Sei sulla pagina 1di 6

UNSW | Art & Design

SDES2 410 Object Design Dialogues : Concept to Fabrication

Semester 1, 2016

Object Convenor: Zoe Veness Email: z.veness@unsw.edu.au

Tutor: Julia Charles Email: juliapcharles@ozemail.com.au

THE ULMER STOOL REVISITED Assessment Tas k 1 Due:

Weighting:

Research Report of Chair Designs

Week 4

20%

Assessment Brief: Research Report of Chair Designs This project provides the opportunity for students to engage with the field of contemporary furniture by examining local and international examples of chair designs. Sele ct a national and international chair design for comparative analysis and write a 1000 word research report that include s a report title and good quality, high resolution, colour images of the selected chair designs .

You can s tart to explore your research through the following links:

International Designs Vitra Design Museum: 100 Masterpieces http://www.design - museum.de/en/collection/100 - masterpieces.html Milan Furniture Fair http://www.salonemilano.it/en/media/mediagallery.html Droog Design, Amsterdam https://www.droog.com/designers/ National Designs Rigg Design Prize 2015 at the National Gallery of Victoria (NGV) http://www.ngv.vic.gov.au/exhibition/rigg - design - prize - 2015/ Anibou: European & Australian Designer Furniture & Homewares, Bourke S treet Sydney. http://www.anibou.com.au Jam Factory in Adelaide. http://www.jamfactory.com.au/studios.php

Ask yourself the following questions in r elation to your research and analysis:

What is my initia l response to the selected chair designs ?

What do I find engaging about the designs in terms of (1) materials used, (2) technical processes employed, (3) themes conveyed, (4) stylistic tendencies, (5) his torical periods or (6) functionality ?

What is t he background of each designer or maker for example (1) educational training, (2) stages in design career (emerging, mid - career or established), (3) stylistic preferences, (4) thematic or cultural influenc es?

This must be original work (in the student’s own words) of the standard expected of an academic design student. All images, ideas and text quotes must be acknowledged and referenced appropriately. Personal writing style, fluency an d conciseness of the written text, c hoice of objects and interpretation is important as evidence of research.

Assessment deliverables: Submit the research report as:

1) A hard copy format to the tutor that must include a signed assessment cover sheet and, 2) A digital version uploaded on Moodle.

Assessment Criteria for Task 1 with Marking Rubric:

 

FAIL Unsatisfactor y performance, below minimum expected level. Poor or incomplete work, which shows a significant lack of understanding of the topic or its context.

PASS Satisfactory performance. Addresses assessment requirements and demonstrates acceptable understanding of the issues en tailed.

CREDIT

DISTINCTION Very Good performance. Demonstrates superior ability to consider the course and its assessment requirements from a number of perspectives and to explore their interrelation.

HIGH DISTINCTION Outstanding performance. Indicates the student has produced excellent work, and demonstrates a high level of understanding, application an d synthesis of the assessable criteria.

Assessment Criteria:

Good

performance.

Demonstrates

analysis and

contextual

thinking.

Understands/p

resents

alternative

points of

view/perspecti

 

ves and

 

supporting

 

evidence.

Appropriateness to the topic of the assessment brief

         

Evidence of in depth research and analysis of chair designs and practitioners

         

Quality of the visual presentation including the use of good quality ima ges of the two chair designs , the c onciseness of report writing, the clarity of design layout and the use of appropriate referenc ing

         

FL (Fail) – PS (Pass) – CR (Credit) – DN (Distinction) – HD (High Distinction) TOTAL GRADE

 

Comments:

UNSW | Art & Design

SDES2 410 Object Design Dialogues : Concept to Fabrication

Semester 1, 2016

Object Convenor: Zoe Veness Email: z.veness@unsw.edu.au

Tutor: Julia Charles Email: juliapcharles@ozemail.com.au

THE ULMER STOOL REVISITED Assessment Task 2 Due:

Weighting:

The Ulmer Stool Revisited: Design Proposal Week 7 3 0%

Assessment Brief: The Ulmer Stool Revisited: Design Proposal

The Ulmer Hocker Stool - A Post - Bauhaus D esign The Ulm School of D esign was one of the of fsprings of the famous Bauhaus S chool in Weimar, Germany. When the Ulm School of Design was first furnished in 1954, the stool "Ulmer Hocker" not only served as a transportable seating furniture, but also as a side table, a portable tray for books and tools, and even as a shelf element, or, placed on a table, as a speaker's desk.

