Atlantis #18.4 by ATLANTIS

issue 18.4 october 2007

editorial cristina ampatzidou

Accepting the invitation of the department of Urbanism, Atlantis put together this issue meant to comment the content and the quality of the educational program of the department of Urbanism in our Faculty. For many of our subscribers the Faculty of Architecture and more specifically the Department of Urbanism is part of our everydayness, a place where we spend a significant part of our time, we learn, work and socialize. Trying to carry out the task of the current issue we came to the sad realization of the small response it initially found. But it seems that the individualism that is such a corporate mentality among the students following the master of urbanism and the academic stuff, does not allow them to comment the structure within which they are called to expose and cultivate their skills. The collective task of facing the conditions of our direct environment, criticize and finally improve it, is voluntarily neglected, as struggling for the better requires a constant state of alertness. In the first feature of this issue an identification of ideas about the meaning and way of teaching Urbanism, between the coordinator of the Bachelor courses and a student is being doubted by Alexander Vollebregt later on, supporting, among others that the so wanted collaboration

between the departments of our faculty is almost non existent. Following, the Msc1, introduction to Urbanism it is interesting to see what the program aims to offer and what the Msc1 students expect from their studies and future carrier. An approach to education as the cooperation between teachers and students and the vision of Henco Bekkering, the new chairman of the department will update the information of the new readers and create a source for comments for the long time readers. The importance of free choice courses is emphasized by the article of Edward Hulsbergen and Han Meyer, who managed to raise a lot of reaction with his statement in Atlantis 18.3, is giving a good bye interview after 6 years. Anthony Fuchs is writing his comments in a very caustic but fair way and finally an interview with the general secretary of the EMU closes the outline of this education issue with a description of the post-master program. The coming issue is aiming to deal with the role of urban space in the creation and exposure of art. How the changing conditions of the city as an object and as field are affecting the design procedures? The treatment of urban complexes as works of art is or isnâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t an artistic intervention, meant as an aesthetic action or it only conceals a historical and social meaning? We invite your thoughts and insights, your experiences and studies.

02 03 04 05 06 08 10 12 16 22 24 28 32 36 42 46 50 56 62 64 66

editorial contents the department of Urbanism polis from the board[s] bachelor courses of Urbanism - a discussion msc1 Urbanism - design and strategy msc1 Urbanism - opinions verantwoordelijkheden en verwachtingen in het onderwijs aan de medewerkers van de afdeling Urbanism Paramaribo - photoreport on free choice in Urbanism Han Meyer reflections - an interview reactions: what happened to the critical student? from “Research by Design” to “Action Research”: strategies for a better world education in the mirror Urban education and no mirror european master of Urbanism - an interview agenda call for submissions polis partners

daily board

chairman

Prof. Ir. Henco Bekkering

vice chairman

DEPARTMENT OF URBANISM TU Delft

Prof. Dr. Ir. Han Meyer

research nestor

Prof. Dr. Ir. Clemens Steenbergen

managment

Drs. Amber Leewenburgh

sections

chairs

urban design

u r b a n c o m p o s i t i o n s u r b a n d e s i g n metropolitan & regional design technical ecology & methodology

spatial planning & strategy

s p a t i a l p l a n n i n g urban renewal & managment

landscape architecture

lanscape architecture b e l v e d e r e c h a i r cultural history & spatial design

environmental technology-based design

environmental technology -based design

education & research

urbanism research lab Ir. John Westrik

EMU post-graduate programme Prof. Dr. Ir. Han Meyer Andrea Peresthu, Msc

M s c 1 u r b a n i s m : d e s i g n & s t r a t e g y Dr. Ir. Paule Stouten

M s c 2 u r b a n i s m : urban history, analysis & design Dr. Ir. Frank van der Hoeven

Msc urbanism programme

Msc3 / Msc4 urbanism: g r a d u a t i o n y e a r

Ir. Maurice Harteveld

Dr. Ir. Remon Rooij

u r b a n i s m

B s c 1 H u i s e n Ve ra n k e r i n g

M I N O R

Ir. Evelien Brandes

Prof. Ir. Eric Luiten Ir. Lies Boot

B s c 3 S t a d e n Wo n i n g b o u w Prof. Ir. Henco Bekkering

Linda de Vos

Bsc Stedenbouwkundige B a s i s b e g r i p p e n Prof. Dr. Ir. Han Meyer Ir. Maurice Harteveld

POLIS - platform FOR URBANISM

History

Polis was founded by professors and students of the department of Urbanism in the Faculty of Architecture Delft in October 1989. Owed to the forces of changes in education it was obvious that the wish to reinforce and improve the quality of Urbanism education led to the founding of Polis. In addition, an important objective of Polis is to create a favourable atmosphere in which the interaction of education, science and practice is intense.

Urbanism

Urbanism is energetic, following and guiding. Urbanism is subject to changes in society and discussions. As a practising Urbanist, it is important to take cognizance of these changes and to take up a position in society. This means for science as well. In doing so, the Urbanist fully is able to project his or her view on society.

Urbanist Platform

To determine positions for Urbanists in practice and in science, Polis created a platform. Urbanists are encouraged to enter this platform through displaying various activities such as excursions, lectures, debates, symposia or contests. The periodical Atlantis plays an important role in this. It gives a survey of all those activities, and, moreover, it acts as a medium for discussions

Consultation

Polis is the link between science and practice. Polis is guarding contacts with various Urbanist representatives. And Polis is guarding the quality of Urbanism education by conferring with several parties in the Faculty of Architecture. Practice and science are tested in the consultations. Consultations with related organizations both in and outside the faculty are being held to reinforce the basis of Polis.

Polis Trust

The Polis Trust was founded by Polis Urbanism Platform to support financially individual and small-scale initiatives which flow from the daily practice in Urbanism or science. Please contact Polis to make an application. The members of the Polis Trust are: Roy Bijhouwer, Quadrat Urbanist, office for Urbanism, Architecture and Landscape Design, Esther Heemskerk, Polis vicepresident and Urbanism student, Miranda Reitsma, editor “Stedenbouw en Ruimtelijke Ordening” magazine, Maarten Schmitt, The Hague Urban Planner, Thom Wolf, Dura Bouw Amsterdam adjunct director. Gifts are more than welcome by giro 8522358, stating “Polis Trust”.

A new Atlantis edition lies before you. This time a special education edition. The Atlantis committee realized it in collaboration with the department of Urbanism. Fantastic, that this edition is ready. The following years education editions will be an interesting way to reduce the distance between practice, education and students. What are students, future colleagues, educated in? That’s an interesting question for an urban office, or government. Not only the practice has benefits to understand what education of urbanism offers but also students, with a clear mind, can ask themselves whether this education is the most excellent way. A critical student, who debates the education policy, can help the department Urbanism and next generation of students to get better education, facilities and decisions. The Atlantis-education editions are a help in being a medium in which this theme can be discussed and evaluated in a positive critical manner. Besides, the department of Urbanism wants to support Polis the following years. And Polis wants to help the department of Urbanism to make the education of Urbanism better. The collaboration with Atlantis is a first step in de right direction. The end of the eighteenth Polisyear is already past. The annual ALV with board change has taken place. The central theme of this year was ‘Act small, think big’. With lunch lectures, company excursions and exhibitions we worked out this theme. With the exhibition and urbanism week ‘History, Culture and Urbanism’, a large public is reached in the faculty. Many have seen the beauty of the cities Persepolis, Teheran and Isfahan. It was the start for the trip to Iran that, with a private initiative of one member of the board, has been a large success for a small group of people. In the spring the theme has been worked out in a weekly lunch lectures series. Different speakers like companies, practice members and teachers spoke about for example: ‘Pocketparks’, ‘Child in the city’ and ‘Water in the city’. With a fixed core of visitors we concluded that indeed small-scale projects and ideas can lead to large coherent elements or structures. After a year of absence a PALU (Polis Active Members Trip) was organized in the Tikibad for all active members. Once again we would like to thank all active members for their commitment and hard work in this year. It wouldn’t have been this good without them. Thanks! All in all, we have tried to create space for the discussion about the educational and professional relevance of the profession and we have attempted to stimulate your thoughts on urbanism. We have had a very nice, enjoyable and educational year. From this spot we would like to wish the new board (Edoardo Felici, Job Oosterhuis, Sander Scholte, Haani Washian, Christian Messing en Bart Stoffels) and all active members a great and successful Polis year. If you are not a member or active member yet, you can always mail to polis@bk.tudelft.nl to become a member. Or visit us at kab. 9.51.

Erwin Stoffer

As the new academic year begins it is also time for a new Polis board, a new theme and a new list of activities for the coming period. This past year has been a very exciting one, filled with very good initiatives and for that we would like to thank the members of this past Polis board and all the committees for their hard work and dedication. We, as the new Polis board, are very enthousiastic about what is to come and hope to continue along the same lines as last year. After giving it some thought we decided to choose â&#x20AC;&#x153;The Ism in Urbanism: Ideologies in the Cityâ&#x20AC;? as this yearâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s theme. This implies different categories of research; we can distinguish religious, political, urbanist or architectonic ideologies that have shaped cities. In this way we can structure the activities and discussions around this topic and hope to stimulate teachers and students in debate. At the moment we are still busy making a general agenda for the coming events. As soon as things will become clear the information will become available on our website: polis.bk.tudelft and through our mailinglists. We intend to make good use of these facilities so remember to check them regularly. If anyone is interested in volunteering for Polis there is always something to be done! You can contact us through the website or just stop by at our office whenever someone is present. We hope to come into contact with many Polis members to exchange ideas and thoughts to make this another successful year!

New board (left to right): Edoardo Felici (President), Hani Washian (Treasurer), Sander Scholte (vicepresident), Brenda Gladpootjes (vice-president), Job Oosterhuis (secretary).

Bachelor courses of urbanism A Discussion Maurice hartevelt Sodaba Roustayar

Maurice Hartevelt is the coordinator of the Urbanism courses in the Bachelor program. Atlantis has requested a short statement on the value and quality of these courses and approached a bachelor student in order to compare insights and experiences. We were really surprised by the common understanding of what the meaning of urbanism really is.

In the tradition of our Polytechnic Academy on our faculty, the Bachelor student has a technical, scientific and design-specific approach. Herewith the education distinguish itself in the (inter)national context. In the first place the bachelor course is preparatory on the master courses of our faculty, including Urbanism. Thus, by the broad orientation on Architecture, Urbanism and Building Sciences the bachelor education connects seamlessly four orientations in our disciplinary field. If the bachelor student does not continue his or hers master, the student might for example assist a team in a design practice. In the last years only a few exemplars are known. These graduated bachelors assist in analyzing the design task, they explore design variants and they use appropriate media to present research results or they chose a different direction in their career. I would state that where bachelors of other colleges, academies or universities are perhaps a specialist or more practically-

oriented, our graduated bachelor has a broad insight in the integrated design task at several moments and at several spots in the design process. This integrated approach effects also the courses on Urbanism: In the design courses the relation with either Architecture or Real Estate and Housing is always present. In the history courses the developments in scientific urbanism is always related to those in architecture and techniques. In the different media courses the urban project is one of the several to study on. In physics, process management and law the essential knowledge on urban development is provided for every possible future in our field, so as an architect, as an urbanist, as a product developer et cetera. Last but not least, the course on the fundamentals of urbanism provides the student to obtain knowledge of the basis concepts in the field of urban theory and â&#x20AC;&#x201C; methods. This includes urban design, landscape architecture and spatial planning and the consistency between them.â&#x20AC;?

Maurice hartevelt

In his statement Mr Hartevelt is mentioning that â&#x20AC;&#x153;the bachelor education connects seamlessly four orientations in our disciplinary fieldâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;. I find this absolutely true, the bachelor is a preparation for your master course, one has to learn the basics, which make him/her able to continue in their Master or to get involved in a small project, although the last one, would be difficult, but not impossible. Later on in his statement the multydisciplinarity of Urbanism is put forward. I am also sharing the opinion that what is so special about Urbanism is that it seems to have a liberal education. Actually itâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s not only these four orientations of this faculty that are coming together in an urban project, but also other orientations and other faculties. The social context, the political context, the philosophical context are a few of the factors that need to be considered when dealing with urbanities. These interrelations make, in my opinion, Urbanism a very wide disciplinary field, with lots of tasks. An urban plan is not only based on the area itself but also on many other parameters, and this is why other disciplinary fields need to be advised. The multidisciplinarity of Urbanism is emphasized throughout his statement and I could not agree more with his last sentence. The fundamentals of Urbanism are the beginning of all later development. I personally consider the implementation of an urban plan as the start of a new life, giving a new breath to an area, an idea which fascinates me.

