DOCSLIB.ORG

2013 Master of Architecture Program Report for NAAB Visit

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
2013 Master of Architecture Program Report for NAAB Visit Ball State University College of Architecture and Planning Department of Architecture ARCHITECTURE PROGRAM REPORT FOR SPRING 2013 NAAB VISIT FOR CONTINUING ACCREDITATION Program Type: Master of Architecture Option 1 (pre-professional degree + 46 graduate credits) Option 2 (non-pre-professional degree + 104 credits) Previous year of accreditation: 2007 Current term of accreditation: Six years Submitted to the National Architectural Accrediting Board (NAAB) on September 7, 2012 PART ONE (I): INSTITUTIONAL SUPPORT AND IMPROVEMENT+I.1. IDENTITY & SELF ASSESSMENT + I.1.1. History and Mission Architecture Program Benefits the University through Teaching, Scholarship, and Service 2 Leadership University Jo Ann M. Gora, PhD, President Ball State University (BSU) Contact: (765) 285-5555 / [email protected] Terry King, PhD, Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs Ball State University (BSU) Contact: (765) 285-1333 / [email protected] College Guillermo Vásquez de Velasco, PhD, Dean College of Architecture and Planning (CAP) Contact: (765) 285-5861 / [email protected] Department Mahesh Daas, LEED AP, DPACSA, Chair ACSA Distinguished Professor Department of Architecture (DoA) Contact: (765) 285-1904 / [email protected] Walter T. Grondzik, PE, Associate Chair Department of Architecture (DoA) Contact: (765) 285-2030 / [email protected] Joshua R. Coggeshall, RA, M.Arch Program Director Department of Architecture (DoA) Contact: (765) 285-2028 / [email protected] Individual submitting the architecture program report: Mahesh Daas Name of individual to whom questions should be Directed: Mahesh Daas Ball State University Architecture Program Report. Submitted to NAAB, September 7, 2012 PART ONE (I): INSTITUTIONAL SUPPORT AND IMPROVEMENT / I.1. IDENTITY & SELF ASSESSMENT / I.1.1. History and Mission 3 Table of Contents PART ONE (I): INSTITUTIONAL SUPPORT AND IMPROVEMENT .................................................................... 5 I.1. IDENTITY & SELF ASSESSMENT ...................................................................................................... 5 I.1.1. History and Mission ................................................................................................... 5 I.1.2. Learning Culture and Social Equity .......................................................................... 13 I.1.3. Response to the Five Perspectives........................................................................... 17 I.1.4. Long-Range Planning ................................................................................................ 31 I.1.5. Self-Assessment Procedures .................................................................................... 33 I.2. RESOURCES ................................................................................................................................. 35 I.2.1. Human Resources & Human Resource Development ............................................. 35 I.2.2. Administrative Structure and Governance .............................................................. 55 I.2.3. Physical Resources ................................................................................................... 62 I.2.4. Financial Resources .................................................................................................. 88 I.2.5. Information Resources ............................................................................................. 97 I.3. INSTITUTIONAL AND PROGRAM CHARACTERISTICS ................................................................. 105 I.3.1. Statistical Reports .................................................................................................. 105 I.3.2. Annual Reports ...................................................................................................... 109 I.3.3. Faculty Credentials ................................................................................................. 110 I.4. POLICY REVIEW ......................................................................................................................... 118 I.4.1. Policy Review ......................................................................................................... 118 PART TWO (II). EDUCATIONAL OUTCOMES AND CURRICULUM ............................................................... 119 II.1. STUDENT PERFORMANCE – EDUCATIONAL REALMS & STUDENT PERFORMANCE CRITERIA . 119 II.1.1. Student Performance Criteria ............................................................................... 119 II.2. CURRICULAR FRAMEWORK ...................................................................................................... 122 II.2.1. Regional Accreditation .......................................................................................... 122 II.2.2. Professional Degrees and Curriculum ................................................................... 123 II.2.3. Curriculum Review and Development .................................................................. 129 II.3. EVALUATION OF PREPARATORY/PRE-PROFESSIONAL EDUCATION ......................................... 129 II.4. PUBLIC INFORMATION ............................................................................................................. 131 II.4.1. Statement on NAAB-Accredited Degrees ............................................................. 131 II.4.2. Access to NAAB Conditions and Procedures......................................................... 135 II.4.3. Access to Career Development Information......................................................... 