Issuu on Google+

AR3U022

Theory of Urbanism The difference between the right word and the almost right word is the difference between lightning and a lightning bug.

Mark Twain

Department of Urbanism Chair Spatial Planning and Strategy Challenge the future


Mission statement This 4ects course Theory of Urbanism aims to provide the student with a structured way to concise academic writing. A review paper is the concrete outcome, in which the student discusses the urban theories related to his/her graduation project. This paper can be the basis of the theoretical framework chapter of the final thesis. The course consists of a number of exercises training the students in: • understanding the difference between academic and non-academic literature; • critically assessing the academic literature and urban theories; • managing the search for relevant literature; • writing arguments; • writing outlines, introductions, conclusions and recommendations; • citing, quoting and referencing. All papers are reviewed by a department of Urbanism review committee. The best papers are invited to be presented at the 7th Graduation Lab Urbanism Conference, in January 2011 at the end of MSc3. During the MSc3 mid-term assessment period (P1), students have to submit a paper abstract which is reviewed by the conference organising team / editorial board. Review committee Inge Bobbink, MSc Dr AnaMaria Fernandez-Maldonado (editorial board) Prof. Dr Han Meyer Dr Stephen Read Dr Remon Rooij (editorial board) Dr Thorsten Schuetze Dr Diego Sepulveda Dr Stephan vd Spek Important dates • • •

22 October 2010: submit 2 hardcopies of the paper outline at the Urbanism secretary (300-500 words, 1 A4) 13 January 2010: submit 2 hardcopies of the full paper (3,000-5,000 words) according to the pre-established format (to be found on Blackboard) 27 January 2011: 7th Graduation Lab Urbanism Conference


Literature Why do you have to learn how to cite, quote and reference?

Because it is the conventional way of academic writing. The references included in your paper are needed to: • provide evidence that your position is well-researched and carefully considered; • give credit to the author of an original concept or theory presented; • help readers identify and locate the source work.

 

 

“Schrijven is schrappen” (“Writing is rewriting”)

Edward Hulsbergen


Schedule Exercise 1 What is an academic conference? What are conference proceedings?

Exercise 2 Differences between review, research and position papers

Exercise 3 Harvard referencing method

Exercise 4 Literature search management

Exercise 5 Academic versus non academic sources

Exercise 6 Developing a research question for a review paper

Exercise 7 Reviewing paper outlines

Exercise 8 Concise academic writing

Exercise 9 Theory paper versus thesis plan

Exercise 10 Writing a review paper outline

Exercise 11 Writing arguments

Exercise 12 feedback session Paper outline assessment

Exercise 13 feedback session Paper progress: how to write an introduction

Exercise 14 feedback session Paper progress: how to get to conclusions and recommendations

Exercise 15 7th Graduation Lab Urbanism Conference

U

R

B


Abstract Evaluation Review paper ABSTRACT evaluation form MSc3 Urbanism

Name evaluator: …….……………………………………….. Date: ……………………………………………… Name author: Study number: Studio:

…….……………………………………….. …….……………………………………….. …….………………………………………..

Title abstract:

…….………………………………………..

General judgment: [1] O Insufficient [2] O Moderate/Poor [3] O Sufficient [4] O Good Specific judgment Informative and attractive title Representative key words Clear motivation (relation to project) Clear research question / aim of paper Argumentation and explanation used literature Clarity of presentation/organization (writing style, structure, graphics)

1 1 1 1 1 1

2 2 2 2 2 2

3 3 3 3 3 3

4 4 4 4 4 4

In your opinion, what are the strengths of this abstract? In your opinion, can this paper be helpful to build a theoretical underpinning and/or framework for the graduation project?


Preliminary Evaluation Preliminary paper evaluation form MSc3 Urbanism Name evaluator: Date:

…….……………………………………….. ………………………………………………

Name author: Studio: Title paper:

…….……………………………………….. …….……………………………………….. …….………………………………………..

Introduction Read the introduction carefully. Does the introduction give the information that an academic reader expects when reading a review paper? Yes/no Motivation Yes/no Problem statement Yes/no Aim of the paper Yes/no Presentation and argumentation of reviewed literature Yes/no Description of paper structure Literature review Take a look (in general) at the body of the paper Yes/ no Is there a logic structure? What does it look like? How to improve? Conclusions/Recommendations/Discussion Read this section carefully. Yes/no Does the author derive clear conclusions from the review? Yes/no Does the author derive clear recommendations for the graduation project? Use of References / Bibliography Yes/no Is the referencing done accurately? (underline good/bad things in paper)

GR

Che

EEN

ckl

The

ist

for

ory 1. N Pap o p er! last 2. P i c c rint ove on b rs! oth o f side 3. N the s p o b lack aper bac (sa kgr ves ound ink)


Paper Evaluation Paper evaluation form MSc3 Urbanism Name evaluator: Date:

…….……………………………………….. ………………………………………………

Name author: Study number: Title paper:

…….……………………………………….. …….……………………………………….. …….………………………………………..

General judgment: [1] O Insufficient [2] O Moderate [3] O Sufficient [4] O Good Would you like to have this paper presented at the mini-conference? YES / NO Specific judgment Clear introduction

Insuff. Mod. Suff. 1 2 3

Good 4

(motivation, problem statement, aim of paper/research question, research approach, structure of paper)

Relevance for graduation project

1

2

3

4

Adequacy of analysis of issues

1

2

3

4

Use of (academic) references

1

2

3

4

(Harvard Referencing Method: [i] in text quotations and citations and [ii] bibliography)

Clear conclusions for graduation project

1

2

3

4

Clarity of presentation/organization (writing style, structure, graphics, use format)

1

2

3

4

Specific comments


“Wie schrijft, die blijft” traditional Dutch saying

translation: remain”

Challenge the future

Design: Roberto Rocco

“Those who write,


Theory Course MSc3 Urbanism, TU Delft