ANDREW ELLIOTT​
replication of nature through engineering and architecture in the built environment. Students were grouped together with different mindsets and abilities for the purpose of working together to construct an architectural element from studying natural organisms. At first glance the subject matter seemed more appropriate for a marine biology class. Our eight-person group was tasked with studying the tube anemone. From our research we engineered movable products that imitated the organism’s materiality and nature. As the course progressed, we expanded on our product and then applied it to a building as the final step in the process.
Upon completion of the Critical Practice studio it was apparent that the motive for the course was not merely to focus on how architecture could mimic natural organisms. Rather, it was more so a professional lesson of how to communicate and work together through the challenges of distance and unfamiliarity with our teammates and the material. This was an interesting and useful experience. With professional design work somewhat scarce in the private practice, extending out of the niche has become a necessity for many companies. Working with a team or clients from a distance is a lesson we all must learn to keep up with the current market. All eight of our team
members lived in different locations across the nation; and all had full time careers in the architecture field. Despite the inconvenience of meeting across time zones, the group demonstrated professionalism by taking responsibility in all components of the project. Our team’s expertise relieved the stress of working from a distance—which appeared to be a major issue for other groups.
The first Advanced Design Studio consisted of a mixed use design in the city of Dayton, Ohio. Extensive research was conducted on the city’s history and demographics to determine the architectural needs. This studio gave students the ability to form their own program however they saw fit. Most students selected locations they were close to. Being familiar with the area helped understand the needs of the community. We were not just placing buildings on a site for the sake of architecture. The studio instructed design with purpose. In my own research I found the city of Dayton (where I have lived since 2009) had a long history of booming industry, technology and a proud community. Within the last 10 years, much of the industry and businesses have moved out of the city—and the population has followed suit. The community has suffered as a result. Based on the apparent needs of the city by the history and data found, I designed a mixed use city plan that employed many community sharing features. The design connected new with existing characteristics of the community in a location that was in desperate need of rehabilitation. The studio overall taught more than designing mixed use architecture in an efficient and practical way; it emphasized the importance of research in architecture so that designers know their audience, the occupants.
The second semester of Advanced Design Studio engaged monuments as the basis for design. The content challenged the idea that
monuments must be massive in size and revered by all. According to Aldo Rossi, whose theories were studied through the length of the semester, a monument could be as simple as architecture or an artifact that has retained significance throughout time. A monumental structure may change occupational uses to adapt to the evolving world. With this in mind, I took a site that had a rich history and used architecture to help the site adapt to the growing needs of its surroundings. Triangle Park in Dayton Ohio, where the first NFL football game was played, was chosen as the site. Expanding on the knowledge of the previous semester, I rigorously studied the site and its history to find the needs of the community that could be achieved through architecture. I developed a small community athletic center and a football stadium to serve as a monument to Dayton’s role in initiating the NFL. This studio revealed not everything in architecture has to be so big or bold to be significant. True significance is found in ageless architecture.
Advanced Design Studio 1 and 2 were the first online studios I had ever been a part of. Surprisingly, even the lessons learned beyond the architectural designs were directly related to the architecture career field. Since the professor and the class were not able to see firsthand the design progress, it was necessary to be proficient in representing the work and the process on each weekly presentation. This technique was similar to what I had experienced in the architecture field. For instance, a superior or client would not typically see, nor be interested in, every drawing or thought process in a design. Rather, he or she would prefer a clear, concise presentation leading up to the final product. The Advanced Design Studios sharpened my presentation skills that are necessary in my profession.
Tracking maturity can be done by observing previous work. An essay stating the student’s design philosophy was required as part of the application for admission into the Master of Architecture program at Lawrence Tech. I wrote about the significance of craftsmanship, fundamental design with emphasis on the natural. My design philosophy before starting the Master of Architecture program at Lawrence Tech depicted simplicity and minimalism. Interestingly enough, my preference towards these items have not changed since completing the curriculum. Through the graduate experience, however, I have found new reasoning as to why these design elements were so significant. My design philosophy is now structured around meaning and backed by historical theology rather than pure practicality from experience. The graduate experience at Lawrence Tech gave me a greater perspective on the design methods that seemed so simple and obvious; but also added new knowledge of architecture by expanding my horizons. Examining philosophical design theory forced me out of my comfort zone and rewarded me with an architectural understanding that could not be found in practice alone—for that, I am thankful I chose this program.
The purpose of the Master of Architecture program at Lawrence Technological University was to expose students to fundamental theories and issues within the contemporary discipline of architecture, with specific focus on orientation and implementation within professional practice. The content delivered through the curriculum continually addressed current theory and practice. Graduate courses covered a wide range of territory from design philosophy of Socrates and Plato up to the current issues in design techniques and project management. The mixture of historic and contemporary theories through the curriculum provided students a better understanding of architectural meaning, reasoning and direction.
Prior to starting the Master of Architecture program at Lawrence Tech, my educational and work experience had been mostly hands-on, physical practice. Nearly all work I was involved in consisted of practical field type studies. I was familiar with the basics of construction materials and management given my employment at the time with a construction contractor; and I was well versed in the structural abilities of architecture thanks to the typical practice courses of the undergraduate curriculum at Georgia Institute of Technology. The Architecture undergraduate program at Georgia Tech provided students a fundamental knowledge of design and construction. This information has been very beneficial to my professional work thus far in my career. Georgia Tech’s undergraduate program, however, did not offer many classes based in theoretical studies. To take on a Master of Architecture program at Lawrence Tech would mean stepping out of my comfort zone to tackle architectural concepts I had never before dealt with.
The intensity of the curriculum engulfed me right from the beginning. Courses such as Current Issues in Architecture and Research Methods had students examine architecture from a different perspective than I was used to. Through rigorous research, students found architectural issues that could be improved or expanded on, theoretically, with a certain practice. Previously, studying architecture meant observing precedents and following with imitation. These courses stretched the
boundaries of what architecture could be—more than a building or set of buildings, with greater impact than just the immediate area.
The Design Theory course covered the history of design philosophy and how it progressed to our current architectural concepts. As I listened to lectures and read the texts of philosophers’ conflicting theories of what they believe design should function, I became confused as to what was correct. I later realized that I had the aptitude to create my own theory that could be just as meaningful as the theories famous philosophers put forth. Just as Plato expanded on the writings of Socrates and later Galileo expanded (and corrected) Aristotelian truths, I am able to take the knowledge of these theorists and branch off their ideas to explain current architectural trends.
The Critical Practice studio was structured around the concept of biomimicry—the