135 Ball State University Architecture Program Report. Submitted to NAAB, September 7, 2012 PART ONE (I): INSTITUTIONAL SUPPORT AND IMPROVEMENT / I.1. IDENTITY & SELF ASSESSMENT / I.1.1. History and Mission 4 II.4.4. Public Access to APRs and VTRs ............................................................................ 135 II.4.5. ARE Pass Rates ...................................................................................................... 135 PART THREE (III). Progress Since Last Site Visit ......................................................................................... 136 Summary of Responses to the Team Findings [2007] ..................................................................... 136 PART FOUR (IV): SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION .................................................................................... 143 Courses ............................................................................................................................................ 143 Course Descriptions ........................................................................................................ 143 Faculty ............................................................................................................................................. 200 Faculty Resumes ............................................................................................................. 200 Visiting Team Report 2007 (VTR) From The Previous Visit ............................................................. 232 Catalog ............................................................................................................................................ 232 Responses to the Offsite Program Questionnaire .......................................................................... 232 Note: Because of the multidimensional nature of many of our activities, certain events are mentioned more than once under different headings. Effort has been made to reduce redundancies without limiting the potential non-lineal review of this document. Ball State University Architecture Program Report. Submitted to NAAB, September 7, 2012 PART ONE (I): INSTITUTIONAL SUPPORT AND IMPROVEMENT / I.1. IDENTITY & SELF ASSESSMENT / I.1.1. History and Mission 5 PART ONE (I): INSTITUTIONAL SUPPORT AND IMPROVEMENT I.1. IDENTITY & SELF ASSESSMENT I.1.1. HISTORY AND MISSION When natural gas was first struck in September 1886 fifteen miles north of Muncie, it brought an economic boom to the Muncie region. Soon after the discovery of the natural gas reserves, the Ball brothers of Buffalo, New York, chose Muncie to establish a glass jar manufacturing plant. With economic prosperity came the need for the establishment of many institutions to support community development. A few prominent citizens of Muncie formed what could now be called a nonprofit organization with the purpose of funding a university. They named it the Eastern Indiana Normal University. In 1899, the first building was built. From that time, until 1918, the university went through periods of operation and closures, name changes and affiliation changes. Eastern Indiana Normal University started with 15 faculty members and 250 students. However, due to dwindling enrollment and difficult financial conditions, the university closed in 1901. For a brief period of two years the institution was called Palmer University, then it closed again in 1904. The university was renamed in 1905 as Indiana Normal School and College of Applied Science. The turning point for the university came in 1918, on the fifth attempt to revive the university. The Ball brothers purchased and deeded 64.6 acres of land and property to the state of Indiana, a gift duly accepted by the Board of Trustees. The board approved that a “Muncie Auxiliary” (later named Eastern Division of Indiana State Normal School) be opened on behalf of the Indiana State Normal School of Terre Haute. By 1922, the school was
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Reflections on the History and Future of the Open Building Network
    Reflections on the History and Future of the Open Building Network September 2015 2 Reflections on the History and Future of the Open Building Network The Origins of the Open Building Network Conferences An informal international network advocating the During the intervening years since the founding of the CIB implementation of what is now called “open building” has W104, we have met 19 times. These meetings, hosted and existed since the early days of the SAR (Stichting Architecten organized by network members and their local supporters, Research in Eindhoven, the Netherlands). Housing for the have taken place in Delft, Brighton (UK), Helsinki, Paris, Millions – John Habraken and the SAR (1960-2000), Bosma, Bilbao, Washington, DC, Boston, Muncie, Indiana (USA), van Hoogstraten, Vos, NAIA, Rotterdam, 2000) helps to tell Tokyo, Taipei, Hong Kong, Beijing, Mexico City, and Durban, this history. After years of such informal contacts, and after South Africa. The ETH / CASE in Zurich agreed to host a an early attempt (SAR INTERNATIONAL) failed to take root in conference in 2015 on The Future of Open Building, and the mid-1980’s, a formal network was successfully discussions are taking place to meet in Korea in 2017. On established in 1996, in a meeting in Tokyo, called CIB W104 occasion, we have met with other CIB Commissions, and Open Building Implementation (www.open-building.org). It members attended some triennial CIB World Congresses. was formed under the auspices of the CIB - the International Council for Research and Innovation in Building and The most recent conferences have expanded beyond the Construction (www.cibworld.nl).
