Architectural Design Concept

Proof required

Submit a precedent analysis document (three to five projects, each with plan or section images and 150-word analysis of spatial strategy, structure, and context response) and your initial parti diagram with a 100-word description of the central spatial idea.

What gets checked

• Precedent analyses address spatial strategy, structure, and context response — not just architectural history or aesthetics
• Parti diagram is a single legible concept image — not a drawing of the building, but an abstraction of the idea
• Written description of the parti explains the spatial idea in terms of how it serves the brief

Common mistakes

• Precedent analysis describes what buildings look like rather than analysing the spatial strategies they employ
• Parti is a perspective or plan of the imagined building rather than an abstract concept diagram

Resources

What a verifier looks for

• Confirm precedent analyses address spatial strategy, structure, and context response — not only aesthetics
• Verify parti diagram is an abstraction of the concept, not a drawing of the imagined building
• Check written description of the parti explains the spatial idea in terms of brief objectives

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

Proof required

Submit your concept development package: minimum two competing spatial configurations shown in plan and section, your chosen direction shown in plan, section, and a spatial perspective or axonometric, and a 200-word statement explaining why you selected this configuration over the alternatives.

What gets checked

• At least two competing configurations are documented — the student has genuinely explored alternatives
• Chosen configuration is shown across plan, section, and a three-dimensional view — spatial idea is readable at multiple scales
• Decision statement explains why the chosen configuration is architecturally superior — not just a preference

Common mistakes

• Only one configuration developed — no exploration of alternatives before committing
• Spatial studies are only plans — sections and three-dimensional views are absent

Resources

What a verifier looks for

• Confirm at least two competing configurations are documented — not one design shown at two development stages
• Verify chosen configuration is shown in plan, section, and a three-dimensional view
• Check decision statement provides architectural reasoning — not personal preference

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

Proof required

Submit: (1) the final concept development package; (2) critique documentation — reviewer name and role, date, 200+ words of specific challenges posed and your responses; (3) a revised 200-word concept statement incorporating feedback.

What gets checked

• Critique documentation records specific spatial or conceptual challenges — not general approval
• Student responses address each challenge with revised drawings or a principled explanation
• Revised concept statement is stronger than the pre-critique version — feedback has demonstrably sharpened the concept

Common mistakes

• Critique treated as a progress check rather than a challenge — no specific conceptual issues documented
• Revised concept statement is virtually identical to the pre-critique version — feedback has not influenced the student's thinking

Resources

What a verifier looks for

• Confirm a live studio critique session occurred — not async written feedback
• Verify reviewer is named with their professional role or architectural qualification
• Check revised concept statement is demonstrably stronger than the pre-critique version

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