEASURES INTENDED

LEARNING OUTCOME(S)


1	Refine a Proposition based on independent research into objects of a sub-field of Architecture.	LO1
2	Use controlled research processes and methods to progress an Architecture project.	LO2
3	Propose Architecture that is materially meaningful and presents arguments of intellectual value	LO3
4	Use drawings, models, and spoken and written words to communicate a developed Architecture Proposition to a discipline-specific audience.	LO4

How your final result is determined

To pass this unit, you need to demonstrate your attainment of each of the Intended Learning Outcomes, achieve a final unit grade of 50% or greater, and pass any hurdle tasks.

Submission of assignments

Where practicable, assignments should be submitted to an assignment submission folder in MYLO. You must submit assignments by the due date or receive a penalty (unless an extension of time has been approved by the Unit Coordinator). Students submitting any assignment in hard copy, or because of a practicum finalisation, must attach a student cover sheet and signed declaration for the submission to be accepted for marking.

Academic integrity

Academic integrity is about acting responsibly, honestly, ethically, and collegially when using, producing, and communicating information with other students and staff members.

In written work, you must correctly reference the work of others to maintain academic integrity. To find out the referencing style for this unit, see the assessment information in the MyLO site, or contact your teaching staff. For more detail about Academic Integrity, see Important Guidelines & Support.

Requests for extensions

If you are unable to submit an assessment task by the due date, you should apply for an extension.

A request for an extension should first be discussed with your Unit Coordinator or teaching support team where possible. A request for an extension must be submitted by the assessment due date, except where you can provide evidence it was not possible to do so. Typically, an application for an extension will be supported by documentary evidence: however, where it is not possible for you to provide evidence please contact your Unit Coordinator.

The Unit Coordinator must notify you of the outcome of an extension request within 3 working days of receiving the request.

Late penalties

Assignments submitted after the deadline will receive a late penalty of 5% of the original available mark for each calendar day (or part day) that the assignment is late. Late submissions will not be accepted more than 10 calendar days after the due date, or after assignments have been returned to other students on a scheduled date, whichever occurs first. Further information on Late Penalties can be found on the Assessments and Results Procedure.

Review of results and appeals

You are entitled to ask for a review of the marking and grading of your assessment task if there is an irregularity in the marking standards or an error in the process for determining the outcome of an assessment. Details on how to request a review of a mark for an assignment are outlined in the Review and Appeal of Academic Decisions Procedure.