    [Show full text]
  • College of Architecture and Planning Annual Report Academic Year 2008 – 2009
    COLLEGE OF ARCHITECTURE AND PLANNING ANNUAL REPORT ACADEMIC YEAR 2008 – 2009 The word is out…. It is a true pleasure to submit this annual report. We have many success stories to report, and we certainly had a lot of fun working on those, but we also had substantial challenges; we all did. In our February issue of e-cap we acknowledged that “every challenge is an opportunity” and that creative minds are particularly well equipped to take advantage of such opportunities. Today we want to celebrate the fact that in spite of financial uncertainty we have been able to continue to move forward in an aggressive quest to take our college to the next level. A fundamental move in that quest has been to build a “dream team” for the college’s departmental leadership. Last fall we welcomed Prof. Mahesh Senagala as our new Chair in the Department of Architecture, this summer we have been blessed with the arrival of Prof. Michael Burayidi as our new Chair in the Department of Urban Planning, and before it gets too cold in January we will be joined by Professor Jody Naderi as our new Chair in the Department of Landscape Architecture. I don’t know of any other college of architecture and planning in the nation with a stronger leadership team. We have adopted the structure of our University’s Strategic Plan and in such a way promote integration and synergy through all our units. We invite you to review this report and share in our excitement and enthusiasm. This is a great time to be at CAP.
    [Show full text]
  • Carol Ross Barney
    Carol Ross Barney Carol Ross Barney, FAIA, is founder and principal of Ross Barney Architects. She is responsible for the design excellence of all projects undertaken by the firm. Dedicated to improving the built environment, her work has an international reputation in design of institutional and public buildings. The work of her firm has been published in national and international journals, books and newspapers and has been awarded with numerous honors including four Institute Honor Awards from the American Institute of Architects and over 20 AIA Chicago Design Awards. Her drawings have been widely exhibited and collected by the Art Institute of Chicago, the Chicago Historical Society, The Museum of Contemporary Art Chicago and the National Building Museum. Carol is the recipient of the American Institute of Architects 2005 Thomas Jefferson Award for Public Architecture. This award recognizes excellence for a career of architectural achievement. Commissions include the new Commodore John Barry Elementary School for the School District of Philadelphia, United States Federal Building in Oklahoma City, United States Border Station in Sault Ste. Marie Michigan, Swenson Science Building for the University of Minnesota at Duluth, Arts Science and Technology Pavilion for Oakton Community College, a new Synagogue for the Jewish Reconstructionist Congregation and reconstruction of two of Chicago's most heavily used transit stations at Fullerton and Belmont Avenues. Carol Ross Barney is a graduate of the University of Illinois at Urbana Champaign. Following graduation, she served as a U.S. Peace Corps volunteer in Costa Rica planning national parks. Carol is a Fellow of the American Institute of Architects, one of the highest honors the Institute bestows upon its members.
