|
|
| PEM2007 | Environmental Design Project II | 3+4+0 | ECTS:9 | | Year / Semester | Fall Semester | | Level of Course | First Cycle | | Status | Compulsory | | Department | DEPARTMENT of LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE | | Prerequisites and co-requisites | PEM1002-Environmental Design Project I must have been passed | | Mode of Delivery | Face to face, Group study, Practical | | Contact Hours | 14 weeks - 3 hours of lectures and 4 hours of practicals per week | | Lecturer | -- | | Co-Lecturer | Prof. Dr. Cengiz Acar, Doç. Dr. Arzu Kalın, Yrd. Doç. Dr. Tuğba Düzenli, Yrd. Doç. Dr. Emrah Yalçınalp, Yrd. Doç. Dr. Müberra Pulatkan, Yrd. Doç. Dr. Nilgün Güneroğlu, Yrd.Doç.Dr.Ertan Düzgüneş | | Language of instruction | Turkish | | Professional practise ( internship ) | None | | | | The aim of the course: | | The course aims to teach students relationships of space organisation and created scenarios and to help them design an individual house environment considering outdoor activities of users (families) . |
| Learning Outcomes | CTPO | TOA | | Upon successful completion of the course, the students will be able to : | | | | LO - 1 : | produce design solutions about individual house environment depending on different kind of users. | 1 | 4 | | LO - 2 : | produce plan, section, siluette, detail solutions and models about the subject. | 1 | 5 | | LO - 3 : | express the functional and aesthetic approaches in other words their design approach for the house environment they designed. | 1 | 5 | | CTPO : Contribution to programme outcomes, TOA :Type of assessment (1: written exam, 2: Oral exam, 3: Homework assignment, 4: Laboratory exercise/exam, 5: Seminar / presentation, 6: Term paper), LO : Learning Outcome | | |
| Contents of the CourseLiterature study about the subject of project (individual house environment) , Composing an original scenario about the subject, Determining the needs of users depending on the subject, List of user needs, function diagram, need-affordances of project area analysis, Producing the first drafts of spatial organization in light of the previous evaluations and criticizing the produced draftsProposing-criticising draft process till the end of semester Delivering the plan, section, siluette, model representations of design proposal on which consensus was made. |
| |
| Course Syllabus | | Week | Subject | Related Notes / Files | | Week 1 | Deciding subject and study area. Model of land topography. | | | Week 2 | Analyzing study area, resource values, possibilities (opportunities) of the area depending on these, literature review about the subject. | | | Week 3 | Determining user needs in relation to subject, list of human needs. Function scheme, needs-possibilities analyze. | | | Week 4 | Developing a scenario in relation to subject, brain storming technique, and thinking with drawing technique. | | | Week 5 | Priorities of function scheme for the given area, drawing the scenario considering area analyzes and needs. Suggestion-criticism. | | | Week 6 | Suggesting designs, developing multiple choices, discussion and analyzing the suggested drawings. | | | Week 7 | Suggesting designs and analyzing the suggested drawings. | | | Week 8 | Mid-term exam | | | Week 9 | Discussing and choosing the proposed designs, discussing the chosen designs and the ways to improve them. | | | Week 10 | Theoretical expansion of the subject, preventing deviations from subject, discussing proposed designs. | | | Week 11 | Discussing proposed designs. Attaining a certain level at plan presentations. | | | Week 12 | Analyzing sections and siluettes, developing proposals, discussion and concluding, section and plan relationship. | | | Week 13 | Improving sections, discussion of details, checking plan-section and siluettes in relation to each other, feed back. | | | Week 14 | Checking the project as a whole; plans, sections, siluettes, details and model. | | | Week 15 | Preparing the final project, however, anyone who need can ask for correction. | | | Week 16 | End-of-term exam | | | |
| 1 | Booth, N., Hiss, J. E. 2001; Residential Landscape Architecture: Design Process For The Private Residence, Prentice Hall | | | 2 | Grant, W., 1993, From Concept to Form: In Landscape Design, Wiley | | | |
| 1 | Hannebaum, L. G., 2001; Landscape Design: A Practical Approach (5th edition), Prentice Hall | | | 2 | Reilly, A., Roth, S. A.,Skibinski, R., 1990; The Home Landscaper: 55 Professional Landscapes You Can Do, Home Planners, | | | 3 | Wilson,A. 2007; The Book of Plans for Small Gardens: More Than 140 Ready-made Schemes to Help You Transform Small Spaces, Mitchell Beazley | | | 4 | Wilson, A., 2008,The Book Of Garden Plans, Mitchell Beazley | | | |
| Method of Assessment | | Type of assessment | Week No | Date | Duration (hours) | Weight (%) | | End-of-term exam | 16 | 30/12/2017 | 200 | 100 | | |
| Student Work Load and its Distribution | | Type of work | Duration (hours pw) | No of weeks / Number of activity | Hours in total per term | | Yüz yüze eğitim | 6 | 14 | 84 | | Sınıf dışı çalışma | 7 | 14 | 98 | | Laboratuar çalışması | 0 | 0 | 0 | | Arasınav için hazırlık | 0 | 0 | 0 | | Arasınav | 0 | 0 | 0 | | Uygulama | 5 | 14 | 70 | | Klinik Uygulama | 0 | 0 | 0 | | Ödev | 0 | 0 | 0 | | Proje | 0 | 0 | 0 | | Kısa sınav | 0 | 0 | 0 | | Dönem sonu sınavı için hazırlık | 7 | 2 | 14 | | Dönem sonu sınavı | 4 | 1 | 4 | | Diğer 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | | Diğer 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | | Total work load | | | 270 |
|