Sodaba Roustayar

MSc1 Urbanism Design and strategy Tom Kuipers For most students, the MSc1 Urbanism is the first actual contact with the profession of Urbanism. In the bachelor at TU Delft little time is spend on urbanism. Although students can choose an urbanism course in BSc-6, the focus during the rest of the semesters is mainly on architecture and building technology. Only some bachelor semesters pay attention to an urban plan within the design studio, often developed with the support of a teacher who has architecture as his or her main background. MSc1 offers a wide range of courses that cover a large part of the urbanism fields. Together with the first part of MSc2 it has to deal with all the fundamental principles of urbanism and sufficient experience must be gained for the final semesters 3 and 4. The courses of the semester are split up along two lines; the design studio and the supporting knowledge courses, which form the theoretical background that should be used in the studentsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; designs or create the necessary knowledge for an urban designer. The design studio of MSc1 consists of three parts; the Atlas, the Perspective and the Project. These three parts are strongly related to each other. The design area changes once in a while and in the current semester the region of design is Landport, the area between Amersfoort, â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;t Gooi and Almere. The atlas, made by the whole design group, is an analysis of the design region .The final result is a booklet with collected data that is the basis for the next phase: the perspective. The perspective is in fact a regional plan for the next 30 years in which the students interpret the data from the atlas and show their ideas for the future of the region. The last part within the design

studio is the individual strategic project. In order to help a perspective getting realized, one needs strategic projects that will catalyze events in the region. The word spin-off is frequently used in this context, because you try to make a design on a relatively small scale that creates other possibilities and chances for a region. So the strategic project leads to other projects and finally in the ideal situation a perspective can be realized. The element time is very important in all the design courses. Already in the stage of the atlas it is important to focus on trends and prognoses. Of course you need to know what is going on in the design region right now, but more important is what might happen in the next 25 or even 50 years. Will the population still be growing, or is it going to decline? Students need to react on things that are happening in the Dutch society. The theoretical courses within the MSc1 Urbanism are: Society and space, Design and strategy, Territory and Feasibility. Society and space teaches students about social developments and their spatial implications. Design and strategy deals with the theory and method of strategic design. The course also deals with tools of urban management, decision-making processes and the various public and private actors, all by several lectures and workshops. Territory deals with divergent technical subjects that are relevant for the urban design, for example the influence of the natural elements. The feasibility course is split up in three parts: the economical, spatial and legislative feasibility. The feasibility and the effects of the perspective and the individual project are researched and related to the design. This year, in addition to these courses, a new

course has been introduced under the name Introduction urbanism. It gives all the different chairs of Urbanism (8 in total) the possibility to show what their specific view is on urbanism and what the main issues in their research are. Since Dutch education on urbanism is widely known throughout the world, a lot of international students follow the semester. About half of the students is coming from abroad, mainly from rapidly developing countries in Asia like China. They really want to learn how to deal with the urban issues that take place in their own country, although the scale of the MSc1 Urbanism design project cannot be compared with the scale of Chinese urban developments. For them the actual design is perhaps not the most important, but the methods used and the way of thinking are. Working back and forth through different scales, the way of research and the development of consistent solutions are important things these students can learn in the MSc1. One can see a lot of differences between the Dutch, the Asian and the other foreign students. In general, the European students (including the Dutch) communication skills seem to be more advanced, while the skills in (computer)drawing of Asian students are generally more advanced. The communication in terms of speaking and discussing in English is a problem that comes back every year. Because most work in the design studio is group work, and decision-making is therefore very important, communicating and discussing in English is something that should be improved. At the end though, the different qualities of each individual student contributes to the design process and broadens the view of the other students.

MSc1 Urbanism - opinions Design and strategy katerina chrysanthopoulou As the new semester started over a month ago, we thought that the students of Msc 1 would have already formed an idea about education in urbanism. Approaching them and asking about their expectations and hopes would be an interesting way to understand better the image education in our department projects to the outside world and more generally how is Urbanism as a discipline understood by students. More specifically we asked them why they chose for Urbanism and why they went for TU Delft. From this short set of ideas and views we can conclude that TU Delft has a very good international reputation, which in the case of architecture and urbanism is owed to the Dutch tradition in these fields along with the countryâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s position in the international architectural map. At the same time urbanism is usually understood as a broader discipline which will provide the students with a better understanding in matters of society, space and architecture itself. But the link with architecture is always present and although it is not perceived as a completely different discipline, the shift in scales becomes very important for choosing the one over the other.

In the Masters program there are four main directions you can choose among. Urbanism is for me a more socially oriented way of designing. Architecture is creating icons that do not contribute to the structure of the environment where people live together. Here I realized that TU Delft education is based very much on graphics and I prefer expressing things in a short graphical way. Ariene Lee

Urbanism can offer me a wide view on the country, region, district and especially on architecture. Architecture has to be relevant to society. I chose to study urbanism in order to have a wider view and ideas on such issues. TU Delft has a really mature system of teaching urbanism and doing research on that field. At the same time being in the Netherlands can offer me opportunities to visit other countries in Europe and it is essential for Architects and Urbanists to open their mind on different views. Lingjuan Zhang, China

I don’t really want to become an urbanist since it was my second choice, but I want to be an architect. TU Delft is part of the well known Dutch tradition in architecture which is related to many famous names such as Mecanoo, MVRDV, Koolhaas. Alessandro Bua, Italy

Living in Asia and Europe has raised my deep interest in cities, their development potentials and their future form. I came to TU Delft because it is in the middle of a very rich urban tradition. Jaffri

I decided to follow the master of Urbanism because of my interest in big scale projects, after having two years working experience in Rotterdam. TU Delft has a good reputation among other universities and allows me to put my recent professional experience into perspective. Maria, Germany

I choose to become an Urbanist because I have the dream to rebuild my motherland, China, and in this way to make people happier. Good living environment should be built for people. Last year I joined the “Landscape” summer school, which was held by TU Delft and the Berlage Institute. I realized that TU Delft is an international university, with very good teachers and a rich history in the education of Urbanism. Song Chunyan

Urbanism is the beginning of Architecture. That’s why I choose the double master. Urbanism fascinates me because of the non-physical facts. (social, demographics etc.) and pulling it in the physical. I finished my bachelor in TU Delft, and since I didn’t want to move to another city I chose to continue in the master program. Nils

I like the scale of Urbanism. A lot of things come together in Urbanism: Government, People, Infrastructure, Municipality, Country, Europe etc. This overview scale really interests me. After high school I wanted to study â&#x20AC;&#x153;Bouwkundeâ&#x20AC;? and since Delft is more creative-oriented than Eindhoven (TUE), I have been studying here for three and a half years. Vera

In the past years doing my bachelor I developed an ever growing interest for research and theory behind the design. Having found out that I was really horrible at designing details and management was not my thing, I thought to go for urbanism and I actually really like it so far! I finished my bachelor here at TU Delft and since I am already used to the chaos of this faculty I decided to stay. With all the internationals that come here every year I still get to meet lots of people with different backgrounds. Sanne van den Heuvel

I wanted to get a degree in urbanism because I think one can not understand complex relationships within the built environment without first having a good grasp of urban issues. I already have a degree in architecture and I would like after finishing University to work in both fields of architecture and urban planning. I chose Delft because the studying curriculum was interesting and of high quality, and at the same time it offered an attractive and friendly environment. Peter Bednar, Czech Republic

I started with the masters of architecture but it was not my cup of tea, so then I tried working for an office. In architecture I was missing the contact with the people. I felt that I was clicking all day. Urbanism fits better my wide range of interests. I cannot say if I would choose TU Delft again. During my bachelors I wasnâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t satisfied with the quality of education, and especially with the behavior of the teachers. In the master as far as now things are better and critics are targeting my work and not my personality. Laurens Plender, Netherlands

Verantwoordelijkheden en Verwachtingen in het Onderwijs van studenten, docenten en onderwijsorganisaties met betrekking tot leren & doceren, leerprocessen en leeromgevingen Dr.ir. Remon Rooij Ir. Maurice Harteveld Prof.dr.ir. Clemens Steenbergen

“In the long run we shape our lives and we shape ourselves... and the choices we make are ultimately our own responsibility”

Aanleiding

De kwaliteit van de inhoud en organisatie van het Stedebouwkunde onderwijs wordt door Polis weer eens expliciet op de agenda gezet. Feitelijk is het een onderwerp dat nooit van de facultaire en afdelingsagenda afkomt, sterker nog: af moet (kunnen) komen. De onderwijskwaliteit behoort een professionele onderwijsorganisatie zeer na aan het hart te liggen. Zo ook bij ons. Deze bijdrage zal echter niet gaan over hoe wij vinden dat het Stedebouwkunde onderwijs georganiseerd moet worden, hoewel je dat wellicht van het MSc Urbanism coördinatieteam zou verwachten. Dit schrijven gaat dieper in op wie, ons inziens, verantwoordelijkheden hebben te dragen en nemen, in het proces van onderwijs organiseren, geven en krijgen. Wij denken dat dit belangrijk is, omdat met duidelijkheid over deze verantwoordelijkheden, de verwachtingen van de onderwijsbetrokkenen (studenten, docenten, onderwijscoördinatoren, onderwijsondersteuners, facultaire en afdelingsbestuurders) beter en gelijkgestemder zullen zijn, wat het onderwijsproces danig zal kunnen verbeteren. In de dagelijkse praktijk van ons onderwijs zien wij een hoop ‘misgaan’ omdat verwachtingen niet synchroon lopen en zelf soms volledig tegenstrijdig zijn.

Alvorens te kunnen bepalen waar verantwoordelijkheden liggen, moeten we het eerst eens worden over wat ‘onderwijs krijgen’ (leren/studeren), ‘onderwijs geven’ (doceren) en ‘onderwijs organiseren’ nu precies is in de MSc.

Coöperatief: de student leert in interactie met en van anderen.

Leren

Het helpt om bij deze omvangrijke beschrijving onderscheid te maken tussen verschillende typen leeractiviteiten. Leeractiviteiten kunnen we onder verdelen in cognitieve, affectieve en regulatieve activiteiten. Het zijn activiteiten die de student tijdens het leerproces moet vervullen, wil er sprake zijn van leren .

Het gaat in een opleiding natuurlijk allemaal om leren. Een universitaire opleiding is daarbij een bijzonder type opleiding. Hoogleraren hebben de taak het vakgebied te vernieuwen, te verdiepen of te verbreden. Dit ligt besloten in hun ‘leeropdracht’. Ook de docent leert. Onderzoek doen, publiceren, lezen van vakbladen, bezoeken van congressen en onderhouden van contacten met collega-onderzoekers, het hoort er allemaal bij. Tevens integreert hij/zij de onderzoeksresultaten, van hem/haar zelf of van anderen, in het onderwijs en begeleidt en coacht de studenten bij het leerproces . Iets waar je zeker, als docent, ook van kan leren. Maar boven alles leert natuurlijk de student. Maar: Wat is leren eigenlijk? Leren kan gedefinieerd worden als een constructief, cumulatief, zelfgestuurd, doelgericht, gesitueerd, coöperatief en individueel verschillend proces van kennisen inzichtverwerving, betekenisgeving en vaardigheidsontwikkeling . Constructief: de student bouwt kennis, inzicht en vaardigheden op in interactie met zijn/haar omgeving. Cumulatief: de student bouwt voort op en maakt gebruik van kennis, inzicht en vaardigheden waarover hij/zij reeds beschikt. Zelfgestuurd: de student zelf beheert en bewaakt het leerproces. Doelgericht: de student is zich bewust van een (leer)doel en heeft daarover verwachtingen. Gesitueerd: het leerproces van de student voltrekt zich in directe en nauwe samenhang met de sociale en materiële context.

Individueel: het verloop en eindresultaat van leren verschilt van student tot student.

Cognitieve leeractiviteiten: relateren, structureren, analyseren, concretiseren, toepassen, memoriseren, kritisch verwerken, selecteren Affectieve leeractiviteiten: attribueren, motiveren, concentreren, zichzelf beoordelen, waarderen, inspannen, emoties opwekken, verwachten Regulatieve leeractiviteiten: oriënteren, plannen, proces bewaken, toetsen, diagnosticeren, bijsturen, evalueren, reflecteren

Doceren

Leren, zeker op een universiteit, gebeurt in hoge mate zelfstandig. Toch is het prettig als er een persoon is die kennis en vaardigheid ‘overdraagt’ aan studenten. Overdraagt tussen aanhalingstekens trouwens, want kennis, inzicht en vaardigheden moet je (zelf) al doende verwerven. Die zijn niet (letterlijk) overdraagbaar. Een tweede vraag die nu opkomt is: Wat is goed lesgeven eigenlijk? Wanneer is een docent een goede docent? Eenvoudige vragen die echter niet gemakkelijk te beantwoorden zijn. Al was het maar omdat we binnen Urbanism heel veel verschillende typen docenten hebben rondlopen. Allereerst natuurlijk de vaste staf, die een (vast) onderwijsprogramma binnen de MSc Stedebouwkunde verzorgt (docent, UD, UHD, HL). Maar daarnaast ook vele gastdocenten: van mensen die incidenteel een lezing houden tot en

met ‘vaste’ ontwerpbegeleiders. Daarnaast is het ene lesgeven het andere niet. Een collegezaal van 200 man iets (laten) leren, practica geven aan een groep van 40, ontwerponderwijs met 10-15 man, of één op één afstudeerders begeleiden, vergen toch allemaal andere lesgeefvaardigheden van de docent. Duidelijk mag zijn dat de eigenschappen van een goede stedebouw docent dus niet eenvoudig te omschrijven zijn. Toch heeft de professionele docent bepaalde kennis, inzicht en vaardigheden nodig heeft om zijn of haar taak als docent goed te kunnen verrichten, naast het voldoen aan een aantal basale lesgeefvoorwaarden (beschikbaarheid, bereikbaarheid, omgangsvormen). Maar welke kennis, inzicht en vaardigheden zijn dat dan precies? Niet alle vaardigheden heeft een docent immers te allen tijde nodig. Hieronder een eerste aanzet van 7 competentiegebieden, waarvan wij vinden dat die een professionele TU docent karakteriseren. Hij / zij : heeft een wetenschappelijke attitude en benadering Een professionele docent is kritisch en onderzoekend, en helpt studenten systematisch en analyserend te werk te gaan, met behulp van theorie, modellen, methoden en technieken, en zo te komen tot heldere verantwoordingen en argumentatie bij hun werk. is bekwaam in het ontwerpen Een professionele docent heeft vakinhoudelijke (ontwerp)kennis, expertise en ontwerpvaardigheden. Ontwerpen is een synthetische activiteit gericht op de totstandkoming van nieuwe of gewijzigde artefacten of systemen, met de bedoeling waarden te creëren conform vooraf gestelde eisen en wensen, waarbij de ontwerper zich bewust is van de wederzijdse beïnvloeding van het ontwerpproduct en het ontwerpproces. is bekwaam in het onderzoeken Een professionele docent heeft de competentie, i.e. de vakinhoudelijke kennis en vaardigheden, door onderzoek nieuwe wetenschappelijke

kennis te verwerven. Onderzoeken is het op doelgerichte en methodische wijze ontwikkelen van nieuwe kennis en nieuwe inzichten. beseft zijn/haar rol in het leerproces van de student(e) Een professionele docent begrijpt de positie die hij/zij heeft in het leerproces van de student(e) en kent zijn/haar eigen sterktes en zwaktes voor wat betreft (de competentiegebieden van) het lesgeven. Tevens begrijpt de docent dat verschillende studenten verschillende leerstijlen (kunnen) hebben en speelt daar in zijn lessen op in. heeft goede lesgeefvaardigheden Een professionele docent heeft goede vaardigheden op het vlak van didactiek, pedagogiek, communicatie en heeft een grote set aan intellectuele basisvaardigheden. is een beoordelaar en een onderwijsontwikkelaar Een professionele docent kan studenten, studentenwerk, onderwijseenheden en zijn/ haar eigen functioneren beargumenteerd en transparant evalueren, mede ten behoeve van de beoordeling en verwijzing van studenten, en de ontwikkeling van het onderwijs. houdt rekening met de onderwijs- en lesgeefcontext Lesgeven doe je niet geïsoleerd, maar heeft altijd een temporele en maatschappelijke context. Verder is de onderwijseenheid waarbinnen lesgegeven wordt onderdeel van een facultair onderwijsprogramma, met haar eigen leerdoelen, eindtermen, en didactisch concept. De docent kent de facultaire Studiegids, de inschrijvingsprocedure voor studenten en onderwijsmedia zoals Blackboard. Een professioneel docent is zich van deze onderwijs- en lesgeefcontext bewust en heeft de competentie deze context te integreren in zijn/haar lesgeven.