    [Show full text]
  • 'The Halfway House'
    ‘the halfway house’ Temporary housing and production facility for parolees in Pretoria West Gerhard Janse van Rensburg © University of Pretoria The halfway house: Temporary housing and production facility for parolees in Pretoria West by Gerhard Janse van Rensburg SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE MASTER OF ARCHITECTURE (PROFESSIONAL) DEPARTMENT OF ARCHITECTURE FACULTY OF ENGINEERING, BUILT ENVIRONMENT AND INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY UNIVERSITY OF PRETORIA Study leader: Marga Viljoen Course coordinator: Jacques Laubscher Mentor: Jacques Laubscher PRETORIA 2011 With thanks to: My loving and supportive parents, The Alcade crowd, The studio crowd, Jacques Laubscher for his commitment and effort, Marga Viljoen for all her support 2 In accordance with Regulation 4(e) of the General Regulations (G.57) for dissertations and theses, I declare that this thesis, which I hereby submit for the degree Master of Architecture (Professional) at the University of Pretoria, is my own work and has not previously been submitted by me for a degree at this or any other tertiary institution. I further state that no part of my thesis has already been, or is currently being, submitted for any such degree, diploma or other qualification. I further declare that this thesis is substantially my own work. Where reference is made to the works of others, the extent to which that work has been used is indicated and fully acknowledged in the text and list of references. Gerhard Janse van Rensburg 3 Contents _ Abstract 7 01 _ Introduction 8
    [Show full text]
  • Honorary Membership Nomination Narrative Nominee: Carol Ross Barney, FAIA Nominee's Address: Ross Barney Architects, 1
    Honorary Membership Nomination Narrative Nominee: Carol Ross Barney, FAIA Nominee’s Address: Ross Barney Architects, 10 West Hubbard Street City / State / Zip: Chicago, Illinois 60654 Phone: 312‐897‐0600 Nominator: Terry Warriner Ryan, FASLA Carol Ross Barney, FAIA, has been in the vanguard of civic space design since founding Ross Barney Architects in 1981. With a career that spans over 40 years, Carol has made significant contributions to the built environment, the profession, and architectural education. As an architect, urbanist, mentor, and educator, she has relentlessly advocated that excellent design is a right, not a privilege. Her body of work represents this ethos and occupies a unique place within the panorama of contemporary architecture, being exclusively composed of work in the public realm. Attending the University of Illinois Urbana Champaign, Carol received a Bachelor of Architecture degree in 1971. A week after graduation, Carol and her husband, Alan Barney, a botanist, embarked on their assignment with the United States Peace Corps. Working with the fledgling Costa Rican National Park Service, their mission was to assist in the protection and preservation of Costa Rica’s amazingly diverse and threatened ecology. Carol’s projects included a master plan for coral reef protection at Parque Nacional Cahuita, restoration of the historic hacienda at Parque Nacional Santa Rosa, and worker housing at Parque Nacional Volcan Poas. Following her service in the Peace Corps, Carol joined a few notable Chicago firms before venturing out on her own. Here is where Carol was able to uphold a deep commitment to the role the built environment plays in life quality.
    [Show full text]
  • OPEN BUILDING and SUSTAINABILITY in PRACTICE Frans Van Der Werf Msc, Arch BNA.1
    The 2005 World Sustainable Building Conference, 10-037 Tokyo, 27-29 September 2005 (SB05Tokyo) OPEN BUILDING AND SUSTAINABILITY IN PRACTICE Frans van der Werf Msc, Arch BNA.1 1 Frans van der Werf, Organic Architecture and Urban Design, Tolweg 12, 2042 EL Zandvoort, the Netherlands, [email protected] Keywords: Open Building, Pattern Language, sustainable technology, user participation Summary The concept of Open Building relates decision making to constructing and maintaining the built environment. It provides the framework for incorporating conditions for user participation, environmental sustainability, public as well as personal health and wellbeing. This paper give a personal account of four key projects designed in my practice of architectural and urban design. First the underlying objectives of the designs are explained: sustainable quality of the built in relation to the natural environment, human wellbeing and user participation. Secondly, the methods applied, are discussed. Open Building provides the framework for decision-making. The Pattern Language is used to communicate design decisions with the users and user groups. The latest insights in ecological building are applied, experimented with and evaluated. Next, these experiences are illustrated by four built projects, the most recent one currently being under construction. In the final analysis it is concluded that the shortest route to a sustainable built environment can be found by connecting a well-structured process of decision making to user participation and sustainable technology. 1. Introduction The sustainability of the built environment has many facets. First of all, the urban fabric needs to be designed in such a way that it can sustain for a very long time.
