Difference between revisions of "Nicholas2018"
BogdanaHuma (talk | contribs) (BibTeX auto import 2018-07-07 04:08:47) |
AndreiKorbut (talk | contribs) |
||
| (One intermediate revision by one other user not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{BibEntry | {{BibEntry | ||
| + | |BibType=ARTICLE | ||
| + | |Author(s)=Claire Nicholas; Arlene Oak; | ||
| + | |Title=Building consensus: Design media and multimodality in architecture education | ||
| + | |Tag(s)=ethnomethodology; architecture; consensus; design; interaction; intersemiosis; multimodality; materiality; education; ethnography | ||
|Key=Nicholas2018 | |Key=Nicholas2018 | ||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
|Year=2018 | |Year=2018 | ||
| + | |Language=English | ||
|Journal=Discourse & Society | |Journal=Discourse & Society | ||
|Volume=29 | |Volume=29 | ||
|Number=4 | |Number=4 | ||
| − | |Pages= | + | |Pages=436–454 |
| − | |URL=https://doi | + | |URL=https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0957926518754415 |
|DOI=10.1177/0957926518754415 | |DOI=10.1177/0957926518754415 | ||
|Abstract=This article explores multimodal communication and social interaction in university-level architecture education. Drawing on ethnography of North American programs of ‘design-build’ architecture, we consider how the judgment of a ‘good’ (or ‘bad’) design is as much a result of how it is communicated as what is communicated. In settings like the design ‘review’, students endeavor to persuade an audience of the merits of their proposed design. This is ideally accomplished through the ‘convergence’ of multiple design media on the same ‘idea’ or design gestalt. ‘Convergence’ involves not just technical competency; it is also a social achievement: an effect of composing and coordinating multimodal semiotic media according to shared representational and communicative conventions. Failure to recognize convergence is often an effect of intersemiotic dissonance. This is also the risk of a design’s failure in the eyes of the faculty jury, who often direct their critiques toward communicative inconsistencies. | |Abstract=This article explores multimodal communication and social interaction in university-level architecture education. Drawing on ethnography of North American programs of ‘design-build’ architecture, we consider how the judgment of a ‘good’ (or ‘bad’) design is as much a result of how it is communicated as what is communicated. In settings like the design ‘review’, students endeavor to persuade an audience of the merits of their proposed design. This is ideally accomplished through the ‘convergence’ of multiple design media on the same ‘idea’ or design gestalt. ‘Convergence’ involves not just technical competency; it is also a social achievement: an effect of composing and coordinating multimodal semiotic media according to shared representational and communicative conventions. Failure to recognize convergence is often an effect of intersemiotic dissonance. This is also the risk of a design’s failure in the eyes of the faculty jury, who often direct their critiques toward communicative inconsistencies. | ||
}} | }} | ||
Latest revision as of 11:08, 12 January 2020
| Nicholas2018 | |
|---|---|
| BibType | ARTICLE |
| Key | Nicholas2018 |
| Author(s) | Claire Nicholas, Arlene Oak |
| Title | Building consensus: Design media and multimodality in architecture education |
| Editor(s) | |
| Tag(s) | ethnomethodology, architecture, consensus, design, interaction, intersemiosis, multimodality, materiality, education, ethnography |
| Publisher | |
| Year | 2018 |
| Language | English |
| City | |
| Month | |
| Journal | Discourse & Society |
| Volume | 29 |
| Number | 4 |
| Pages | 436–454 |
| URL | Link |
| DOI | 10.1177/0957926518754415 |
| ISBN | |
| Organization | |
| Institution | |
| School | |
| Type | |
| Edition | |
| Series | |
| Howpublished | |
| Book title | |
| Chapter | |
Abstract
This article explores multimodal communication and social interaction in university-level architecture education. Drawing on ethnography of North American programs of ‘design-build’ architecture, we consider how the judgment of a ‘good’ (or ‘bad’) design is as much a result of how it is communicated as what is communicated. In settings like the design ‘review’, students endeavor to persuade an audience of the merits of their proposed design. This is ideally accomplished through the ‘convergence’ of multiple design media on the same ‘idea’ or design gestalt. ‘Convergence’ involves not just technical competency; it is also a social achievement: an effect of composing and coordinating multimodal semiotic media according to shared representational and communicative conventions. Failure to recognize convergence is often an effect of intersemiotic dissonance. This is also the risk of a design’s failure in the eyes of the faculty jury, who often direct their critiques toward communicative inconsistencies.
Notes