Onderwijs organiseren

De organisatie van het onderwijs kent een

inhoudelijke kant en een organisatorischelogistieke kant. Hier zullen we voornamelijk ingaan op de inhoudelijke aspecten. Het onderwijsprogramma speelt hierbij een centrale rol. Het betreft primair de keuze van de leerstof, leerdoelen en leermiddelen, en de samenhang hiervan met de eindtermen van de opleiding . Hiermee nauw verbonden is de opbouw van die leerstof; het onderwijsconcept, i.e. de wijze en logica waarop een onderwijsprogramma is vormgegeven. Wanneer krijgt de student wat aan bod? En waarom? En hoe? Welke didactische werkvormen (colleges, ontwerpstudio’s, projectonderwijs, casestudies, practica, seminars, workshops, ed) worden ingezet om studenten tot kennis, inzicht en begrip te (kunnen) laten komen? Als laatste is het beoordelen een belangrijk aspect. Hierbij spelen keuzes als ‘wie beoordeelt?’, ‘wat wordt beoordeeld?’ en ‘wanneer wordt beoordeeld?’ Hiervoor worden leerdoelen opgesteld, beoordelingscriteria geformuleerd en eindproducten gedefinieerd .

Verantwoordelijkheden, maar voor wie?

Leeromgeving Misschien een enorme open deur, maar wij vinden dat in eerste instantie de afdeling Urbanism (bestuur én staf) samen de verantwoordelijkheid dragen om een goede leeromgeving voor studenten te creëren. Zelfkritisch als wij zijn, lijken wij hier te kunnen constateren dat anno 2007 er maar weinig mensen te zijn die het totaalplaatje van onze MSc Urbanism kunnen omschrijven (wat wordt waar en wanneer en hoe onderwezen). Wij hebben geen cijfers maar ‘een rondje over de gang’ lijkt ons vermoeden te bevestigen. Dat is zorgelijk, want als je als docent niet de onderwijsinhoud kent van het grotere onderwijsprogramma, hoe kun je jouw lessen (leerstof, leerdoelen, leermiddelen) daar dan goed op afstemmen? De opbouw en samenhang zijn dan in gevaar. Maar waarom kent de ‘gemiddelde’ stedebouwdocent het totale programma dan niet? Misschien is de opbouw en samenhang wel niet zo overzichtelijk of logisch… Hier ligt ons

inziens duidelijk een taak voor de afdeling. Zij moet het raamwerk van de opleiding -opbouw, samenhang, onderwijsconcept, leerdoelen, leerstof, leermiddelen, beoordelingscriteriaduidelijk communiceren naar alle docenten en studenten. Alle Urbanism semesterboeken moeten bij alle docenten en studenten bekend zijn. Wat ons betreft is dit iets van voortdurende revisie en terugkoppeling . We kunnen natuurlijk kiezen voor een nieuwe of andere opbouw, maar als het (alleen) daarbij blijft dan sluimert over een paar jaar weer een gebrek aan overzicht over de afdeling. Het inrichten van de leeromgeving is echter niet enkel voorbehouden aan de docenten! De student heeft ook een belangrijke rol. Hij of zij kan de eigen leeromgeving inrichten -op zijn minst beïnvloeden-, en daarmee tegelijkertijd de leeromgeving van anderen. (Pro-)Actieve betrokkenheid stimuleert het wetenschappelijke klimaat en het wetenschappelijke debat met de docenten en mede studenten. Ook hier valt een kritische noot te plaatsen, maar nu aan het adres van de student. We merken dat velen niet op de hoogte zijn van de leerdoelen van de onderwijsonderdelen. Te vaak merken we dat studenten onvoorbereid naar college of atelier komen. Veel studenten (b)lijken kennis opgedaan in het verleden (BSc) vaak ‘vergeten’ (het cumulatieve aspect van leren). Leerproces Hoewel er veel over verantwoordelijkheden in leerprocessen te zeggen valt vanuit diverse wetenschappelijke hoeken (didactiek, pedagogiek, cognitieve psychologie ed.) is de bottom line erg eenvoudig. De student is primair verantwoordelijk voor zijn eigen leerproces. Iedereen is immers verantwoordelijk voor zijn eigen persoonlijke ontwikkeling (ook docenten) en dat is bij ons, bij Urbanism, echt niet anders. Hoewel wij de indruk hebben dat menig student anders denkt, of misschien anders (had) verwacht. De docent is echter wel een expert (of zou dat moeten zijn) op het gebied van het faciliteren, stimuleren en begeleiden van leerprocessen. De docent helpt studenten bij het verkennen van hun toekomstige positie als vakgenoot. Hij of zij heeft daarom wel

degelijk een belangrijke rol. Maar dit alleen is te weinig. Het vraagt ook om motivatie en ambitie van de student. Het is daarom voor studenten raadzaam om vaak de discussie met de docent aan te gaan. Je vraagt waarover je het dan samen moet hebben? Over alle onderwerpen die in deze bijdrage worden aangestipt. En trouwens niet alleen in woorden, maar juist ook in de vorm van concrete (ontwerp)voorstellen en producten. Wij zijn namelijk van mening dat goed onderwijs in al zijn facetten een co-productie is van de docenten/afdeling enerzijds en de studenten anderzijds. Leerprocessen in ontwerponderwijs Het bijzondere van het leerproces in de faculteit der Bouwkunde is dat daarbij het ontwerpen centraal staat en dat dit niet alleen berust op denken (kennis en inzicht) maar ook op doen (vaardigheid). Het gaat voortdurend om een juiste balans en samenhang daartussen. Hoe kun je ontwerpen doceren en hoe kun je het eigenlijk leren? Wat is de rol van de docent en van de student daarbij? Het is de taak van de zowel de onderwijsorganisatie en de docent om het spel en de stukken te bedenken waarmee de student zich ontwerpkennis, -inzicht en -vaardigheid kan eigen maken. In een goede opleiding kan dit spel variëren van een “onmogelijke opgave”, waarin je gedwongen wordt om allerlei vanzelfsprekendheden opnieuw ter discussie te stellen tot een “maakbare” opgave waarin puur de technische materialisering centraal staat. Of van een opgave met een voorgestructureerd programma tot een hybride of programmaloos ontwerp. Het essentiële van de opleiding is de laboratoriumsituatie; de nadruk ligt niet primair op het simuleren van de latere beroepspraktijk maar op een kritische verkenning van de vakinhoud en de grenzen daarvan. Dit vraagt kennis en overzicht van het vakgebied. Bepaalde dingen worden wel en andere worden niet van belang geacht. De docenten bouwen als school dit gemeenschappelijke referentiekader. Zij hebben de taak dit voortdurend, samen met de studenten, te exploreren en de nieuwsgierigheid van de docent kan daarbij als een katalysator

werken voor de student en vice versa. Het stedebouwkundig referentiekader, de verzameling van stedebouwkundige bouwstenen en ontwerpvoorbeelden vormt een kennisreservoir; maar dit moet voor de student hanteerbaar zijn, hij moet ermee om kunnen gaan en het mag niet belemmerend werken op zijn inventiviteit en originaliteit. Stedebouwkunde is niet een louter technisch vak waarbij sprake kan zijn van mechanisch handelen dat herhaalbaar is. De ontwerper moet elke keer opnieuw een specifieke oplossing vinden om de kloof te overbruggen tussen tegenstrijdige eisen en om nieuwe perspectieven te genereren. In die zin is het ontwerp, als getekende en gemotiveerde voorstelling van een nieuwe werkelijkheid, het communicatiemiddel bij uitstek, niet alleen voor een gedachtenuitwisseling tussen student en docent, maar ook voor de student met zichzelf. Het is de kunst/kunde om dit kritische gesprek zodanig te structureren in een reeks van uitgekiende ontwerpopgaven, dat de student een voldoende basis kan leggen voor de ontwikkeling van een eigen houding en handschrift. Dit is meteen ook dé basisvoorwaarde voor een excellente school in de Stedebouwkunde. (1) zie diverse functieprofielen zoals gedefinieerd via het Universitair Systeem van Functieordenen (UFO), januari 2005, Den Haag: VSNU, Vereniging van Universiteiten. (2) naar: Verschaffel, 1995, Beïnvloeden van leerprocessen. In: J. Lowyck & N. Verloop (red.) Onderwijskunde. Een kennisbasis voor professionals. Groningen: WoltersNoordhoff, p. 153-188 (3) ibidem (4) zie box Eindtermen Stedebouwkunde (5) zie bijvoorbeeld Rooij, R. (2005) Beoordelingscriteria afstuderen Stedebouwkunde, 08 juli 2005, www.urbanism. nl en Meijers, A.W.M., C.W.A.M. van Overveld, en J.C. Perrenet (2005) Criteria Academische (3TU) Bachelor en Mastersemester opleiding, Eindhoven: TU/e (Technische Universiteit Delft, Technische Universiteit Eindhoven en Universiteit Twente) (6) zie bijvoorbeeld Bevers, J.A.A.M. en J.J.W.M. Wagenmakers (Instituut voor Onderzoek van het Wetenschappelijk Onderwijs Katholieke Universiteit Nijmegen) (1973) Een Mogelijke Strategie voor Herprogramering, In: Van Voorden W.M., T.M Chang en L.J.M. van Guens-Wiegman (red) (1973) Onderwijs in de Maak, Utrecht/Antwerpen: Uitgeverij Het Spectrum (7) Smienk, Gerrit en Johannes Niemeijer (2000) De Hand van de Meester, Het Ontwerponderwijs in Praktijk, Rotterdam: Uitgeverij 010: p. 118

Domeinspecifieke eindtermen MSc U

0.0 Ontwerp: Het vermogen om op verschillende schaalniveaus ruimtelijke concepten en stedenbouwkundige ontwerpen te vervaardigen die zowel aan esthetische als aan technische en functionele eisen voldoen. 0. Het doelmatig kunnen aanwenden van de hieronder genoemde kennis, kunde en vaardigheid ten dienste van het stedenbouwkundig ontwerpen. 1. Wetenschap: Passende kennis van de theorie en het kennisapparaat van de stedenbouw; grondslagen, ontwerponderzoek, ontwerpmiddelen, strategieĂŤn en methoden alsmede de reflectie daarop. 2. Geschiedenis: Passende kennis van de geschiedenis van de stad en de stedenbouw (in Nederlandse en internationale context), alsmede inzicht in processen die hebben geleid tot menselijke nederzettingen en occupatiepatronen in cultuur- en natuurhistorisch opzicht. Inzicht in prototypen, typologieĂŤn en transformaties. Kritiek en reflectie. 3. Media: Vaardigheden en methoden in beeld, geschrift en woord om een plan en ontwerp voor anderen inzichtelijk te maken. Vaardigheid in het operationaliseren van media voor ontwerponderzoek. Theorievorming. 4. Onderzoek: Vaardigheden op de gebieden van stedenbouwkundig onderzoek, inzicht in plannings- en ontwerpmethodieken en vaardigheid met de analyse van stedenbouwkundige verschijnselen en oplossingen en vaardigheid met de functionele, temporele en compositorische analyse. 5. Planning: Passende kennis van de ruimtelijke planning, de organisatie, de middelen en instrumenten van de ruimtelijke ordening en planningsniveaus in Nederland. Reflectie op de verhouding tussen de rol van planning en ontwerp. 6.(landschaps-) Architectuur: Passende kennis van vaardigheid met andere bij de ruimtelijke vormgeving betrokken disciplines, te weten de architectuur, en de landschapsarchitectuur. Reflectie op de verhouding (landschaps-) Architectuur-Stedenbouw. 7. Maatschappij: Passende kennis van de maatschappijwetenschappen, sociale en historische geografie en de ecologie. 8. Fysica/economie/recht: Passende kennis van de stedenbouwfysica, en de economie, alsmede van het ruimtelijk ordenings -en stedenbouwrecht. 9.Techniek: Kennis van de inrichtingstechnologie, in het bijzonder die van waterhuishouding, civiele techniek, cultuurtechniek, bouwrijp maken, nutsvoorzieningen en openbare werken. Inzicht in technische randvoorwaarden, grenzen en modellen. 10. Management: Inzicht in en vaardigheid met de methoden van stedenbouwkundige management processen. 11. Beroep: Inzicht in het beroep van de stedenbouwkundige en de rol van de stedenbouwkundige in de maatschappij. 12. Functie: Het vermogen om in de ontwikkeling van een ruimtelijk concept voor stedenbouw de relatie tussen mensen en ruimten en de afstemming daarvan op menselijke behoeften en maatstaven te betrekken. 13. Realisatie: Vaardigheid in het toetsen van het stedenbouwkundig ontwerp aan normen en regels van vorm, functie, technische uitvoering, grondexploitatie en milieuvoorwaarden. 14. Procedures: passende kennis van en inzicht in de procedures en processen van besluitvorming m.b.t. stedenbouwkundige interventies.

Aan de medewerkers van de Afdeling Urbanism Henco Bekkering De redactie van ons trouwe tijdschrift Atlantis heeft mij de gelegenheid geboden als kersverse voorzitter hier wat meningen en (goede) voornemens te spuien. Zij sluiten aan op de Terugblik van de vorige voorzitter, Han Meyer, in de Urbanism Nieuwsbrief, waarin hij zijn dank betuigt voor de steun en het vertrouwen die hij de afgelopen zes jaren heeft ondervonden. Dat moet ik nog maar zien te verdienen.

aantrekken van “nieuwe” medewerkers voor de organisatie en inhoudelijke voeding van het U-Lab in de personen van John Westrik en Erik van der Kooij, goede bekenden van de Afdeling en ook materieel is er het een en ander op gang gebracht. Hier moeten we in gezamenlijkheid alles op alles zetten. Ook is René van de Velde benoemd als UHD om een nieuwe Master Landscape Architecture voor te bereiden.

