Working Out: Thinking While Building III

Call for Abstracts

 

The Design-Build Exchange (dbX) will be launching its North American portal soon. In addition to project case studies, the Exchange aims to include content on issues critical to the effective operation of a design-build studio. We are seeking short papers for the second of a peer-reviewed series concentrating on parameters for success in design-build education. For this session, we are collaborating with the DesignBuild Xchange (EU) platform, part of the network Design for the Common Good.

The Design-Build Exchange is interested in creating opportunities for easy sharing of information. Accepted papers will be presented online in a virtual conference format on Saturday, 8 September 2018. Instructors, students, and administrators from across North America and Europe are invited to tune in online to view and discuss presentations.

We are currently seeking papers on the following issue:

 

Issue 3: Learning from Failure

Chair: Ursula Hartig, Hochschule München, CoCoon Studio, DesignBuild Xchange (EU)

Realized academic Design-Build and Live Projects offer an array of intended and unintended tangible and intangible outcomes. For each stakeholder – students and faculty, users and clients, donors, and public and governmental organisations – the success of the outcome differs depending upon their role within and aspirations for the project. However, in publications, the projects are presented in a manner that parallels professional architecture, showcasing photographs of eagerly working students and a successful product. There is a lack of information on success and, even more importantly, failures of process, and the multiple outcomes beyond the publicised images of academic Design-Build projects. Without a discussion of both the successes and failures of a project in terms of socioeconomic context, stakeholders and actors’ expectations, and middle and long-term performance, the effects of a product and production can be neither fully demonstrated nor competently evaluated.

The aim of this conference is to support the development and operation of future Design-Build studios in recognizing the multiple and often diverging ways to measure outcomes, and to provide a framework for defining the goals for a project, as well as the parameters for success. For this conference, we are looking for papers that explore the issue of failure in relation to Design-Build in order to capture valuable data and experiences and develop Design-Build methodology further. Failure, in this context, is broadly defined. Possible topics include, but are not limited to:

  1. Case studies of projects or categories with negative outcomes that did not match expectations, so called “failures.”
  2. Accessible methods of evaluation
  3. Failure as a pedagogical tool
  4. Realized evaluations and related findings:
    1. Education and training: institutional framework, intra and extra-curricular structures, academic goals and transmitted competencies (professional- and soft-skills), etc.
    2. Building and technique: mid- and long-term performance, sustainability, cost-efficiency, etc.
    3. Local implementation: acceptance, appropriateness and maintenance, social, cultural, economic outcomes, etc.
    4. Management: Time-, and cost-frame, liabilities, funding, cooperation and networking, research-embedment, effectiveness, etc.
    5. Other…

 

“Hey boss, did you ever see a more splendiferous crash?“ Alexis Zorba in the film “Zorba the Greek“, 1964

 

This call forms part of a series of reports intended to examine the logistics that underpin the Design-Build studio. The Exchange anticipates future calls on logistical resources, roles and responsibilities, research status, and faculty professional practice.

 

Submission Guidelines and Process

Submissions must follow the following guidelines:

  • Submissions should include a title and abstract (maximum 300 words).
  • Any identifying information (author name, institution, etc.) should be removed from the submission to maintain an anonymous review process.
  • Abstracts must be written in English.
  • Abstracts may be submitted in Word or PDF format.

The deadline for submissions is 1 June 2018. Abstracts must be submitted through the ACSA online interface. Follow the steps below to begin your submission. The web interface will guide you though the steps to complete your submission.

All submissions will be reviewed carefully by at least two reviewers. Selection is based on clarity, contribution to the discussion outlined, and relevance to the session topic. All authors will be notified of the status of their paper. Once accepted, authors may be asked to complete a questionnaire to aid the editors in their commentary.

 

Contact

For questions concerning the conference please contact:

Ted Cavanagh

Co-founder, Design-Build Exchange

admin@db-x.org

 

For issues with submission via the web platform please consult:

Eric Wayne Ellis

Director of Operations and Programs

eellis@acsa-arch.org

(202) 785.2324

 


Call for Papers *CLOSED*

The Design-Build Exchange (dbX) will be launching its North American portal soon. In addition to project case studies, the Exchange aims to include content on issues critical to the effective operation of a design-build studio. We are seeking short papers for the first of a peer-reviewed series concentrating on parameters for success in design-build education.

The Design-Build Exchange is interested in creating opportunities for easy sharing of information. Accepted papers will be presented online in a virtual conference format on Saturday, 10 December 2016. Instructors, students, and administrators from across North America are invited to tune in online to view and discuss presentations. Following the conference, papers will be published online in short, edited volumes with editorial introductions.

We are currently seeking papers that address the following issues:

Issue 1: The Design-Build Studio and the Curriculum

A design-build studio is either elective or mandatory, a core studio or a thematic one. As design-build becomes more prevalent, there is increasing support from accrediting bodies and reciprocal pressure on the design-build studio to take on clear, and often additional, curricular requirements. For this call, the editors are interested in reports that address the effectiveness of different curricular strategies. This could be measured comparatively in three ways:

  1. Internal to your program, such as between two different studios or within the scope of a sequential design curriculum; or
  2. Before and after an inherited studio; or
  3. Before and after major curricular change.

Papers could also compare a studio run by the same faculty member at different universities. Effectiveness should be measured using teaching outcome parameters, etc., and the report should explain how these mechanisms clearly calibrate the effectiveness of the design-build studio.

This call forms part of a series of reports intended to aid the establishment of new design-build programs and the repositioning of existing programs. The editors anticipate future calls on the relationship between programs and accreditation, service learning, promotion and tenure, and the impact of design-build programming on the practices of our graduates.

Issue 2: The Design-Build Studio and the University

The relationship between the university and the design-build studio is fraught with complex discussions based on perceptions of risk and legal responsibility. For this call, the editors seek reports on the locus and effectiveness of different student safety regimes. Papers might analyse the significance of a safety protocol in establishing a working relationship with the university, or identify the source of the protocol and compare it with state law, construction, other university field studies, or the design studio. Does safety training occur in the design-build studio, the school, or elsewhere? Reports could also analyse the difficulties of working within overlapping jurisdictions and their resolution.

This call forms part of a series of reports intended to examine the logistics that underpin the design-build studio. The editors anticipate future calls on logistical resources, roles and responsibilities, research status, and faculty professional practice.

Submission Guidelines and Process

Authors may submit only one paper per topic. Papers should not have been previously published elsewhere. To allow for peer review, papers must also be rigorously formatted according to the following requirements:

  • Papers should be between 2000 and 3000 words in length.
  • The voice should be technical and objective, backed up by facts and diagrams (to a maximum of 10 diagrams, tables, or photographs) whenever possible. Images/diagrams should be embedded in the paper.
  • Identifying information (author name, institution, etc.) should be removed from the paper to maintain an anonymous review process.
  • Papers must be written in English.
  • Papers should be in Word or PDF format.

The submission deadline for complete papers is 24 October 2016. Papers must be submitted through the ACSA online interface. Follow the steps below to begin your submission. The web interface will guide you though the steps to complete your submission.

All submissions will be reviewed carefully by at least three reviewers. Selection is based on clarity, contribution to the discussion outlined, and relevance to the session topic. All authors will be notified of the status of their paper. Once accepted, authors may be asked to complete a questionnaire to aid the editors in their commentary.

 Contact

For questions concerning the conference please contact:

Ted Cavanagh

Co-founder, Design-Build Exchange

admin@db-x.org

 

For issues with submission via the web platform please consult:

Eric Wayne Ellis

Director of Operations and Programs

eellis@acsa-arch.org

(202) 785.2324