I interrupt this flow of dreamy travelogues to report on something I feel is incredibly important. I got back to Berkeley a few days ago for a pit-stop en route to my final destination of the Branner fellowship, the Philippines and Guam. My inbox has been inundated with messages bouncing around from students and administrators alike about a new fee that is slated to begin starting next fall. It's called a Professional Degree Fee or PDF. Already the graduate schools of Law, Business, Public Health and Public Policy have this fee, ranging from about $5000 a year for the two latter and over $25000 per year for the two former. The PDF has been under review for a few years now here at the College of Environmental Design. You can see the fees for yourself.

Our new dean, Jennifer Wolch, probably feeling like Barrack Obama, is stepping on to a sinking ship. We all know how screwed California is. (A flyer in Wurster Hall reads: California is Broken. Let's fix it.) On October 9th, students received the following memo from Dean Wolch:


As many of you know, over the past 3 years, the College has been considering the adoption of a Professional Differential Fee (PDF) for professional graduate students. This is something that is being implemented in many professional degree programs across campus, to sustain and enhance the quality of the professional schools' academic programs and services. Our deliberations have included extensive student surveys, discussions with staff, and faculty meetings both within individual departments and college-wide. Because of our collective desire to not only maintain the excellence of our programs and infrastructure, but to enhance the CED educational experience and placement opportunities for professional graduate students, the College has proposed a $6,000 per year PDF to the University of California Office of the President (UCOP). If approved by UCOP, this proposal will come before the UC Regents for their approval, sometime this fall.

It is important to understand several points related to the PDF. If approved:

1. The PDF would be assessed for all professional graduate students (MArch; MCP; MLA; MLA-EP; and MUD).
2. The fee would be imposed beginning in academic year 2010.
3. Continuing students, who entered prior to Fall 2010, would have their PDF returned to them in the form of student financial aid (but they would continue to pay the equivalent of the Miscellaneous Student Fees as appropriate for use of computer labs, CAD/CAM lab, shop, etc.).
4. For incoming (new) students, the PDF would replace Miscellaneous Student Fees.
5. At least 33% of the PDF would be returned to students in the form of financial aid.
6. Some share of PDF funds would likely be deployed to improve information technology infrastructure and services, provide other instructional support, enhance student career services, and increase participation of students from under-represented groups.
7. Students would be directly involved in developing plans for the allocation of PDF revenue.

I am currently meeting with graduate student association leaders to understand their range of concerns, and have scheduled a Town Hall meeting with all CED graduate students. You will receive a notice of this meeting soon. I encourage you all to attend and participate. In turn, I will be happy to share with you more details regarding the PDF, as well as answer your questions on a broad range of additional issues of concern.

Jennifer Wolch
Dean, College of Environmental Design


Various letters expressing the students concerned have been circulated, from all departments within the College. The concerns in the Architecture letter can be summarized: 1. Please bring the proposal for the PDF back to our campus and reopen a comment period 2. In order to protect our own and future students’ interests, we want transparency and student governance in every step of instituting the PDF 3. We want to ensure that continuing students are not charged this new fee. And 4. We want the support of the administration in securing new sources of funding.

There was a Town Hall meeting two days ago which I sat in on. Dean Wolch addressed a few hundred bristled graduate students from architecture, planning, and landscape. She looked a little uneasy up there, and I think that came from having some sympathy ("no one wants to do this") but at the same time knowing that it doesn't matter what we say, the PDF is going to happen. The atmosphere became ludicrous at times, with students announcing things like a survey taken where 90% of students say they don't want to spend $6,000 more per year etc etc. (duh..) And at the end saying "The question is, Dean Wolch, does student opinion matter at all?" At one point Dean Wolch lost her patience as students demanded to see the CED's budget. She basically laughed it off, "It's too complicated." It was a dumb request by the student, but that didn't look so good on Dean Wolch's part. It reveals, though, just how much stress she is under.