De Afdeling staat sterker dan enige tijd geleden. We zijn er nog lang niet tevreden mee, maar het beleid en de vasthoudendheid die we onder leiding van Han Meyer hebben getoond hebben wel resultaat gehad. We zijn echter vrij plotseling in behoorlijk zwaar weer terecht gekomen als gevolg van de herverdeling van de financiële middelen van de Faculteit voor 2008 die de decaan door lijkt te zetten. Eerst leek het alleen een wat onoverzichtelijke verandering van de begrotingssystematiek, maar het blijkt te gaan om een grote ingreep in met name de meerjaren-toezeggingen waarop de Afdeling Urbanism de vernieuwing van het onderwijs in directe relatie met de vernieuwing van het onderzoek had gestoeld: het U-Lab. Ondanks de decimering hiervan houden we vol. We zijn gelukkig net op tijd geweest met het

Ter geruststelling voor alle zekerheid: ook de definitieve begroting zal geen gevolgen hoeven hebben voor ons huidige medewerkersbestand; in veel gevallen wel voor de voorgenomen uitbreidingen daarvan. Er is binnen de Afdeling niet zoveel dat ik zou willen veranderen. Dat zou in mijn ogen de verdiensten van de afgelopen periode ook ernstig tekort doen. Eigenlijk heb ik maar twee voornemens, die we ook al eerder hadden maar nooit helemaal ten uitvoer hebben gebracht. De eerste is de tijdige opzet van een jaarplanning voor de inzet van de medewerkers in onderwijs en onderzoek. Daarmee weet iedereen waar hij aan toe is en weten we waar we van afwijken als dat nodig is. En naar de decaan kunnen we ermee laten zien wat we doen en van

plan zijn. Het tweede is de presentatie van Urbanism naar studenten in de BSc op de Faculteit en naar buiten, in binnen- en buitenland. In het buitenland gaat het om de verdere uitbouw van de aantrekkingskracht die we blijken te hebben op buitenlandse studenten van over de gehele wereld. Dat moet worden versterkt door intensivering van de internationale samenwerking, ook op het niveau van uitwisseling met leden van de staf. In het binnenland gaat het niet alleen om het werven studenten van andere faculteiten, universiteiten en HBO-instellingen, maar evengoed om het winnen van opdrachtgevers voor derde geldstroomonderzoek. Onze ambitie zou moeten zijn weer een centrale rol te spelen in het debat over de ruimtelijke ordening van ons land en over de toekomst van de discipline. Voor dat alles is opnieuw de volle inzet van alle medewerkers van de Afdeling hard nodig, in een sfeer van collegiale samenwerking door de verschillende secties en leerstoelen heen. Ik vertrouw erop dat we dat op zullen (blijven) brengen. Aarzel niet om ideeĂŤn te komen spuien of problemen te komen bespreken. Mijn deur staat open, vaak letterlijk.

PARAMARIBO 09

Cristina Ampatzidou

_ SURINAME 10

01. chinese temple in the city center 02. the synagogue in the 05.the main mosque in the city center 06. the wooden cath waterfront 10. mosque and synagogue side by side 11. boats 14. anton de kompt university main entrance 15. keti koti cele city 17. the centrral market 18. the bus terminal 19. anton de k

e city center 03. the pesidential house 04. typical street scene hedral 07. fort zeelandia 08. neighborhood scene 09. the s to new amsterdam 12. school kids 13. tropical architecture ebrations - womenn with traditional clothing 16. casino in the kompt university - school of architecture 20. departing boats

ON ‘FREE CHOICE’ IN URBANISM A Statement

Edward Hulsbergen

Introduction Both demand and supply of Free Choice in Urbanism (or elsewhere in the Faculty) seem object of dissatisfaction, mainly subcutaneously expressed. The editors of Atlantis desire to push the topic to the surface. The following statement might be of use as a kick-off. One quarter of the Urbanism (Stedebouwkunde) study programme is labelled as ‘Free Choice’ (optional study subject). After the first semester Design and Strategy (30 ects), and the compulsory part of the second semester (15 ects), the student can study whatever wished for (15 ects), within the faculty, outside the faculty, or even in another university. This concept is, as such, great. Why not doing a course in geography or planologie (land use planning; urban, city, town, regional planning) to enlarge one’s own urbanist view on space, and to understand how in other disciplines the conditions to create space are defined? Or a course in Spanish or Italian, to be able to read professional architectural texts, a course in French or Chinese in preparation of spreading one’s professional wings as an engineer in the near future? Or reading and writing about fundamental discussions for which there is not enough time in the compulsory study parts? Or doing research on the subject that keeps popping up but for which there was never enough time?

Urbanism Urbanism can be defined as the study and practice of the organisation and reorganisation of urban and regional areas, in order to deal with spatial,

functional and structural topics in relation to societal questions at large. Generally speaking, the task of urban design and planning (urbanism) is to integrate a variety of interests into proposals (designs), including approaches to the solution of conflicts. All this in a complex and dynamic urban and regional context which includes a variety of spatial scales, sectors and actors, not to forget politics, policies and involved (other) disciplines. Urbanism is opposed to fragmented, ad hoc urban interventions. Short term and long term need to be linked in a strategic frame (vision) for sustainable urban and regional development. Urbanists work professionally in various roles: as urban managers, as advisors and mediators, as visionary designers, or as scientists; in public or private institutions and offices. This means that the compulsory study programme never can cover all these fields in width and depth. The intention is to prepare the student with knowledge and skills which enable her or him to start in any role and with any task that is asked for in a specific urbanism job, and to continue by long life learning. The Free Choice is the opportunity for a student to fill in felt gaps, or follow (professional) interests.

Supply In Urbanism and in the Faculty as a whole - in the wake of the Faculty’s call to provide free choice projects - the supply may be called abundant. Nevertheless, many students express that there is not enough free study opportunity. As far as I understand this, the felt shortage may have very different origins. From “no idea what I would like to do, but what I find is not what I could be looking for” to “the compulsory course keep me from studying what I see as necessary”. Most students

will be somewhere in between: missing overview, uncertainty about what could be interesting, fear of wasting time, or pressed by the compulsory tasks using time that should be reserved for Free Choice study. Systematic interviews could make the picture complete. In this statement I focus on Free Choice in the context of the Urbanism study (15 ects in the second half of the second semester), as relevant for urbanism students and for students from other departments in our faculty or students from other universities. I can imagine that the supply side of Free Choice for students looks like disorganised complexity (which I personally do not mind, as this can be an instrument for ‘growing up’; Free Choice as an opportunity to be confronted with the ‘void of choice’ and learning to cope with one own indecision). However, I also think it necessary that there is in fact an underlying structure which – if asked for – can be explained clearly enough to help students to find their way efficiently.

Thinking about free choice study in urbanism A university study includes: theory, method and application. For a study like Urbanism the ‘understanding’ of phenomena is not enough; the proposed in(ter)ventions are supposed to ‘work’ in the practice. So, in terms of contents students could wish to fill the gaps – which are certainly experienced in the compulsory programme as time is limited – in their theoretical knowledge, the knowledge of planning and design methodology and knowledge of and experience with instruments. But there is tension which should not be neglected, but should be at the heart of the optional study subject debate. On the one hand, Free Choice study from the point of view of students should be really free, leaving the responsibility with the particular student. On the other hand, Free Choice study supplied within the context of urbanism should be of the same high quality as the compulsory part, but with the greatest attention for the wishes, demands or needs of the particular

student. Unlimited freedom doesn’t exist; there is always a context, there are always connections and (experienced or actual) limitations. Free within the context of urban design and planning means free with a clear link to urban problems and urban tasks. Points of departure are the aims of the Urbanism study, which might be formulated as: (1) the capability to make a (preliminary) design as a research hypothesis for a concrete design area; (2) the capability to define relevant research questions and problem statements concerned (yes or no based on a thorough ex ante evaluation of an urban design); (3) the capability to start, execute, manage and report an urban design research project, including conclusions and recommendations to improve a design (one’s own or of someone else); (4) the capability to enlarge scientific and practical knowledge and skills by research (theoretical, methodological, instrumental) linked to design; and (5) the capability to negotiate strategically (long term) urban interests in the heat of sector related interests and hypes. Free Choice activities are in my view only good if they can be linked to the preceding.

Linking and nesting In my opinion, from the point of view of the education in Urbanism, key words are ‘linking’ and ‘nesting’, both forms of connecting study parts in a defined context (in this case: Urbanism). Linking means that the Free Choice study project is clearly linked to the contents and approaches of Urbanism, in fact to the Urbanism aims mentioned above. This should be a leading principle in the supply of any Urbanism Chair. Nesting means that Free Choice projects can be small and large (3 to 15 ects) covering the same subject. The course Urban Planning, Design by Research for Strategic Location Development is our attempt to organise the choices in this way. It consists of two parts: the first part (AR0860) concerns research by design (the evaluation of a design, with as a result one or more research

questions (in time 3ects), followed by an urban design oriented research project. This research ends with conclusions and recommendations for the improvement of the original design (in time 6ects). The student can decide to do only the first part (9ects). The project can be enlarged with the second part (AR0870) which is the integrated urban redesign (6 ects). The urban design oriented research project is also Free Choice as a separate project (Urban Research and Report, 6ects, with another code to make this possible, AR0200). The research project is in this way ‘nested’ in the larger whole of a 9 or 15 ects Free Choice programme. In the future this idea could be extended, by a 3 ects Free Choice focussing on theoretical study to explore researchable questions to guide the urban design oriented research project. This is not to say that the foregoing is prescriptive. I just want to pose the question: is there in Urbanism a clear position about what kind of (students’) energy is worthwhile spent in the framework of free choice concerning theory, method and application? This without hindering students to follow their interests, in whatever discipline.

Some more thoughts There is not much time in the compulsory study parts to really read the ‘classics’ (old and new) such as Stedebouw (De Casseres, 1926), or A Theory of Good City Form (Lynch, 1981), nor is there much time to read the books produced by staff members, or dissertations written by urbanists, or the many books on architecture, urban planning and design, developments in society and space, technology, and research methodology. Critical evaluation of an existing situation (which can be described as the urban design as it exists) is a core activity of urbanists. Thorough evaluation is a good activity for a free choice project. The result could be well defined praise or doubts about the explanation and underpinning of the design, and the deduction and formulation of theoretical or empirical questions, which as such also could be subject to free choice reading and

researching. It is also very worthwhile to give students the opportunity to make a (free choice) critical reflection on one’s own design(s). Research, in particular empirical research complete, including problem statement and report - is the Cinderella of the education; most ‘research’ is equivalent to ‘retrieval’ or ‘selection and combining’. However, society expects that engineers know better that the average citizen what they are talking about, and that engineers know how to come to independent judgements. As a design is always based on preferences of the designer, altering a design departing from other preferences is no big deal. However, improving an existing situation or a proposed design based of research outcomes is the characteristic of an university-educated urbanist.

Conclusions - Free choice for the students is an opportunity to study completely after one’s own interest: to gain knowledge and/or to improve capability. - Free choice supply by Urbanism should offer urbanism students a clear context. For students from other universities Urbanism could offer opportunities to ‘urbanise’ the problem statements and products of the own discipline. - The task should therefore be as ‘open’ as possible, however, with strict rules about the quality and quantity of the work (professional fun, not just fun). - ‘Linking’ and ‘nesting’, also ‘through Chairs’ (analogue to through scales), need attention as potential means to create a ‘free choice in Urbanism’ structural framework. - Finally, Free Choice is also an opportunity to do some independent, preliminary exploration relating to the final study subject and graduation project, analogue to the air quality detector.

HAN MEYER reflections An Interview

by arjen Spijkerman “After six years the department of Urbanism will get a new chairman. Since September Henco Bekkering will take over chairmanship from Han Meyer. Han Meyer will take over research Nestorship from Jürgen Rosemann”. So now it’s the perfect occasion to ask Han Meyer about his experiences as being a chairman and his ambitions for the future at our faculty.

- Could you briefly describe the history of your carrier in the field of urbanism?

I studied at this faculty and finished in 1979 with the specialisation of urbanism. After graduation I worked at the department of urban planning in Rotterdam. In the last years I became involved in the reconstruction of old port areas in the city. In relation to that work I made several study trips to other port cities all over the world, where similar processes were taking place. In 1990 I was appointed here at the TU as an associated professor on urban design. Here I decided to continue with this study of port city development. These PhD pieces resulted in the book ‘City & Port’ which was published in 1996. In 2001 I was appointed a professor of urban design and that’s what I still am. Besides that there were all kinds of sideways which I took like membership of committees and in the early nineties I joined a committee for the redevelopment of the port city Antwerp. I was also vice chairman of the AIR (Architecture International Rotterdam). And for a long time I was involved in the Europan, which organizes competitions for young architects and urban designers all over Europe.

- When became urbanism an accepted discipline at the faculty of architecture?

