filmeu

Class Theory of Architecture 3.1

  • Presentation

    Presentation

    Teoria 3.1 (Theory of Architecture) belongs to the field of architectural theory and criticism, focusing on the period between the early 1960s and the present. The unit works on the formation of the architecture student's critical thinking: the capacity to read a theoretical text as an argument and to identify the presuppositions of a position. It is a course unit on the analysis of discourses and methods. It addresses the critical reading of primary sources, the methods of analysis of the built territory, particularly those developed for reading a real urban area, and the forms of critical discourse beyond the text - the architecture exhibition, documentary film and analytical drawing as instruments of argument.
  • Code

    Code

    ULP286-16158
  • Syllabus

    Syllabus

    Topic 1 - The crisis of the functional city and the revision of modern orthodoxy. Jane Jacobs (1961) Topic 2 - Looking at the ordinary: analytical method and the suspension of judgement. Venturi (1966); Venturi, Scott Brown and Izenour (1972) Topic 3 - Type, permanence and the city as construction in time. Rossi (1966) Topic 4 - The expansion of the disciplinary field. Hollein (1968); Banham (1965, 1969); architecture as infrastructure, servicing and norm. Topic 5 - Postmodernism: language, historiography and reception. Jencks (1977)
  • Objectives

    Objectives

    Identify and historically contextualise the main texts, authors, and critical positions produced between 1961 and 2000. Precisely define the operative concepts introduced by these texts - urban diversity, type, urban fact, permanence, duck and decorated shed, double coding, served space - and distinguish their respective fields of application. Critically read a primary source, situating it within the debate to which it responds. Translate a theoretical concept into an operative question applicable to a design decision. Construct and publicly defend a well-founded argument, responding to objections and revising one's position when the evidence warrants it. Work collaboratively to produce a shared outcome, negotiating common criteria for method and representation. Use sources ethically, transparently, and critically, including those generated by GenAI systems, while taking responsibility for the accuracy of the material presented.
  • Teaching methodologies

    Teaching methodologies

    All contact hours of this UC are devoted to theoretical teaching. The methodologies described are implemented through lectures, guided discussion, and seminar sessions. The exercises are carried out as autonomous student work within the allocated hours. a) Expository sessions conclude with a synthesis that translates the content into an operative question addressed to the ongoing work in the Design Studio CU. b) Study visits are coordinated across the different teaching activities. c) In the EG sessions, discussion will require each group to consider divergent positions, with assessment focusing on the quality of the argumentation and the ability to respond to objections. d) Study visits constitute expository sessions conducted outside the university premises, with commentary guided by the lecturer. e) Critical GenAI literacy. f) Moodle platform for the provision of primary texts, reading guides, briefs and assessment feedback, following an inverted classroom approach.
  • References

    References

    Bristol, K. G. (1991). The Pruitt-Igoe myth. Journal of Architectural Education, 44(3), 163-171. Hollein, H. (1968). Alles ist Architektur. Bau, 23(1/2). Jacobs, J. (1961). The death and life of great American cities. New York: Random House. [Ed. portuguesa: Morte e vida de grandes cidades. São Paulo: Martins Fontes.] Jencks, C. (1977). The language of post-modern architecture. London: Academy Editions. Rossi, A. (1966). L'architettura della città. Padova: Marsilio. [Ed. portuguesa: A arquitectura da cidade. Lisboa: Edições Cosmos.] Venturi, R. (1966). Complexity and contradiction in architecture. New York: The Museum of Modern Art. Venturi, R., Scott Brown, D., & Izenour, S. (1972). Learning from Las Vegas. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.  
  • Assessment

    Assessment

    A avaliação é contínua e distribuída, sem exame final. A aprovação exige classificação final igual ou superior a 10 valores e presença mínima nas sessões de apresentação e nas visitas de estudo, nos termos do regulamento em vigor.

    Descrição

    Tipo

    Ponderação

    F1 - Exercício individual "Jane Jacobs"

    Individual

    5%

    EG1 - Exercício de Grupo "Venturi"

    Grupo

    20%

    F2 - Exercício individual "Learning from..."

    Individual

    10%

    EI1 - Exercício Individual "Venturi"

    Individual

    20%

    F3 - Relatório da Visita 1 

    Individual

    5%

    F4 - Relatório da Visita 2  

    Individual

    5%

    EG2 - Exercício de Grupo "Pós-Modernismo"

    Grupo

    20%

    Caderno de UC

    Individual

    15%

    Total

     

    100%

     

    Critérios transversais de classificação. Rigor na leitura e no uso das fontes, incluindo verificação e correta referenciação; capacidade de construir e sustentar um argumento; qualidade e pertinência do material produzido em trabalho autónomo; e capacidade de responder à objeção em contexto de discussão pública.

    Acompanhamento. Atendimento semanal por marcação. Devolução comentada de todos os elementos de avaliação, com apresentação sumária dos resultados em aula na(s) semana(s) seguinte(s) à entrega.

    Trabalhos escritos. Todos os elementos escritos seguem referenciação usada na U. Lusófona e incluem declaração de utilização de IAGen.

SINGLE REGISTRATION
Lisboa 2020 Portugal 2020 Small financiado eu 2024 prr 2024 republica portuguesa 2024 Logo UE Financed Provedor do Estudante Livro de reclamaões Elogios entidade signataria