    [Show full text]
  • College of Fine and Applied Arts Annual Meeting 5:00P.M.; Tuesday, April 5, 2011 Temple Buell Architecture Gallery, Architecture Building
    COLLEGE OF FINE AND APPLIED ARTS ANNUAL MEETING 5:00P.M.; TUESDAY, APRIL 5, 2011 TEMPLE BUELL ARCHITECTURE GALLERY, ARCHITECTURE BUILDING AGENDA 1. Welcome: Robert Graves, Dean 2. Approval of April 5, 2010 draft Annual Meeting Minutes (ATTACHMENT A) 3. Administrative Reports and Dean’s Report 4. Action Items – need motion to approve (ATTACHMENT B) Nominations for Standing Committees a. Courses and Curricula b. Elections and Credentials c. Library 5. Unit Reports 6. Academic Professional Award for Excellence and Faculty Awards for Excellence (ATTACHMENT C) 7. College Summary Data (Available on FAA Web site after meeting) a. Sabbatical Requests (ATTACHMENT D) b. Dean’s Special Grant Awards (ATTACHMENT E) c. Creative Research Awards (ATTACHMENT F) d. Student Scholarships/Enrollment (ATTACHMENT G) e. Kate Neal Kinley Memorial Fellowship (ATTACHMENT H) f. Retirements (ATTACHMENT I) g. Notable Achievements (ATTACHMENT J) h. College Committee Reports (ATTACHMENT K) 8. Other Business and Open Discussion 9. Adjournment Please join your colleagues for refreshments and conversation after the meeting in the Temple Buell Architecture Gallery, Architecture Building ATTACHMENT A ANNUAL MEETING MINUTES COLLEGE OF FINE AND APPLIED ARTS 5:00P.M.; MONDAY, APRIL 5, 2010 FESTIVAL FOYER, KRANNERT CENTER FOR THE PERFORMING ARTS 1. Welcome: Robert Graves, Dean Dean Robert Graves described the difficulties that the College faced in AY 2009-2010. Even during the past five years, when the economy was in better shape than it is now, it had become increasingly clear that the College did not have funds or personnel sufficient to accomplish comfortably all the activities it currently undertakes. In view of these challenges, the College leadership began a process of re- examination in an effort to find economies of scale, explore new collaborations, and spur creative thinking and cooperation.
    [Show full text]
  • Beijing Moscow
    NEW YORK + STUDIO x CITY GLOBAL METROPOLIS PROGRAM GSAPP COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY APP Colum k GS bia U yor niv w ers ne ity studio x city g n paris ji i moscow e b tokyo amman mumbai istanbul rio de janeiro johannesburg “IF WE DON’T THINK ABOUT THE FUTURE IN AND WITH ALL THE TRANSFORMATIVE REGIONS OF THE WORLD, THEN WE ARE NOT THINKING ABOUT THE FUTURE” MARK WIGLEY, DEAN GSAPP G L suggested PROGRAM STRUCTURE M E T R P O L I S B A L NEW YORK + STUDIO x CITY 01. SUMMER TERM RUS 1. Design Studio I 2. Global New York Seminar + > 3. Tools for Global Practice (on computation) > 4. Open elective presentation US 02. FALL TERM + { + } + RUS thesis proposal research advisor Moscow + > + > presentation + US day 20- studio project studio critic workshop 03. SPRING TERM + { } studiox - Rio studiox - Beijing + studiox - Mumbai RUS thesis submission research advisor thesis publication studiox - Johannesburg + > + > + day trip studiox - Amman 7- + US studiox - Moscow studio critic group exhibition studio project studiox - Istanbul presentation studiox - New York PROGRAM DESCRIPTION ADMISSION REQUIREMENTS GLOBAL METROPOLIS PROGRAM A class of highly selected students with above average design and theoretical skills is anticipated for each year. All applicants for admission to the Global Metropolis Program must apply for the MSAAD program on-line. Degree: Columbia University Master of Science in Advanced Architectural Design Students can contact the Office of Admissions and Student Affairs at GSAPP for information. Admission will be based on an evaluation of applicants’ academic records, professional experience and samples of their work. A joint program of the Graduate School of Architecture, Planning and Preservation, Columbia University (GSAPP) Please follow the instructions and requirements for how to apply to the MSAAD program: and Global Institutes http://www.arch.columbia.edu/school/admissions/how-apply Program Committee: Applicants are required to submit the following documents in English: Markus Dochantschi, Director Phu Hoang, Studio Critic 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Our Great Rivers Vision