Froger and van Eesteren where the first real

urbanism professors who where appointed in the 40’s. At the end of the 60’s urbanism became a special track on the faculty of architecture. It was recognized as an important field of scientific academic research and knowledge. And that has to do with the long planning tradition of Holland, which is one of the very few countries in the world where such a specialisation exists in the academic studies. In the 20’s and 30’s the first professional organisations where founded like the BNS (Union Dutch Urbanism), the NIROV (Dutch institute for Spatial planning and Public Housing) and the first departments of urban planning. This was the period when urbanism was recognized as a professional field. Granpré Molière, a professor of architecture was the first one who set up a program with specific parts concerning urban design, which he concerned as very important to be known for architects who are working in the urban field. He stated two important factors for urban design, where not enough attention is paid these days. These factors are: - the technical conditions of urban design. Looking to the old study programs it’s very surprising that a lot of attention for study parts is related to civil engineering, like preparing the building site, water management, traffic, size of the streets etc. - the cultural and societal aspects of urbanism. Someone like Molière is pointed very often as being an early traditionalist, as you can call him, but he was very focused on the cultural value of an urban district and how can this be expressed in the design. One of most the famous designs of Molière is Vreewijk, the garden village in Rotterdam, but also the reconstruction plans for Middelburg which he did together with his

college Piet Verhagen. They where very based on the interpretation of the cultural value of streetscape, the quality of the urban space as an important value, as a condition for being able to live together. As you can define the society as an amount of people who should live together, they try to pay attention what is then the contribution of an urban designer. And how should we make compositions of different elements like houses, schools, shops and especially the public domain. How this should be organized in order to create a living condition form. So you should have some notion of what is public space, not only in the sense that it is a street and trees and should have a profile but what is the sense of it in society with a culture of public live. This was a very important question in the thirties but also in the post war era because of the complex development of society, full of social, cultural and political contrasts. Both aspects are very relevant today again. The technical aspect because we are facing a very difficult situation in finding new technical solutions because of climate changes the new water situation, mobility and so on. And as a matter of fact it’s a little shame that some don’t have enough skills. We also should pay more attention in the study program on this element to be able to deal with that. The cultural question of today is about the contribution of an urban designer in a society which finds itself very much in a process of transition. And our role is to make space which can contribute to the situation again for living together. The question is how to combine technical and cultural aspects in one approach. The difference with the previous periods is that we have some specific points on the agenda which first has to do with the scale of the region, how to give sense to the regional scale

that is only possible if you can relate it with the very low scale of the urban design. When the region is just an abstract notion of a map you can not define it. Second is that we have work in another type of condition that I have worked in the 70’s and 80’s, which had to deal with a big change in responsibilities and different roles of sample state of lower parties, municipalities, private market and individual citizens. For a long time especially Dutch urbanism has evolved since the 20’s in a rather top-down approach. This is really well shown in the map of the second report on the spatial planning in the 60’s, which highlighted in this period a very strict order map. It was posed that is was possible to plan from a very national point of view but this turned out to be the complete opposite, now in the Nota Ruimte the focus is more decentralisation. Off course this did not happen suddenly, because the Nota Ruimte is a moment in a very long process, but it is a rather extreme point of view. So I think that is not exactly the way how we can deal with a lot of questions because especially the western part of Holland is not possible to create a new reality without the role of higher central authorities. What we are looking for now is a new balance between high and low and public and private responsibilities. That is rather difficult but also important that we should find new solutions for these questions. The Real Estate people are now promoting the integral location development (integrale gebiedsontwikkeling) as the way we should do it! Perhaps it’s a contribution but I think it’s just a very small part in this complete question, because integral location development is nothing more than making plans for rather smaller size locations. It’s very good to strive for intergrality, because integral means how everything is connected with each other,

but the point is how the location itself can contribute to the development of the region as a whole. Right now in the Msc1 semester a perspective has to been developed for a larger regional entire area where students should be able to relate projects which have a strategy or a meaning as an engine. This is at the moment the main question and perhaps also the discussion in our department. So maybe that discussion is too difficult and too complex to start directly in Urbanism, perhaps its wiser to keep that question for the graduation labs and perhaps it would be wiser to start with a more elementary urbanism knowledge in the first semesters of the master track, then I am talking about the more technical and the cultural societal knowledge. Because these are two aspects of urbanism students should at least know about.

- Can you describe your new position as Nestor, and on what topic you want to do research? What I would like to promote on research is the relation between the main topic in the research program and the education, especially in the graduation labs in the master program. What we are doing right now is making preparations for founding a U-lab. U-lab works with the three main teams of research but also with the coming studio’s of the master; urban regeneration, urban landscape and the transformation of the global metropolis. On the other hand we want to cooperate more with professional organisations like city municipalities, provinces and the national authorities. Right now we are talking with VROM the provinces of North and South Holland and the cities of Amsterdam, Rotterdam and The Hague. We want to focus on three themes:

The theme of ‘urban regeneration’ deals with questions about the regeneration of the existing city and as well what to do with the post-war areas, the city centre, and the sub centres the formal harbour and industrial areas and so on. The theme ‘urban landscapes’ focuses on the question in what sense should urbanisation and the landscape relate to each other in new regional concepts, is it necessary and how it is possible to protect the open landscape. The third theme is Globalization and Urban Transformations: we have to ask our self how to deal with globalisation, if for instance half of the port economy in Rotterdam will be financed by Chinese cooperation’s. What does this mean for the spatial development for the region of Rotterdam? On the other hand a process is taking place in foreign cities; all over the world cities are developing more explosive than here. So what we can learn from them and what can they learn from us.

- If Buitenhof (a debate program) will invite you, like Adriaan Geuze was already several times, on what topic you want to debate then? If they invite me, for me personally the most important question is how the public character of the city and the urban landscape can be maintained and improved. Because in the development of regions it is very important to put forward what are the most important public features, in the sense of spatial structures. This makes sense in the way of regions that should not only be abstract notions on maps, but spatial entities which are part of everyday life of people, and should be recognized as high quality living environments. That’s now very much on the table which is also rather endangered because of processes of urban sprawl, privatisation and location development. I already focussed on that the

location development can be integral on a very local scale but can be a destroying factor exactly on the regional level. My second interest is still port area development; right now we are building up a special relation with Singapore, where a group researchers is doing research for port city development in Asia. This port city ambition has two reasons; - Firstly port cities are open for all kind of development in the most extreme examples and already for a long time are related into an international network and they need a structure to be very open to all kind of different influences from all over the world. - Secondly port cities are balancing on the edge of water and land and find themselves mostly in delta areas. Especially the delta areas are the most vulnerable areas in an ecological sense and you have to balance urbanisation with water quality and its management. So its not only about the small urban projects on the waterfronts, like the Kop van Zuid, but it is about the long term process of change of the next coming 50 years because they are so dependant from trade on the global economy and on the climate-change. So how can you already anticipate on big questions which will come the next coming decennia when the oil trade will be diminished and other types of energy are necessary, because this will have enormous consequences for the ground area and the land use in the port cities, which are now defined by oil refineries. So complete new conditions will exist and if we think now already about that future we should start to develop concepts for projects for long term development.

- Thank you very much. You are welcome.

WHAT HAPPENED TO THE CRITICAL STUDENT? A Reaction

Maarten Bouten In the Atlantis of June 4th 2007, Han Meyer argues for students reclaiming their position in the ‘appointment advisory committees’. I agree with Han Meyer that “the critical involvement of students is needed to increase the level of our educational program”. I disagree however with his statement that “this critical involvement is only possible when students themselves are convinced of this necessity of their participation, and when they claim a repair of their participation in the debates and committees”. I think there are many other ways for students to be involved in increasing the level of the educational program. They are convinced of the necessity of participation. But participation needs more than that. It is nice that Han Meyer acknowledges the positive influence of critical and involved students. His proposal for how this is possible is rather conservative however and doesn’t match contemporary possibilities for innovative organizations. Although the term ‘innovative organization’ might be detached from the daily reality of

the department of Urbanism, there are more appropriate ways than only committees to involve student and improve the quality of education. Han Meyer himself could have influenced these ways in his position as the (former) chairman of the department of Urbanism. A vital condition for the involvement of students, is that the organization is sensitive and open to critique and that it is effectively using this critique to improve both the organization and the professional and academic quality of the education. As a student I have experienced no organizational structure that usefully enabled (self)critique, whatsoever. Nor did I experience a departmentwide drive for quality, or an impressive vision behind the educational program and its level. Although I know these things are not easy in such a diverse academic environment, I think they are one of the preconditions before announcing a call for the involvement of critical students in a cog in the institutional mechanism. Participation of students should go much further than a facility to make the debates within committees more interesting.

I will not use this article to explore the possibilities for student involvement. However, I am convinced that if a more progressive approach to this subject would have been used before, this call wouldn’t have been necessary and the commitment and ambition of students and the quality of organization and education would have been in a better position than they are now. Also I would have been spending my energy on something else than this article. I know that the tone in both structure and content of this reaction are rather aggressive. This isn’t the way I normally prefer to communicate, but since the quality of my education is something I am concerned and care about this is the feeling that the shortsighted call of Han Meyer evokes. But if the ‘appointment advisory committee’ of Han Meyer needs the critical opinion of a student he can always invite me for a contribution to the debate. I however hope that this will not be the only improvement in student participation. j.m.bouten@student.tudelft.nl

WHAT HAPPENED TO THE CRITICAL STUDENT? A Letter to Han Meyer pieter van der kooij

Hello mr Meyer, For some time now I read in Atlantis a request to students to think about the education in the urbanism department. I would like to reply through this letter. My motivation for this is that I would like the education to improve before I return to university in February 2008 to attain my degree in urbanism. Secondly, I think good education increases the value of the degree I will get, the level of what I will learn, but also the reputation of the degree. In short something about me, I started studying bouwkunde in 2002 and chose to study urbanism in February 2006. I started with the master 2 and chose to fill up my 15 free choice points in this semester by studying a semester at the TU Berlin. After this, I continued studying in Delft, doing the first master semester in urbanism, to start an internship after this in February 2007 in Amsterdam until the end of July. After the summer I will do an internship in Berlin, to return to Delft in February 2008, in order

to finish the last two semesters and get the masters degree. Leaving the university to study abroad and then doing a 6 month internship has given me more experience in urbanism, so that I can say what the trade should be according to me and give some pointers on how I feel the education could be improved. I donâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t have the Atlantis issue here with me at the time I start writing this, but from memory I will try and stick to your questions. I believe you were asking students to tell about their personal experiences in urbanism, to point out their stumbling blocks and to come with proposals to improve the education. First about my personal experience with urbanism. I actually left university because I did not feel ready to finish my studies and because I was unsure what urbanism actually was. I also have to say that I did not feel

the motivation to finish, not sure knowing if this was right for me. I was just not that impressed by the education and felt the need to broaden my horizons. That sounds awful – at least as I am writing it - but I have to say that I have learnt a lot in the last six months and I imagine that I will learn even more until returning in February. Starting in the master 2 was a real culture shock to me. Different from the bachelor mainly through the many foreign students. As I studied in master 1 there were a lot of foreign students again, but they were disappointed by the education. As I understand they were much more content after doing the Urban Body course. Another shock is that the levels of master students are so different, many have finished internships, an architecture degree, come from an HTS and already have some working experience. Some actually did a bachelor at bouwkunde like me. Then for my stumbling blocks and how I feel education could be improved. (1) I hear that my bosses have little connections to education in Delft anymore, although they studied there. That means that no relevant information comes from there. The connection between professionals and education seems to be quite weak, sometimes they are lecturers but they do not teach at our university. When compared to academies of bouwkunst this is a great weakness. There, interesting professionals work as teachers. I know from academy students that there are weaknesses to that as well, but at least it can

be said they have the experience working as a professional in Dutch urbanism. So open up education to professionals, for instance by starting design-education in the evening like at academies. (2) This leads to the following: why are the teachers that are teaching, teaching at our university? Last night I googled Han Meyer, just to know who he is and what he has done. Including the bachelor semester in urbanism I did, I think I had only two lectures of Han Meyer in total. I think the semester manual is a good place to publish some information on the teachers, so that we know who is who and what he can do. (3) Open up the master 2 semester as a free choice semester. It is possible in architecture, so why not in urbanism? Opening up means opening it up totally, no restrictions: allow students to study abroad, to do internships, to do projects in architecture. The way they feel they can contribute to their own abilities, force students to take responsibility about their own future. (4) Use a portfolio system to determine the groups. As I was studying in Berlin there were actually more students than study places in design projects and therefore people had to apply by means of portfolio – or by taking part in a lottery system, of which I am against – in the first two semesters this could be used as such: In the mandatory semester 1 urbanism – I think a general semester on urbanism

is good to offer students an overview of urbanism, although I am sure the image offered at the moment is not so realistic and that it is actually more fun as I have noticed in my work – groups can be build up so that different students can learn from each other. In the semester 2 of urbanism a portfolio can be used to apply for projects, making it a sort of competition. At the TU Berlin this is quite normal and I think it is a good way of doing. Foreign students need a portfolio to apply, so they have one anyway. Dutch students need one to get a job, so starting to do this in university is not a bad lesson. This makes it possible for teachers to build interesting design groups or for students to determine with whom they want to work, resulting in interesting groups. Another way of doing this is for instance a small competition at the start of a project to see how serious students are about the project or a letter of motivation explaining their interest in certain subjects. At least we need to find a way to distinguish between students and to allow them to think about what they want to do. (5) As we will now have interesting groups of students put together, they can learn from each others experience. That means places to work are needed; ateliers on the faculty or a way to be able to rent cheap ateliers. This atelier space was available in Berlin as well, although not popular amongst all. Every chair had their own atelier and it was up to them to decorate it according to their wishes. That means competition between the chairs. At our

packed “bruisend gebouw” faculty there is of course no place for this, but we have a park, we have space around the faculty and space at the neighbouring faculty. I think studying should resemble a sort of professional officelike environment in which students have a place to work together and learn from each other. I actually enjoy working in my office with others and students will have to face this situation sooner or later. The nice thing about it is that the university only has to offer space and only limited material, everybody has their own laptop computer now anyway. Although we’re not Zurich, it can still be expected from students to invest in a computer. (6) Then what we could expect from teachers. I think it’s good if university resembles the professional environment. I think it would be good to have more interaction between groups in workshops, forcing students to make their work accessible to others. The teacher can be seen as person in charge and smaller groups with superiors (teachers or students) could join each other in presentations working on the same design task, but in a generic way. An example is the workshop “regio speciefieke architectuur” by SEV. More competition between groups stimulates creativeness. The teacher in this case will function more as a manager. My teacher Remon Rooij in the Master 1, was actually quite strong at stimulating a student’s potential. In combination with Camelia Mulders-Kusumo, they made up a really good team.

(7) Of course in this case there is one big but. Yes that is Dutch English. It relies on the willingness of students to learn from one another. Why would another student with better capacities want to teach someone who is not that good? How can those not be frustrated by the level that others are at. Well, hold them a bone. They are the teachers, they are the leaders, they learn more because they are teaching others. They are in charge of the project and have people working for them. Maybe they should talk to the clients, do the presentation, talk to the teacher. I can see it in my office, I am just an intern, my boss determines the line we’re working along. The subordinates fill this in, I fill in the design. I can think of a system in which this is the way in which education is organised, earning points by leading groups and only then having students finish their studies. In that way general level of the engineers/ designers who finish university gets better and the standard becomes higher. This adds value to the degree students can earn at the TU Delft. It is now only determined by the time available – almost everybody can finish the subjects in one go – and should be determined by the level of ability – in which maybe not everybody will finish a subject in one go.

say I have a positive attitude while I always assume education can only improve.