The biggest fear is lack of student input in future decisions about the PDF--since everyone sitting in that room is promised to be exempt from the PDF, we are actually standing up for students who haven't yet come to the CED. You guys out there who might be reading this, wondering whether or not you should apply to Berkeley--there's a fight under way on your behalf. We don't want fees that can be hiked up on a regular basis (every three years the PDF is under review: it can be taken away, though that has never happened, or increased up to 7%, which you can bet on).


Recent protests at Sproul Plaza

Folks, Berkeley is about to get more expensive. A LOT more expensive. One of the greatest selling points of the architecture program has been the "bargain" of an education, which it truly has been. When I began in 2007, tuition for in-state residents was just $4,789 . The fees for next semester, however are rising to $5,616. The spur for the recent campus-wide protests and walk-outs is the fear that the fees will just continue to rise, exponentially, to the point where those who need access to public education might not get it. That's likely to affect students from middle class families the most.

Add the $6000 PDF and I'm not so sure Berkeley is a bargain anymore. I've always thought "Okay, it's been one hell of a struggle to get the CNC router up and running, but man what a bargain this place is" or "Why can't we get more faculty, or more staff? How about an advisor?… but man, what a bargain my education is." Hell, I won this huge fellowship (that comes from a private endowment). I have absolutely no right to complain. But this isn't about feeling stingy or bitter that a cheap education is about to get more expensive. It's about students lacking control of the cost of our education and decisions happening at the top of the system.

Hello UCLA? You're facing the same deal. In fact, Dean Wolch said UCLA is looking at an $8,000 PDF. Public education in California is under some severe stress. So don't think you're escaping the blighted economy by coming to school. Shit rolls downhill, and as a student, well, you're pretty much at the bottom. Never mind though, we're still sticking up for you and fighting for some control over just how much shit, and how fast it will roll.

Here are a few pictures from my Hong Kong and Macau Visit. Apologies for the limited and poor documentation.

Norman Foster's HSBC Bank.























I.M Pei's BANK OF CHINA building.














This is supposed to be a ninja kick behind the Bank of China building.





The International Finance Center (Hong Kong's tallest building)-Cesar Pelli's design.







Paul Rudolph's Lippo Tower







The Macau Tower- The highest bunjee jumping point in the world.






Macau Science Center.





I didn visit it coz there wasnt enough time. This is a shot from the ferry.

I went into most of these buildings but unfortunately they didn let me take pictures inside the building.

So this last month (october)was the beginning of my final year at the Newschool of Architecture, and I am now getting ready to enter my fifth week. Since I have not updated this blog in a while I have decided to give brief update of some of the things that have happen here at Newschool since the begginning of this fall session. Then I will follow by writing about my thesis project and what I hope to accomplish from this thesis exploration.

Week 1
This first week begun with everybody trying to get situated, selecting instructors, as well as introducing our topics for thesis and identify our objectives for the year. After dealing with all the madness associated with first week thesis studio came the chance to relax and look at what Newschool has planned for the next year. So we headed out to our annual convocation with this year’s ceremonies being held at the Copley Symphony Hall. This year guest speaker was AIA president Marvin J. Malecha, FAIA, who gave a great speech on the subject of architecture and architecture education. He encouraged us to think outside the box and look at some of the new ideas being pushed in the industry to help us develop a more innovative design process as well as better informed. If I remember correctly he talked about embracing the ideas that revolve around performance-based design and the tools that consume them. He then finished up his speech with a reminder to enjoy these experiences and have fun with it.


Week 2
Then the second week for many consisted of researching material for their thesis projects. While others worked on case studies as well as further identify design rationale and goals. The end of the second week brought the first lecture presentation that featured architect Teddy Cruz on the subject of “Radicalizing the Local beyond the Politics of Style”. This lecture was sponsored by the Friends of San Diego Architecture. If I remember correctly he talked about community engagement and addressing the needs of communities as oppose to addressing needs perceived by city politics.



Week 3
The third week brought the rise of the cardboard city; the invasion of the cardboard people. These cardboard people were projects that were being constructed in the first year graduate studio. Walking past their studio you could see these student working together to create these corrugate versions of themselves. This honestly seemed like a lot of fun. These projects continued on till week 4. Mean while in the Thesis studio we continued with thesis research as well as identify potential sites for our projects.