    greatriverschicago.com OUR GREAT RIVERS A vision for the Chicago, Calumet and Des Plaines rivers TABLE OF CONTENTS Acknowledgments 2 Our Great Rivers: A vision for the Chicago, Calumet and Des Plaines rivers Letter from Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel 4 A report of Great Rivers Chicago, a project of the City of Chicago, Metropolitan Planning Council, Friends of the Chicago River, Chicago Metropolitan Agency for Planning and Ross Barney Architects, through generous Letter from the Great Rivers Chicago team 5 support from ArcelorMittal, The Boeing Company, The Chicago Community Trust, The Richard H. Driehaus Foundation and The Joyce Foundation. Executive summary 6 Published August 2016. Printed in Chicago by Mission Press, Inc. The Vision 8 greatriverschicago.com Inviting 11 Productive 29 PARTNERS Living 45 Vision in action 61 Des Plaines 63 Ashland 65 Collateral Channel 67 Goose Island 69 FUNDERS Riverdale 71 Moving forward 72 Our Great Rivers 75 Glossary 76 ARCHITECTURAL CONSULTANT OUR GREAT RIVERS 1 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This vision and action agenda for the Chicago, Calumet and Des Plaines rivers was produced by the Metropolitan Planning RESOURCE GROUP METROPOLITAN PLANNING Council (MPC), in close partnership with the City of Chicago Office of the Mayor, Friends of the Chicago River and Chicago COUNCIL STAFF Metropolitan Agency for Planning. Margaret Frisbie, Friends of the Chicago River Brad McConnell, Chicago Dept. of Planning and Co-Chair Development Josh Ellis, Director The Great Rivers Chicago Leadership Commission, more than 100 focus groups and an online survey that Friends of the Chicago River brought people to the Aaron Koch, City of Chicago Office of the Mayor Peter Mulvaney, West Monroe Partners appointed by Mayor Rahm Emanuel, and a Resource more than 3,800 people responded to.
    [Show full text]
  • Today's News - August 29, 2005 Arcspace Offers an Øresund Region Sneak-Peek
    Home Yesterday's News Contact Us Subscribe Today's News - August 29, 2005 ArcSpace offers an Øresund Region sneak-peek. -- Malmo's new neighborhood may be an architectural delight, but it may not be so good neighborly. -- A $2.99 toxic bath toy is a clue to what we're doing wrong. -- A plan to get Palestine back on track. -- Manhattan's 42nd Street and Chicago's Navy Pier 10 years later: the good, the bad - and the ugly. -- Chicago's grand 2020 plan: a look at the inevitable, the iffy, and the unlikely. -- SCI-Arc students show off development visions for the Los Angeles River. -- Atlanta airport design may be "stunning," but things are getting ugly between design team and client. -- "Is imitation the sincerest form of architecture?" -- WTC Memorial Museum begins to take shape. -- Shaping China's skylines: "...a thoroughly Western modernism with subtle Chinese characteristics marks a new front both for China's development and the globalization of architecture." -- Clooney's $3 billion casino: there's a pix, but no architect named - yet (might it be buddy Brad Pitt?). -- A Sunday chat with Libeskind: "We live in a beautiful world." -- A glass-bottomed skywalk for Grand Canyon (is this really necessary?). To subscribe to the free daily newsletter click here Latest News: The Øresund Region -- Zaha Hadid, Denmark; Santiago Calatrava, Sweden- ArcSpace Swede dreams: Malmo's new neighbourhood [Bo01] is funky, environmentally friendly and the envy of architects worldwide. There's just one problem. The locals hate it. -- Calatrava; Klas Tham; Eva Dalman; Moore Ruble Yudell; FFNS Arkitekter- Guardian (UK) An Environmental Problem Slipping Through the Quacks: William McDonough...made an even stronger argument for change with a little yellow rubber ducky...Toxic chemicals in that sweet, squishy body have been known to cause cancer, birth defects or other reproductive harm.