Well of course this is just a little small fantasy I am having here in front of my computer. Maybe not all is possible, but it can stir up a discussion leading to change. And maybe some changes will have taken effect by the time I get back to finish my studies. People

Pieter van der Kooij Van Foreestweg 98 2614 CL Delft t 06 41490822 e pietervanderkooij@hotmail.com

As I want to start studying again, I would really appreciate it if information on the different graduation labs would become more clear. The different presentations I have seen until now did not make that much clear and as I gather things are changing again. I would assume it is easy to post this information on the internet as the urbanism department has a - mostly not so up to date – website. Financing this change: Seen the developments at the “bruisend gebouw” faculty and the number of foreign students who pay a lot to study, I think financial reasons can not be leading. When they would be, I would gladly be introduced to the financials so that I can improve my proposal as I am only speaking out of personal experience. Besides I know another university with less money, that also seems to manage in the several ways I described. Your student, learning to take a critical stance. Pieter van der Kooij

Strategies for a Better World: From ‘Research by Design’ to ‘ActionResearch’ alexander g. vollebregt We are all urbanites. This proposition you are invited to consider as we walk a path that strives to establish a sensible relationship and intelligent understanding of the contemporary city and our co-involvement as academics. What in fact is the condition of post-modernity? Is it a response to modernism, a reaction or anti-action towards an ‘other’ way of thinking? Is it really something that must remain within the ‘truths’ of modern epistemology, or has it perhaps succeeded its ancestors and gradually yet surely evaded the grasp of its former ‘ministers of knowledge’? If we agree that we are creators of a time enabled with advanced technologies, we can surely agree that we are also products of this intricate correlation. Society and technology has always coevolved, and through that evolution has constantly generated possibilities theretofore unseen. New awakenings are continuously baffling our minds as our horizon of possibilities are continuously stretched. Perhaps this early proposition is best illustrated in the simple yet fundamental ‘axis of urbanization’ depicted by Henri Lefebvre in his 1970 book, The Urban Revolution in which he provocatively, yet seemingly prophetically denotes the urban process we unfold. In his ‘axis of urbanization’ he illustrates the process of development our cities have undergone since the beginning of time illustrating the transition from an agrarian to an urban age. Starting from the Political city and passing through the Mercantile and later Industrial City, he eventually reaches what he

refers to as the ‘critical zone’ of the current urban condition. Lefebvre elaborates how the Industrial City introduced an urban reality that was both amplified and exploded and had lost the features it inherited from the previous period, namely its organic totality. He refers to the historical process cities underwent as a process of implosion-explosion in which “the tremendous concentration (of people, activities, wealth, goods, objects, instruments, means and thought) of urban reality and the immense explosion, the projection of numerous, disjunct fragments (peripheries, suburbs, vacation homes, satellite towns) into space”. How extreme this moment may have been, it was only the predecessor for the urban condition we endure today; namely an urban condition wherein “the simple exchange between two individuals [has evolved] all the way to the exchange of products, works of art, ideas, and human beings”. A condition resulting to a period of generalization, wherein the effect of the process – namely the urban reality – becomes both cause and reason. Lefebvre concludes by seeing the urban problematic as a global phenomenon, we refer to this as ‘Globalization’. Accepting the effects and consequence of this condition, we may ask ourselves, which is the role of academia within such a complex urban system. Where can intelligence be found in order to relate and intervene within its myriad of forces and players? Manuel Delanda, while elaborating on Gilles Deleuze and his understanding of inter-related complex processes and perceiving the evolution of the

world and its constituents as a ‘becoming’ in continuous unfoldment states: “unlike social constructivism, which achieves openness by making the world depend on human interpretation, Deleuze achieves it by making the world into a creative, complexifying and problematizing cauldron of becoming. Because of their anthropocentrism, constructivist philosophies remain prisoners of what Foucault called “the episteme of man”, while Deleuze plunges ahead into a post-humanist future, in which the world has been enriched by a multiplicity of non-human agencies, of which metallic catalysts, and their acts of recognition and intervention, are only one example. (…) in contrast with other realist or materialist philosophies of the past (…) the key non-human agency in Deleuzian philosophy has nothing to do with the negative, with oppositions or contradictions, but with pure, productive, positive difference. It is ultimately this positive difference, and its affirmation in thought, that insures the openness of the world. (Delezue and the Open-Ended Becoming of the World) Maurice Merleau-Ponty while reflecting on concerns regarding the occidental perceptual apparatus puts forward that current “intellectualism (…) is blind to the mode of existence and co-existence of perceived objects, to the life which steals across the visual field and secretly binds its parts together” (Phenomenology of Perception). He questions to what extent our current mode of understanding may enable us to perceive the inherent yet often hidden relations in complex systems. Bearing the former in mind, we now may reflect upon the ongoing struggles in academia to meet the challenges of an evolving and complex urban reality, and in what manner it may strive to prepare its candidates for such an undertaking. At the beginning of the

new millennium, the faculty of Architecture had entered a new pathway concerning research and education. In preparation for the implementation of the Bachelor-Masters system, pilot studios had been setup to operate under the motto of ‘research by design’. While the more classical sciences had already an established research driven agenda, the faculty of Architecture, being the front-runner of student capacity in the university, strived to generate an equally competitive research and PhD aptitude. Shortly hereafter, the department of Urbanism introduced the much debated ‘Ways to Study Urbanism’ documentation which was produced to further facilitate the teaching and research methodology. Generated as the result of a series of interviews throughout the faculty to establish an enclosed methodological understanding towards knowledge formation, it amounted to a compilation of insights concerning how one may find ways to generate intellectual competence. However, one may question if such a manifesto may (or may not) be all-encompassing to its aspirations. In a world that seems to generate not so much a ‘generic city’ through the convergence of technological forces, but seemingly invigorates an increasing divergence of creativity, it is contentious if any true or absolute methodology may even exist. If indeed its aspirations were to be met, is it not paradoxical that any single documentation may hold the fundaments from which all ways to study the urban can be depicted? Is such a utensil truly useful within continuously divergent and complex realities, or does it risk becoming an oxymoron in its proposition? After 14 years of full time (often overtime) engagement within the faculty (7 years studying and 7 years teaching) one constant has always remained, namely the constant of change. A change, mind you, that did not necessarily come forth through an evolution of past experiences and future aspirations, but more as the change experienced from a restructuring of what one already has. In 1994 the university extended the

required duration needed to receive a diploma from a 4 to 5 year program. Having been the product of such a restructuring, the only change students seemed to experience was how the courses one had to follow ended up taking 8 instead of 6 weeks to complete. Years later the length of studio courses changed again to 21-week semester programs that were setup to facilitate the launch of the Bach/MSc system in order to assure integration and continuity with the diverse components. And a few years later the faculty changed its approach once again to stimulate focused and interchangeable courses by accentuating the necessity for 9-week quarter programs. It seems, purely from an organizational point of view that after more then a decade the course structure has returned where it once started – a conclusion that may indeed raise the necessary questions concerning the effectiveness (and perhaps motivation) behind continuous restructuring. Simultaneously, another personal perception had been building up first as a student and later as a teacher. This was the fact that although titled the Faculty of Architecture, the building hosted 3 other disciplines as well; namely those of Urbanism, Building Technologies and Real Estate and Housing. The potentials to exchange between disciplines and insights were literally only one floor away! While in many other prominent universities the faculties focusing at the building and managing of urban worlds are still often dispersed in different buildings and perceived as different faculties, in TU Delft the almost utopian configuration existed that the wide range of diverse disciplines oriented at studying the urban realm throughout the scales were to be efficiently housed under one overarching totality! One can understand the deception a student (and later teacher) experiences when realizing that although so conveniently connected, there seemed to be limited (if any) exchange between the disciplines. This unfortunate state was only further (unknowingly?) accentuated by the

implementation of the Bach/MSc system in which each of the 4 disciplines was to be ‘mastered’ separately. Perhaps the fact that we (as an institution) are required to generate ‘masters’ may need to be questioned. How are we equipping our students to engage in a complex and inter-related urban field if we fail to offer them the possibilities that complex and inter-disciplinary educational structures may offer? Having the opportunity to setup a new research and design Masters studio directly preceding the implementation of the MSc system, we were asked by the chair of Urban Management and City Renewal to search for the possibility to create an inter-disciplinary studio. Research and teaching representatives from the fields of architecture, theory, urban design and urban management put efforts to establish a platform for research and exchange, and to engage with students as co-researchers in an effort to explore theretofore unseen urban complexities in the contemporary city. Positioning ‘space’ as the common ground upon which our fields could disseminate and evolve, Spacelab: Research Laboratory for the Contemporary City (www.spacelab.tudelft.nl) was eventually launched in 2002. Producing outstanding graduate students (with yearly 15% graduating with Cum Laude), the success of the approach was later confirmed as final thesis work received the 1st, 2nd and 3rd prize for the 11th IFHP International Student competition in 2003. As a result of the research driven approach to understand urban transformation processes, in the course of the following years, 6 PhD positions were established to further stretch the theoretical understanding. Their work in turn has fed back into the studio assuring a constant update of the curriculum. The experience of the vast amount of international student projects over the years evolved to the reorientation of the studio to focus its effort towards building a collective vision for a contemporary urban concern. Students utilize

the MSc3 semester to generate a synergetic analysis and understanding of the particular urban condition (e.g. Venice, New Orleans, Suriname, and Cape Town). Often attempting to work with partner Architecture studios (e.g. Interiors, Border Conditions), the unfortunate bureaucratic structure of the faculty does not yet seem to facilitate such liaisons. As a result this has impeded the continuation and growth of the dire need for interdisciplinary exchange. In 2005 however, Spacelab, in conjunction with partner studios (Hyperbody, Border Conditions, Blob & Media) setup the explorative transdisciplinary action-research studio Urban Body (www.urbanbody.org). With 60 students working in an inter-dependant structure for the entire course of the semester, a synergetic model was created in order to ensure multiple exchange platforms. Courses and instructions in Information & Communication Technology (ICT), Theory & Philosophy, Urbanism, Architecture and Building Technology were offered in a non-linear structure to all participants. Simultaneously, practicing firms such as OMA, ONL, Ocean North, UN Studio, Studio Sputnik, and Blue Architects, but also action oriented groups such as Stalker, Stealth [u]ltd, and LEAK were enthusiastic to engage in discussions, presentations and debates with students concerning the search for innovative pathways to correlate man, technology and the built environment in an equitable manner. The studio carried out workshops with international partner universities and has run successful projects in Istanbul (2005), Madrid (2006) and Beijing (2007) and is currently preparing its upcoming focus on the ‘slums’ of Mumbai (2008). The result of the multiple engagements and projects has evolved to a state in which the appreciation for theoretical-driven research, as well as action-driven research has supplied the bases to strive for projects in which

knowledge formation can be implemented (e.g. research-implementation). Currently the studio, while simultaneously running researchdriven projects (e.g. Venice, New Orleans and Cape Town), is also involved with actual regional development projects in developing areas in Suriname, Curaçao, Cameroon and St. Marten (but also Rotterdam South) working in close unity with local governments, investors and citizens. The added value that action-research offers to students, teachers and external partners has illustrated to be of exceptional significance for all participants and was recently presented in the ‘Strategies for a Better World’ exhibition setup by the Netherlands Architecture Institution (NAI) during the Rotterdam Architecture Biennale. Though the faculty strives to adhere to the tradition a university is required to uphold, at the same time it wishes to be innovative and avant-garde. The multiple aspirations between diverse generations, as in many large organizations, may cause tension within its structure. Nonetheless, it is this tension that ignites the passion and vitality to evolve. Unfortunately, it is also this tension that motivates many young aspirants to also stop dreaming. The faculty need not find an ‘either or’ solution to resolve its differentiated desires, yet it may wish to seek within its organization if perhaps through a slightly more openended structure some breathing space may be offered to allow progressive and perhaps even provocative desires to flower. Particularly since it is precisely for this reason the academic institution is the breeding ground for the ideas of tomorrow. Although currently not yet formerly recognized as a hidden potential, the need for appreciating collaborative and inclusive approaches through an interdisciplinary configuration may yet be the stepping stone to finding sensible strategies for a better world, an objective I hope we all still dream for.

how TU Delft sees itself in the mirror

The last year at the university is the graduation year. After struggling about what to do during the Msc3, the Msc4 should be clear. You should know what you want and have a clear idea about the end result. Without courses and an almost completed theoretical framework the last semester at the university is completely free to work on your project. To do your own project can be hard, it needs the will to do it and a lot of discipline. You need to make appointments with your mentors. They expect you to show them every time new material and that you of course follow up their good and so needful advice. But three mentors with their own background have own ideas, so sometimes it can be hard to adept all your work all the time. My graduation project is part of a group work. In the Msc3 we made perspectives about New Orleans and visited the site. The final work of everybody needs to be coherent. All projects are part of one general vision on the city, so all the time itâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s not your project but our project. In the end it is, confirming the regulations, your individual work. Your own work needs to look for a place within all the projects. Contributing to a group work can be hard because your mentors expect you to continue with your individual work as well. But actually it is really nice. It makes you feel the research and design you develop is important. My last presentations are coming, a busy and exiting time, with hopefully in November the final presentation. The time of being a student will be over by then and a new life will begin. To be continuedâ&#x20AC;Ś

Gijs Veugen

EDUCATION IN THE MIRROR MSC4

Being an Msc4 student means that your worries about your final project and your university years are almost over through lots of hours of hard work. And though it is “designed” as a separate semester, it is actually the pick point of a procedure that has started long ago. As much as Msc3 is analyzing, understanding and grasping your final project, Msc4 is about actualizing it, putting it into paper or even into reality. Doing the job that we have been educated for the past three semesters and it will probably be our everyday task after we graduate from the university. Having said that, I think that Msc3 and 4 shouldn’t be separated from each other and that they could form a graduation year where student’s will decide on how much research and theory will be part of their project and how much designing. The P’s are always a good guide to keep us on track but some student’s may need less or more time to focus on the specific elements demanded in each P. Having always maximums and minimums the P deadlines could be decided by the student and the mentor group, in order to have a more flexible, graduation year adaptable to each one’s needs and abilities. In my case, since I have now started Msc4, I must say that I enjoyed very much the theoretical and analytical part in Msc3, which is now settling down to become something real and solid in the next semester. And since I am a foreign student, working in a multicultural group, and in the process of cooperating with even more people, as my mentor group is now formed, I suggest that having a conversation or asking advice from many kinds of people is something TU Delft provides and is essential not only for the progress of the project but for being evolved as a person and an urbanist.