WEEK 4
This fourth week in the thesis studio consisted of more thesis research as well as site analysis and looking at program. With midterm review a few days’ away people (myself included) began working on editing or reworking earlier submittals that might have fallen short. Then midweek brought our next lecture which was presented by the Academy of Neuroscience for Architecture. This lecture featured a presentation by architect Gordon Chong FAIA as well as neuroscientist Dr. Fred "Rusty" Gage. This lecture was honestly a very informative as well as interesting discussion on the ideas of evidence-based design and the connection between neuroscience and architecture. With Gordon Chong FAIA explaining how these ideas of evidence-based design can be used as a way to enhance innovation into the process of design as a way to develop a better informed design process. Then following Gordon Chong was Dr. Fred "Rusty" Gage who talked about the connections between environments and stimulations in the brain.
Evidence-Based Design




Thesis Project
So this year is already running quickly and with our thesis projects in full throttle. My thesis exploration will look at the idea of kinetic (dynamic) or self-organizing architecture that adapts to social as well as environmental conditions in-order to enhance experiential and performative qualities. The current conditions of finished built structures tend to be static in nature which can at times lead to limits or barriers of how people experience space as well as how buildings perform. This exploration will look at how to potentially integrate parametrics, fabrication, and performative strategies as a way to develop high performing architecture that can maximize the experiential qualities of the built environment. My goal is to be able to take the knowledge I gained during this study with me into my professional career (whether applied or not).

Some of the books that I am currently reading for my research are as follows: Performative Architecture | Beyond Instrumentality (Kolarevic), Architecture in the Digital Age | Design and manufacturing(Kloarevic), as well as a long list of many others.
until next time.

Hello Archinect!

Well, we’ve finished four short (12-14 days each) projects and are just starting our last one for the semester: a building/pedestrian bridge integrated into, and more or less based on, one of three locks that sit at the mouth of the Charles river. I say “more or less” because although these locks create very specific site conditions, the project is not supposed to be driven by site so much as by more formal architectural conditions related to the mechanism that allows for a transformation (that is, literal movement) between two states—the first allowing passage for boats and the second for pedestrians. The project brief also gives only a very loose idea of program, simply stating that about 60% of the building’s area should be for public areas for assembly, and the other 40% for back-of-house functions.

The project is in this sense representative of this first semester of the M.Arch. I in particular, but also of our architecture department’s culture in general under P. Scott Cohen. That is, although we engage site and program and the whole range of concerns that relate to design, what is often central is the question of form and of generating form in a rigorous (rather than based on more personal aesthetic preferences) manner through the use of geometry. We also generally do this in the context of buildings, rather than through abstract exercises or through objects of other scales or natures.

This seems like a good time to take stock of my experience here so far for two reasons. First, our studio critic asked us to write a bit about our intentions, our efforts in terms of representation, the criticism we received at reviews, and what we’ve learned, for each of the projects we’ve had so far. That’s because we’ve done these four short projects and are now heading into a longer one—a full five weeks—and particularly because this project is fairly open-ended, we need to have some clarity about where we’ve come so far and what we want to work on for the remainder of the semester.

The second reason is that the GSD has its Open House for prospective students today, I’m excited about that! I’m really happy to be on the other side of the table now, as it was exactly one year ago that I attended this same event as a prospective, but the whole school shopping and admissions process is still close enough in my memory that I can totally empathize with what these visitors are going through.
So right now I have to head off to lunch and to a student panel (in which all faculty members leave so the prospectives can ask a group of students any questions they want in a slightly different and more casual setting). But I’ll post again this weekend with some thoughts about my experience here so far. For now I can say that it’s been really intense, and probably the most difficult thing I’ve ever done, but I feel like I’m starting to find my bearings.

Thanks for reading!

