Debate on the papers of Session 2 195
Darren Dean, Kingston, United Kingdom
Because you are working in a traditional environment, do you have to work with pre-
existing assessment criteria and trying to evolve those criteria into something that
is acceptable to what you are doing? It basically relates to the last question: how do
you judge? Do you have to take an existing body of criteria and change those, and
if so how are you doing that?
Robert Mantho, Glasgow, United Kingdom
Yes, we do that, but we also exploit the cracks. There is a bit of using the criteria
that we are given as a way of finding out some things about the criteria, if you see
what I mean. We are forced to use a set of established criteria, but those are evolv-
ing and changing.
Joanna Crotch, Glasgow, United Kingdom
We are lucky, I guess, in that the people who wrote the Learning Act wrote the criteria
so loosely that all we have to do is to interpret them in the way that we wish, which
does give us that freedom.
Robert Mantho, Glasgow, United Kingdom
But it is also important to note that as much as it is traditional and there is a kind
of resistance to change, there is also a real desire to change, but it is a desire that
is founded on not wanting to lose things that people hold dear. So there is a glacial
change; the learning outcomes are being redefined and will continue to be redefined
in a very openhearted kind of way, but sometimes with a big “Whoa”, if you know
what I mean.
Rivka Oxman, Haifa, Israel
In my opinion, what is happening is that, first of all, the students are fought over,
and what is interesting is that students are choosing their architects, choosing their
offices. They have a direction and they know who they want; they have this kind of
mission, and also of course they are accepted in the best schools to continue their
research. And that probably means something, you know. It is out of the local context
because it is referred to the global context. Frank Gehry believes in what he does. It
may not be right for us, but he believes in what he does.
Johannes Käferstein, Vaduz, Liechtenstein
I would like to ask an open question, which I will ask again – I think – at the end
of this conference. I do not think that there is time to answer it at the moment, but
I would just like to put it before you. In the two sessions we have had, yesterday
and today, there were excellent contributions and a lot of experimenting, and the
theme of this conference is experimenting with architectural design. I refer also to
the comment Nino and Per Olaf made yesterday, relating to changes in pedagogy and
advances in technology. I have seen a lot of experimentation with the tool itself, a
lot of experimentation with line and surface; but right now, and maybe someone will
respond to this later, I think in our experimentation with the meaning of the line
and the meaning of the surface, the construction, in my view it is possible also to