KATIta chrysanthopoulou

I am one of the few students who did not do his Bachelor at the faculty of Architecture. Being one of the so called “zijinstromer” it left me with a rather naïve assumption about the master courses. Naïve because I still believed in the idea of an university that would stimulate debate and teach, or help would probably be more appropriate, the students to develop their own authentic position. After two years of being a master student I have am surely less naïve in that sense that I would no longer see the university as a ‘sanctuary’ of free thought. Surely there is debate and surely there are different positions within this debate. But what does not happen is the questioning of the course of the debate. Or to state it in a slightly different way; there is no debate about the discourse of architecture and urbanism. This could be the end of the story … for someone who is embittered. That would, however, do no just to the development that lingers within this faculty. There are some precious moments, read teachers, tutors and professors, whom singlehandedly built this ‘sanctuary’. These little pockets of truly intellectual freedom are, sometimes, hard to find. And there is no assurance that you would find these moments of vacuum within the controlled milieu of called university. There is no map that shows any of them nor can I draw you one. For it will lead you only to horror. The ‘sanctuary’ of your choice will be in no way close to mine. For I am not you and you are not me. To end this appeal I can only advice you to follow your hart, or to state it in a more scientific approved language, to draw on your non-thinking thinking capacities. It is through this capacity that you will be able to identify the relations that suet you. When I would freely cite a promising PhD it would be that relations determine the thing; you can only start to understand a city if you see it in relation with other cities.

Sybren Boomsma

urban education and no mirror

A short reflexion on current and recent educational system at the department of Urbanism TU Delft Anthony Fuchs

To educate students in a major is as challenging as it is complex, particular if the concerned topic is in itself marked by uncertainty of larger academic battles. Best example is given by Bouwkunde itself showing a tendency of architecture to expand in the fields normally associated with urbanism. This article will less reflect on how urbanism should be taught and more on how it is actually taught. In more detail I try to cast light on the particular way of teaching in Delft based on the experiences gained over the last years. I would like to aver that all the down below written is accumulated knowledge by practice as documents are scarce and most information is actually spread by mouth to mouth - consequently I can not guarantee the 100% accuracy of the given. Initially I only wanted to stay in Delft to quickly get my degree and make a leap over the ocean. Now I am already experiencing my fourth year in Delft and got myself increasingly involved in the educational system of the TU Delft. Over the last two years I have been employed to assist laboratory coordination of Urban Transformation, studio coordination Spacelab, graduation coordination of Urbanism as well as I helped out to organise an International

Seminar organised by the department of urbanism. With every different occupation I learned more about the forces steering the educational machine and the deeper politics lying behind them. Although I can only give an overview of more or less 3 years of urban education, the reader will get the impression of an almost â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;historicalâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; perspective due to the mere density of changes over that period. I started in 2005 as student assistant of Alexander Vollebregt who took the charge of the coordination of a studio and the whole laboratory of Urban Transformation (UT). This former structure was based on three laboratories that became only visual for most students in the year of graduation (if at all). Delta Design (DD) and Urban Composition (UC) fused a year later into Urban Landscapes (UL) and in the following academic year the two remaining laboratories were combined under the new created urbanism laboratory. These changes have to be seen as structural adjustments to a growing gap between administrative frameworks and reality. Numbers are very difficult to establish with complete certainty (see down below for further explanation), but based on own investigations following tendency can be drawn. The Fall semester enrolments are the

most representative numbers: in 2004, UT accounted for 10 students while UC with DD together had only 6 students in total, the year after the gap increased to a 21 – 9 to reach in 2006 a difference of 23 (UT:30UC + DD 7). Explanations are difficult to formulate covering all underlying dynamics but should circulate around the fact that latter laboratories remained in topic and consequently in students very Dutch-based. In three years almost all international master students chose entirely for the UT laboratory (besides a five percent drop-off accounting for 2-3 students). Looking at the quality of final projects, international master students seem to produce – generally speaking again better final products than their Dutch fellows (there do exist obviously positive outlers). Speaking of more skilled international students is a bold simplification but must bear a big moment of truth. ‘Kunst kommt von Können’: Firstly international students hold often already an accomplished major or even have had profound working experience and secondly the bachelor system at the TU Delft limbs in comparison to other institutions. If the lack of BSc education is an inherited stigma of the past or a consequence of the MSc upwards drift due to the international master, is beyond my personal knowledge (although I believe in the first) but more important than its causes are its consequences. The first international master in 2003 had been realised detached of the ordinary education, an exclusive status that has been dissolved from 2004 onwards. In terms of quality the mixing of the students led to a sharp drop in qualitative output,(if talking to the teachers in charge), a phenomena that goes along general academic knowledge of the flatten out effect of heterogeneous student groups. The aspiration of an elitist education structure did persist as an ongoing ambition on very different instances. One

initiative has been the 2005 inaugurated post-master course of European master of urbanism (EMU), a joint program offered by four cooperating European universities. At this stage it is impossible to tell the impact on the ordinary master program but the course bear the risk to drain the qualitative high end of prosperous students. In the beginning being located on the first floor and literarily sealed of any ordinary exchange it loosed solitary character by moving to the 9th floor. Its current and future role could be the one the international master carried on its shoulder in its inauguration year, but the question remains does the department need this plurality, is this the best way to educate? Further complicating the situation is the new star in the firmament of TU Delft with a new halo of education. Initially brought into life as discussion and self-realisation platform for PhD students, it soon became the active engine for international collaboration on lecture and seminar basis, although I do have the impression it is a far more self-running engine than its set-up would suggest. Recent developments increase the discrepancy of initiation to real functioning. The DSD will offer a new master from 2008 onwards unconfirmed called MSc+ and adding a supra-selective education program to the existing kaleidoscope based on a big name as promoter. As it is still in project phase this part of the article is even more based on rumours: What I have heard so far two things are remarkable: firstly Winny Maas will be the representative promoter and studio leader of maximum 30 students (for some time the number 60 has been floating around). As embedded in the DSD this studio will be research-led and actively producing scientific output. For all people who have met Winny Maas so far this appears a contradiction per se a fusion between wishful thinking and incapability with personal qualities. Second

amazing fact is that matter of studio concern will be highly of urban matter although as far as I know no staff from urbanism has been invited for preliminary discussion and it is very likely it will never happen. This bizarre attitude could be explained by taking the chair association of the DSD (TU Delft staff) into account and the fact that Architecture Theory has been mostly incorporated into Interior Architecture (although it is doubtful that this marriage will last for much longer) whose teachers are known to have the opinion to teach the â&#x20AC;&#x153;realâ&#x20AC;? urbanism to their students, it could stand in line with so many incidents of assimilation attempts of architectural practice on urbanism. To sum up the before written paragraph, the MSc education system of urbanism has received some Spalding partners of high competitiveness (someone has just to look at the budgetary power of the DSD) whose synergic potential is questionable - more than before we are in need of an efficient and powerful master course. The second part of this article will focus on the current condition and the missing essential initiatives (until recently) to achieve this goal. There are certain pathologies of the educational system, which are highly interlinked and partly are effects of very deep-rooted shortcomings. Only if seeing them as a system adjusting all parameters would generate any noticeable improvement: -Too many changes, no slight adoptions of existing systems -Pressing structural adjustments of the bachelor tracks were neglected -Lack of rigidity in educational matters -Inefficient or non-existent quality control and feedback loops -Ignorance to first-things-first

1) Too many changes, no improvements and adjustments of existing systems The attentive reader must have noticed the density of changes going on over a very short period of time. Although change is generally something positive as it implies innovation its frequency and nature is at the TU Delft ill-minded. Starting every year with complete new blue prints ignores completely the dimension of improvement by adjusting the existing. Personally I found all systems so far applied appropriate enough for MSc graduation courses but until now (Graduation year system 07/08 excluded) all also failed to understand the importance of the detail. This has to do with the way the graduation systems are decided upon. As I have been involved in the graduation restructuring myself I realised how often decisions were taken directly out of discussion than by thorough reflection and past experience. Consequently the proposed systems risk to forget about detail structural and organisational matters. Although it takes very little effort to establish effective tools like feedback meetings, quality control mechanism, handouts, publicity works, combined presentation moments etc. they were until recently completely missing or only centrally introduced by the TU Delft (The quality guarantee initiative with questionnaires hand-out to teaching staff and students showed the inadequacy of such attempt, being too general due to its TUwide application for all courses and too slow until results were made accessible â&#x20AC;&#x201C; up to one year). 2) Pressing structural adjustments of the bachelor tracks were neglected As before mentioned the quality of the bachelor education can be seen as major problem for the short comings in the master years. Currently I am finishing my second master thus I got to known both MSc 1+2

courses (urbanism and architecture) from the student side and must say I have been amazed how much essentials the students are missing. It can be said the BSc avoids any specialization, as urbanism until recently had been only represented by the BSc6 design studio option (we got a slight increase of representative 3 ECTS urbanism course if I am right), for somehow reason the common basis are taught inefficiently as I met particularly Dutch students facing serious problems to deal with structural-technical matters (the exceptions are HBO step-ins). 3) Lack of rigidity in educational matters A much linked matter to point 2) is the lack of rigidity in educational matters. The TU Delft shares similar difficulties with so many other institutions being dependent of governmental finances which take ECTS credits as basis to calculate the financial support. Only accomplishing students generate money and therefore erode any readiness to fail participants while often the shortcomings are a far-cry. After three years of studies I witnessed only a handful students who failed a course and obviously not a single one failing in his graduation. Besides that, grades seem to inflate increasingly, particular virulent in the graduation projects. 5-6 are almost nonexistent, 7-7.5 graded project are almost the worst possible, 8-9 the general rule. This phenomenon is an effect of the upcoming point, a missing quality control instance. 4) Inefficient or non-existent quality control and feedback loops Probably the most important shortcoming of the current educational system is the missing of an efficient quality control instrument. Together with the fact that appointing studio coordinators followed letâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s say untraceable reasoning it happened that MSc 1+2 courses were run by partly incompetent (the goal was

to teach the urban basics) teachers. Although highly criticised by students who expressed the unsatisfactory disappointment regarding content and methodology nothing actually has been changed so far. The quality control questionnaires failed completely as the bureaucracy made a quick implementation of their results impossible besides the fact their formulation was hardly of help to retrieve any usefully expressed criticism. On the other side the set-up of the MSc3+4 system provided a position of controller, the so called external committee, a 4th person adding to the three mentors to survey both their judgment and that the graduation criteria are met. Interesting as an idea its practice completely fails due to the unpopularity of this assignment. It is difficult to motivate any person to assist the public peilings, so any kind of selection based on their appropriateness is impossible. 5) Ignorance to first-things-first: The all above stated are results of a continuous neglect of the golden rule for efficient people and systems that first things come first. Although it sounds obvious and simple in reality it is surprisingly seldom applied that important modifications should be treated by priority. What went wrong in the past could have been avoided by interventions from above: Walls in the faculty have ears and it is feasible with little efforts by using the cappuccino effect to get to best possible update how our department performs in reality at any given moment. Being department dean is doubtless a busy job but good from bad falls with the fact if someone knows what is going wrong in his own department. Not meant as blame to our outgoing department dean, but for some reason I do think Prof. Henco Bekkering will do in this regard a better job as his processor Prof. Han Meyer. Any way the tracks for the MSc3+4 are leading in the right direction,

someone must only dare to introduce similar settings to the ailing Msc1+2. As I do not want to criticize purely in this article I would like to state what I do think are the first things first list for the improvement of our departmental education system: -Currently the most important missing link is the realisation of a graduation project database. Not only does a digital platform not exist but even the information and files are not centrally collected at the moment. Currently hard copies are literarily lying all over the different places, same goes with the digital files. With the new graduation coordinator position energies should emphasis to start this database from now onward but also should go towards the attempt to reestablish an overview of past projects. The ultimate goal is to realise an internet platform where people can browse past projects. The benefit would be tremendous for prosperous students and becoming MSc3 students (who are often caught in an redundancy loop due to the missing information) and would project an image of the department urbanism of TU Delft. -The initiations of point 4 have to be expanded to the MSc 1 and 2 and integrated in a lasting way within the graduation year. Further some crucial components for the MSc3+4 changes got lost on the way. Currently choices which studios are running have been done by approval of the Daily Board and the reduction of the administrative structure did only virtually happen. The initial envisioned set-up that students choose in the enrolment phase and therefore studios are skipped by natural selection failed with the decision of the DB not to do so. -Quality control mechanism should be operational on two levels, as the over all proofed to be for logical reason too slow and difficult to steer - a random sampling could

help to realise a more efficient way to survey the output of the department. -Finally responsibilities should be clarified that department executives concentrate on control and guidance and less mingle with the execution of educational practice. Far too often developments were slowed down or altered to more traditional set-ups by interventions from top-down. I would like to end the critical reflection by some positive notes. There are ongoing changes happening on several levels at the moment. The positioning of Remon Rooij as graduation coordinator in Urbanism has shown that engagement counts more than experience or age. Within short time and by intense efforts a tremendous quality boost of the graduation system is happening. Due to the fact that we share point of views that transparency, feedback loops and emphasis on first-thing-first have to be the main-pillars of every educational change, the improvements of the current system are likely to be gradual and lasting. Only with an urbanism educational system of strong and healthy nature future attempts to better the position within Bouwkunde could be initiated.

european master of urbanism An Interview with Andrea Peresthu by cristina ampatzidou

First of all can you briefly introduce yourself ? What is your background and what is your position in EMU? I am an architect by trained. I finished my professional bachelor in Parahyangan Catholic University, Indonesia (1996). I funded four companies with three other friends after my study. One of them was architecture and urban planning bureau, where I was in charge as planning director. In the other company (contractor) I was in charge as logistical director. But in general for these four companies, I was responsible as the finance director. In 1998 I got scholarship from AECI (Agencia Espanola Cooperacion Internacional) through Spanish Embassy in Jakarta. I went to the University of Granada and studied two majors: Hispanic Studies and Photography. From 1999-2000 I studied in KU Leuven (Belgium), there I obtained my master degree in human settlement; and on the way back to Indonesia I got another offer from Spanish Embassy for three years to start my postgraduate studies in UPC Barcelona. Well in fact was a kind of predoctoral program where we had plenty of courses before start our thesis. However, the PhD program in Barcelona takes more time than the available funding that I had from

Spanish Government. It was only for three years. At that moment I was looking some possible funding to continue my PhD. I finally got possibility to come to Delft. Prof. Jurgen Rosemann invited me through Dr. Marisa Carmona, where I started working in the studio of Globalisation and Urban Form (2002). I am thankful for both of them for this opportunity. I started to prepare my PhD proposal in September 2002 and got accepted in January 2003. In June 2004 I was asked by Prof. Rosemann and Prof. Meyer to help the preparation of the new joint program (EMU). My task was to coordinate closely the whole process with four other universities till the Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) and the first proposal of Erasmus Mundus. After the whole work finish in October 2004, TU Delft was appointed by the consortium to be the main secretariat general of the consortium. Starting from that point, I was appointed as the secretary general to manage the preparation of EMU program that should start less than one year (September 2005). In Delft itself, I am in charge as the EMU program coordinator and I am also doing my PhD research that dealing with the development of Prodtect Urbanism software. It is the cooperation with Austrian software company that dealing with the issue

of lifecyle modeling, where I am going to focus on the issue of urban projects. I will build up mathematical modeling to measure the impact of one urban project in term of lifecyle as well as ecological footprints. Is it possible to give us an outline of the EMU? Describe in a few words its structure and content of studies. What are the objectives that you are trying to succeed? The structure of the EMU is very simple. The main platform of the EMU is Research by Design. Why do we need research when we design? Because we are looking for a design that offers solutions for our society, instead of offering merely fashion design (as Charles Correa said). This is one of our main objectives. Because of that EMU program emphasis the important of design, which cover more than 50 per cent of the total credit. The rest, several knowledge derived from theory, method and tools are provided to support the design studio. EMU program in TU Delft offers student to gain at least three main dimensions during their period time of study. Firstly, Ducth dimension in urbanism that provide student possibility to combine either Landscape Architecture-Urban Design or Spatial Planning-Urban Design. Second dimension is the richness of diversity of the European urbanism where student has possibility to spend at least one semester in the other university within this consortium.