    [Show full text]
  • SARA in Chicago 63Nd Annual Conference NATIONAL OFFICERS PRESIDENT SSARAARA - Lletteretter Fromfrom Thethe Presidentpresident Octavio A
    A Publication by the Society of American Registered Architects 2019 Volume 9 SSARAA R A Issue 2 sscopec o p e SARA in Chicago 63nd Annual Conference NATIONAL OFFICERS PRESIDENT SSARAARA - LLetteretter ffromrom tthehe PresidentPresident Octavio A. Santurio, FARA 305-665-8844 [email protected] PRESIDENT-ELECT Dennis Dong, FARA 916-438-2171 [email protected] VICE PRESIDENT Abby Schwartz, FARA 610-964-9669 aschwartz@ abbyschwartzassociates.com TREASURER Dear SARARA Membersmbers and Friends of the SocietySociety: Simone D. Beazly, FARA 212-520-2901 x701 [email protected] We haveve hhad a busysy fi rsrst half of 2019 preparingprep for all thatt is in RECORDER store! Walter E. Geiger, FARA 407-234-3601 [email protected] It was great to see familiar faces at ourrB Board Meetingting at the Offi ces off Fong & Chan ArchArchitects in REGENT-AT-LARGE Mitchel Abramowitz, FARA San Francisco, California. A big thank youou to t Denniss Dong,Dong FARA, President-Electdent-E whoo coordinated coooo 215-368-9133 all the details for our meeting location andnd a welcomingming breakfbre ast. [email protected] IMMEDIATE PAST PRESIDENT Gaetano Ragusa, FARA I would like to stress the importance of thishis y year's 63rd3rd AnnAnnual Conferencence and Designgn AwardsA and 212-520-2901 x704 ask all Councils and Chapters to spread thehe wordw andd encourage all to participateti i by attendingat the [email protected] conference or submitting projects that meritt recognitionrec to the Design Awards. Pleaseease refer to this DIRECTORS Anthony Baker, FARA issue or our website for more information. 212-947-5818 [email protected] This year's Conference and Design Awards promiseses to be a succeessss to SARA and both the Carl J.
    [Show full text]
  • Vincent Scully Masterclass Series Returns—Virtually—To the Chicago Architecture Center with “See Like an Architect”
    Vincent Scully Masterclass Series returns—virtually—to the Chicago Architecture Center with “See Like an Architect” Registration now open for the second Scully Series, hosted by noted scholar and IIT College of Architecture dean Reed Kroloff and guests For immediate release January 26, 2021 High-resolution images with captions and credits downloadable here Media contact Zachary Whittenburg, Director of Communications, Chicago Architecture Center [email protected], 312-322-1134 CHICAGO – The Chicago Architecture Center (CAC) continues to offer online and remotely accessible programs for audiences of all ages, initiated in April 2020 with participants joining from across Chicago, the United States and overseas. Located at 111 East Wacker Drive in downtown Chicago, the Center remains temporarily closed to visitors. Chicago Architecture Foundation Center River Cruises aboard Chicago’s First Lady, CAC walking tours, admission to the Center itself and other in-person activities will resume in 2021 on dates to be announced. The CAC Design Store remains open 24 hours online at shop.architecture.org. 2021 Vincent Scully Masterclass Series: See Like an Architect Series pass $50, CAC members $40, students and seniors $30 Individual masterclasses $20 each, CAC members $15, students and seniors $10 Following up the inaugural three-part Vincent Scully Masterclass Series, “The Brilliance of American Architecture,” offered by the CAC in spring 2019, “See Like an Architect” examines timeless fundamentals in conceiving and communicating architecture. Three masterful, entertaining explorations of an architecture-informed worldview continue this series inspired by legendary professor, critic and author Vincent Joseph Scully, Jr. (1920−2017), who made his mark through more than 60 years of leading lectures at Yale University, inspiring countless students to pursue a wide variety of career paths.
    [Show full text]