Architectural Spatial Model

Proof required

Submit your model brief (one page): the type of model, chosen scale and its justification, material choices and why they are appropriate, and a statement of what the model will demonstrate about your design that drawings alone cannot communicate.

What gets checked

• Model type selection is justified in terms of what it reveals — not just what is easiest to make
• Scale choice is justified in terms of the spatial quality or construction detail under investigation
• Material choices are appropriate — materials that misrepresent the design's structural logic or spatial effect are rejected

Common mistakes

• Model brief describes what the model will look like rather than what it will reveal
• Scale chosen for convenience rather than to best communicate the spatial quality under investigation

Resources

What a verifier looks for

• Confirm model brief justifies the type, scale, and materials in terms of what the model will reveal
• Verify scale choice is justified by the spatial quality or detail under investigation
• Check material choices are architecturally appropriate — not just convenient

You'll sign in first, then come straight back here.

Proof required

Submit minimum eight photographs or renders of the completed model from at least three different viewpoints — overview, close-up interior view, and section cut through (if applicable). Include a 150-word construction note describing the key making decisions and any changes from the original model brief.

What gets checked

• Model is physically or digitally complete to an appropriate standard of finish for its type
• Photography or rendering shows the model from multiple angles including interior and close-up views
• Construction note identifies at least one decision made during making that changed or strengthened the original brief

Common mistakes

• Model photographs only show the exterior overview — interior spatial quality is not evidenced
• Construction is incomplete — elements are missing or placeholder-quality in ways that undermine the model's spatial argument

Resources

What a verifier looks for

• Confirm model photographs include minimum eight images from at least three viewpoints
• Verify photographs include interior and close-up views — not only an exterior overview
• Check construction note identifies a decision made during making that changed or strengthened the brief

You'll sign in first, then come straight back here.

Proof required

Submit: (1) final model photographs; (2) critique documentation — reviewer name and role, date, 200+ words of specific challenges raised and your responses; (3) a 150-word reflection on what the model revealed about your design that could not have been found through drawings alone.

What gets checked

• Critique documentation records specific design challenges raised through the model — not general aesthetic comments
• Reflection articulates what the model uniquely revealed — not just a restatement of the design intent
• Student response addresses each challenge with either a design revision or a principled explanation

Common mistakes

• Critique consisted of general appreciation — no specific spatial or structural challenges documented
• Reflection describes what the model looks like rather than what it revealed about the design

Resources

What a verifier looks for

• Confirm a live studio critique session occurred — not async written feedback
• Verify reviewer name and professional role are documented
• Check reflection articulates what the model uniquely revealed about the design — not just describing its appearance

You'll sign in first, then come straight back here.