Third dimension is the comprehension of these two dimensions that need to be well articulated in their final semester (thesis work). To guide more concrete research by design process, we set up four main agenda as the research platform, namely cultural landscape, city of dispersion, network city, emerging city and post-industrial city. These issues are urgent to be answered due to their impact on our urban society today. We need to explore the possibility to offer solutions for the society through our field, urban planning and design. Donâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t underestimate the amount of problems or future risks that embedded to each development trends. All of these need to be pondered carefully. In particular because world goes urban. The majority of worldâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s population is now urban dweller. This means once the city fails to deal with their current problem, it would be a catastrophe. The cost will be even higher. Why these four universities? How were they chosen, what does each one offer and how do the different urban environments within they are situated affect the studies? Was this a conscious choice? There is no restriction to limit the consortium with only four universities. It was just in the beginning that these four universities were actively building up this new joint program. In fact New Castle (U.K) involved as well but they postponed their participation for a certain moment. The first idea to make this joint program was appeared during the

first PhD seminar in Leuven (2004). Prof. Marcel Smets from Leuven was one of the main important figures behind the birth of this consortium. Nevertheless, the main important thing is we have to move beyond our wish and intention. We need to make it true. This cannot be solved by one or two meetings because each school has their own system and regulations. Every country has their own education system and mechanism. No one imagined before the amount of work that need to be done such as promotion, program preparation, harmonizing each system to make it exchangeable modul, etc. That part is relatively easy but we worked like day and night. The difficult part is how to deal with many discrepancies that is always appearing in every organization level. The most tiring part and many times we loose energy for nothing when we are dealing with static bureaucracy system in each school. This is really discouraging in many senses and I think the university is the place to foster the creativity and not to undermine such an initiative. Furthermore, the consortium is growing to the right direction. The number of student is growing double less than five years. Other EU and non-EU candidates to participate in this consortium are becoming more visible and we are working to enlarge the consortium within the next two years. What are the qualifications and learning skills gained by the participants? What would be a motivation for someone to participate to your program? The intention is to prepare urbanist that has capacity on grounding themselves through the aforementioned dimensions (Dutch and European) and bring it into their professional practice in the future. This doesnâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t mean to impose Dutch or European approaches on dealing with their local context. The program

would like to share the scientific attitude to the other context. The interaction of both knowledge may enrich their professional capacity. Our graduate has to be more smart and wise on how to translate what they learn from here to their home country or any where in the world. In my opinion, the big motivation that student can come here, because none of postgraduate program in this field enable student to combine with the richness of diversity that contains in the field of urbanism. If you go to the USA, Japan or Australia, you have to choose either in urban design or landscape architecture or city planning. Meanwhile we offer one program that covers these issues and student has possibility to combine them. This is, we think as one of the most attractive points that could be offered to the student. Which are the differences between the regular master program and the EMU and what is the profile of the EMU students? The difference is very clear. In the EMU program we are targeting the students who have at least five years of academic education or at least they have one master degree, in total it should be five years. Our MSc is in the framework of the five years professional Bachelor, where student who has their three years bachelor may enroll. Therefore, in the MSC program our student received a fundamental knowledge to qualify them as an urbanist; while in the EMU program all of these fundamental knowledge are not taught anymore. EMU focuses on specialized issue such Landscape Architecture, Urban Design and Spatial Planning. We presume that EMU student has acquired these fundamental knowledge and the whole courses in EMU should focus in more specific issue related with important theme of each semester.

What is the necessity for a post master program? In other words what are the supplements it can provide on top of the regular master program? Is it meant as an addition to the master education, are there any master students of the four participating universities that attend the program after their graduation? World wide demand on specialized urbanist is increasing. As I told you before, the majority of worldâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s population is living in the city. This will continue for the next future. In Latin America the majority of population is living in the city. Asia is coming very soon within the next ten to fifteen years from now on. More people living in the city means more complex social and spatial demands. City becomes the main points of country major consumption. In particular under this globalization processes, it turns urban population into hyper consumptive society. Urban dwellers are living less sustainable than ever, because it needs more energy, more resources and produce more waste and pollution. In the other side, very few cities in this world are prepared to face such a complex demands (e.g. affordable housing, lands, facilities and infrastructure) and unpredictable risks (e.g. environmental issue, social exclusions). Therefore, the real task of urbanist, in fact has just started. A lot of works need to be tacked professionally by capable people. This means we need to participate on preparing well trained urbanist to guide and maintain both development and transformation process of urban region toward a sustainable path. So far in Delft, there are no students coming directly from the MSc to the EMU. Our students are in general come from all over the world, including European nationalities. The title of the program is Strategies

and Design for Cities and Territories, how much the urban reality today is affecting the selection of cases and the choice of method each year? And how well intergraded the contemporary urban reality should be in a program that is aiming to produce graduates that can take up many roles in the urban design process? As I told in the beginning, we address five key issues as the intention to orient our research platform. We have our basic knowledge on dealing with such research questions, but to strengthen and go deeper to explore some better solutions for each key issue are essential. Therefore each semester of the EMU program addresses a specific key issue. The intention is that the result of each semester will underpin or (even) generating new insights for each research question through design, theory, method and tools. It is obvious, the sub-theme of every semester change constantly. Let me give you an example, the research issue â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;post-industrial cityâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; could take place in many different social and territorial context. If you address such an issue in Holland will be very different with Belgium context. Logically, the result or knowledge derived from this kind of exercise will generate a rich contribution to underpin the research question itself. I have noticed that EMU students in TU Delft, are not in contact with the regular Master of Urbanism students. Is this a regulation of the Department of Urbanism, a lack of communication between the coordinators of the two programs or it an affect of different approaches and methods used? It was purely technical problem, because their room was located in the first floor for the last

two years. Thanks to the new arrangement, EMU students now are located in the 9th floor. This may open many possibility for more intensive interaction among students coming from different program as well as with other teaching staffs that are not involve in the EMU program. I have another proposal, we should make more parties together, having a drink together and it will bring more people together. Well in general, there is no need coordination between EMU and MSc in practical term, because we are running two different programs with two different emphases. The coordination should take place in the level of daily board of urbanism in order to maintain orientation of each program. The board should guarantee there is no overlapping in term of content and keep both program complementing each other. It is also very interesting to see that before the EMU program, the amount of MSc student annually around 45 to 48 students. If we add 20 EMU students in this semester, this means in total our department have approximately up than 60 students, which is good! Do you think that in the future there can be or will be collaboration between the Master Program of Urbanism and the EMU? Either in terms of common lectures and courses, or joint workshops and studios? In my opinion, it is possible to a certain level and it should carefully arrange. In fact, student can follow some other lecture in the other program freely. The only problem will appear here is concerning the schedule and room capacity. Each program has their different schedule and room capacity. As long as we can solve this problem, why donâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t we do so? However, the other question is how are you going to formalize which lecture is eligible or not for these different program. In

the level of consortium, only several courses and studio from TU Delft is acknowledge as an exchangeable component for the postgraduate level. What other partners will say if suddenly we liberate our student to obtain some credits to the MSc program, for instance? Perhaps in the future we will add more elective course but this concern with many procedures for accreditations and the whole partners should agree first.

ir. Andrea Peresthu M.Sc. dip.urb. Secretary General Secretariat General EMU (R. 8.51) Faculty of Architecture, Department of Urbanism Delft University of Technology Berlageweg 1, 2628 CR Delft The Netherlands Tel. +31 (0) 15 27 81743 Fax. +31 (0) 15 27 84162 email: a.peresthu@tudelft.nl websites: http://www.em-urbanism.net (consortium website) http://em-urbanism.tudelft.nl (TU Delft EMU website)

Activities Polis Syposium Urban Regeneration November 2007 An symposium about Urban Regeneration with lectures, discussions about the theme, organized by Polis and Forum. Check the website for more information.

Activities NAI A better world, an another power May 24 - October 21 2007 In collaboration with International Architecture Biennale Rotterdam, which this year takes the theme of Power Producing the Contemporary City, the NAI presents an exhibition about the groups who â&#x20AC;&#x153;overthrow powerâ&#x20AC;?. The exhibition A Better World - Another Power displays works by groups whose consultative initiatives, spontaneous creativity and activism is like a fresh breeze blowing through the urban planning world.

Activities Elsewhere A better world, an another power 1 Jan - 31 Dec 2007 Rotterdam has over a century of modern architecture within just a few square kilometres. Forty buildings in the city centre, representing a hundred years of modern architecture, have been selected to take centre stage in the Sites & Stories programme. www.rotterdam2007.nl

New Town Simulation 11 Oct – 12 Oct 2007 Nowadays a lot of decisions are being made based upon simulation models, from traffic engineering to economy, towards multi-actor models, improving the planning processes. Additionally, within the field of urban design and planning itself, a number of interesting modelling approaches have emerged. This seminar will give an overview of several relevant simulation approaches in relation to new towns. By discussing these, we expect to foster an interdisciplinary debate, aiming at strengthening the research agenda of the institute, focusing both on research and education. NTI, Almere Exhibition ‘Cityplan Eindhoven’ 29 Sept – 28 Oct 2007 The exhibition ‘Cityplan- The most modern design for Eindhoven’. It expands on the spectacular city expansion plan designed by architects Van den Broek en Bakema at the end of the sixties, giving their view on the city of Eindhoven. Van Abbemuseum Eindhoven www.vanabbemuseum.nl Urban TV 11 June 2002 – 31 Dec 2008 Er wordt al zo weinig aandacht besteed aan ruimtelijke ordening op TV, dus ALS er iets wordt uitgezonden, mis het dan niet! De Urban TV Guide biedt uitkomst voor de hardwerkende urbanist: een overzichtelijke selectie van TVprogramma’s en webuitzendingen over stad en economie, techniek en cultuur, mondiale, lokale en netwerkontwikkelingen. Met af en toe een kritisch commentaar. http://www.urbanunlimited.nl

images sources: http://www.hort.purdue.edu/newcrop/tropical/lecture_35/lec_35.html http://www.christojeanneclaude.net/si.shtml https://www.statsbiblioteket.dk/editors/emneed/fs/x-files/kunsthistorie/gfx/El_Greco_View_of_Toledo_big.jpg http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Giotto

Call for Submissions Atlantis 19.1

Efforts of representation are attempts to understand the structure of the representative object and put it together. In that sense there cannot be a realistic representation, independent from the representational means and conditions that each social group puts together the specific moment. Cities have been the object of mapping since the beginning of time. Passed the time of practical reasons, to the era when only the representation of a city in work of art alone was considered to be innovative, the city itself has been an object as well as a field for artistic expression. Our cities are filled with statues of past heroes and monuments of remembrance, modern art and buildings that function as landmarks. What is the place of the work of art in the city today? And how the city itself manages to serve as a field of urban art, of street art or spontaneous creative moments? What is the role of architecture in this condition, where star architectsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; creations are becoming the expositions of themselves? When Liebeskidâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Jewish Museum in Berlin was open, a great discussion arose around the fact that the museum itself was the experience and exposition of the Holocaust, without containing any additional artifacts. On a higher scale doesnâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t happen the same in urban environments? The UNESCO World Heritage list is getting longer by historical city centers and settlements to be preserved as global monuments. Urban complexes are being exposed for what they are in themselves, their structure, their atmospheres, the sentiments they can provoke, becoming finally pieces of art. How does the discipline of Urbanism deal with this situation? How does it affect the way we perceive the city and the way we project it in the future? How aware are we of the fact that our every day life is meant to be preserved as a monument of our times?

Atlantis Magazine for urbanism, a publication from POLIS, podium for urbanism, published 4 times a year. 18th year, number 4, October 2007 quantity: 500 issues

Main Editor Cristina Ampatzidou Editors Anthony Fuchs Arjen Spijkerman Katerina Chrysanthopoulou Herman van Essen Thomas de Bos Adress of the Editorial Office POLIS

Printer Thieme GrafiMedia Groep, Delft Advertisements Information at the address editorial office Articles Articles, admissions and reactions can be offered to the

address of the editorial office. Author guidance are available at the editorial office. Copyright with the permission of authors and acknowledgement of sources.

Polis-yearcontribution: Students: € 10 Alumni: € 15 Practicalmembers: € 30 companymembers: €60 Previous issues: € 3

Subscriptions Polis-members receive the atlantis for free.

Cover and Layout: Tanja Bergqvist