Lian

P.S. I sometimes get emails from prospective students asking about how they can work on their admissions package or how I ended up choosing the GSD. I find this really difficult to answer because every person has a different background and aims for graduate school, so factors that were crucial for one person might not matter for the next person. But I’ll try to think about this for my next post too.

P.P.S. Here is the fruit (in the singular; the only thing we were to present at the review was a physical model) of my labors for the last project.

As you may have deduced from my previous entry, my computer is more or less dead at this point (thus a lack of updates, photos, etc). I managed to turn it on again after a 2 full sweeps of the harddrive and giving it about a week to think about what it had done, but I am heistant to start investing time restocking it with applications, etc.

But another quick entry today because I am on my way out of town. (Paris, oh la la)

Had a review on Tuesday. A lot of work put into it... for what turned out to be the absolutely worst, most negative review I have ever received. Not one single positive thing was said about my project-- which might I add is "not architecture". Hm.

So perhaps I will try to fix that. The critics did not want to listen to anything I had to say and in general seemed a bit taken back when I tried to challenge them with my design's reasoning. (Which may also have simply fueled the fire for more negative criticism.) I think they made up their mind very early on and the fact that they all spoke broken[ish] english did not help my cause. I did not understand them--- they likely didn't understand me.

So I guess it was just a big misunderstanding, right????


ANYWAY.

Saw this about a free U2 concert yesterday and found it funny. Personally I wouldn't be there in the first place (u2 is not my cup of tea), but you have to admit it is a bit ironic.

Oh yes, and a final note:

I am going to the Zumthor's Thermal Baths for the weekend in 2 weeks. Be jealous.

Mid Review last Friday. I decided on taking the opportunity for some photographs (new 50mm f/1.8 lens!, hence all the portraits). Mind you, I probably could have done a better job had I slept in the previous 36 hours, but here's what I got, more on my flickr.

Things are picking up and we were doing quite a bit of all-nighter busywork. I say busywork because the lack of, as a personal opinion, intellectual challenge. Studio so far...not really feeling it. For Stick Studio standards, I feel like a rebel, pursuing the post-mediocracy, alternative, progressive, avant-garde, and thinktank endeavors. May I call myself creative?

uggggggghhhhhhhhh

Midst all the frustration, I am realizing that my argument against the traditionalists is weak due to the lack of mastery of the traditional.

On another note, I'm doing stuff outside school. Mary Gates Endowment Scholarship application, Architectural Design Collective, Student Exhibits, and Ballard clothes shopping. My new favorite boutique in Seattle - Blackbird.

http://archrecord.construction.com/features/0911BestArchSchools/0911BestArchSchools-2.asp

The list is out and my school ranked #10 but I always wondered how they come up with the results. Do they look at our grades? Judge us by how many get hired after graduating? Come to our reviews and compare? Ranking in the design field is just too subjective. Who should really be the ones to judge? There's architecture politics involved and there are way too many schools and student/ faculty in the U.S. involved to properly justify a school ranking. Just as we rank schools, how can we judge firms out there? We can only tell by their documentation (the print media the firms publish and get published about, the websites etc.) they put out there. But even that, we can only deem them "my" favorite or "your" favorite, there's no such thing as everybody's favorite.


On another note, the trip to SF was tons of fun
It’s nice to get out of studio once in a while...

Powell station. My home for the weekend

Favorite projects we visited:

DeYoung museum by Herzog & de Meuron


BAM (Berkley art museum)
Unhappy museum employee telling me that there were no photos allowed on the right

Finally, we are starting on our final project. We just completed our site analysis and currently we are in design mode. The project is a "lifestyle center" for a car brand. Our site is located just blocks away in downtown LA, right across from LA live. It's pretty exciting to be integrating everything we've learned this year: space/form movement/sequence and now the urban, after our last precedent study and San Francisco (which I miss so much already) trip.

For some reason, I thought I'd have enough time to blog about my first semester experiences. This is not the case.

TODAY

Doug Stockman, El Dorado, Inc.
AIA Columbus Honor Awards Keynote Lecture

5:30 pm
KSA Auditorium
FREE!



See you there.