The artist Max Bill, the product designer Hans Gugelot, and the carpenter Paul Hildinger together developed this piece of furniture that impresses by its strict minimalism and purely functional aesthetics. The "Ulmer Hocker" stands for the school's design philosophy of clear, simple design that is suited for mass production. You will be asked to thoroughly research this design classic and develop the skills to make your personal interpretation of this multifunctional stool . The emphasis here will be the development of your craft skills.

Assessment Deliverables:

A D esign Proposal for the Ulmer Stool Revisited that includes:

A concept statement that explains the ideas and influences behind your design,

C oncept mo dels that visually communi cate your ideas ,

M easured drawings and ,

O ne scale model.

In Week 7 a visual presentation only (not a verbal presentation) of your design proposal for Assessment Task 2 will take place in t he form of a pin - up . Therefore the overall design presentation, in other words the visual communication of your ideas, needs to be considered.

Assessment Criteria for Task 2 with Marking Rubric:

 

FAIL

PASS

CREDIT

DISTINCTION

HIGH DISTINCTION

Assessment Criteria:

Unsatisfactor y performance, below minimum expected level. Poor or incomplete work, which shows a significant lack of understanding of the topic or its context.

Satisfactory performance. Addresses assessment requirements and demonstrates acceptable understanding of the issues entailed.

Good

Very Good performance. Demonstrates superior ability to consider the course and its assessment requirements from a number of perspectives and to explore their interrelation.

Outstanding performance. Indicates the student has produced excellent work, and demonstrates a high level of understanding, application and synthesis of the assessable criteria.

performance.

Demonstrates

analysis and

conte xtual

thinking.

Understands/p

resents

alternative

points of

view/perspecti

 

ves and

 

supporting

 

evidence.

Quality of research into the Bauhaus philosophy and understanding of the social and cultural background to the project

         

Conceptual innovation of the proposed design

         

Clarity and accuracy of the measured drawings

         

Communicative potential and effectiveness of the conc ept models

         

Clarity and accuracy of the scale model

         

Quality of the visual presentation including the effectiveness and clarity of the communication of ideas

         

FL (Fail) – PS (Pass) – CR (Credit) – DN (Distinction) – HD (High Distinction) TOTAL GRADE

 

Comments:

UNSW | Art & Design

SDES2 410 Object Design Dialogues : Concept to Fabrication

Semester 1, 2016

Object Convenor: Zoe Veness Email: z.veness@unsw.edu.au

Tutor: Julia Charles Email: juliapcharles@ozemail.com.au

THE ULMER STOOL REVISITED Assessment Task 3 Due:

Weighting:

The Ulmer Stool Revisited: Final Design

Week 14

5 0%

Assessment Brief: The Ulmer Stool Revisited: Final Design

The Ulmer Hocker Stool - A Post - Bauhaus D esign The Ulm School of D esign was one of the of fsprings of the famous Ba uhaus S chool in Weimar, Germany. When the Ulm School of Design was first furnished in 1954, the stool "Ulmer Hocker" not only served as a transportable seating furniture, but also as a side table, a portable tray for books and tools, and even as a shelf element, or, placed on a table, as a speaker's desk.

The artist Max Bill, the product designer Hans Gugelot, and the carpenter Paul Hildinger together developed this piece of furniture that impresses by its strict minimalism and purely functional aesthetics . The "Ulmer Hocker" stands for the school's design philosophy of clear, simple design that is suited for mass production. You will be asked to thoroughly research this design classic and develop the skills to make your personal interpretation of this mult ifunctional stool The emphasis here will be the development of your craft skills.

Assessment Deliverables:

1:1 scale prototype of the final stool design. In Week 14 the final stool design will be presented in the studio for assessment.

Assessment Criteria for Task 2 with Marking Rubric:

 

FAIL

PASS

CREDIT

DISTINCTION

HIGH DISTINCTION

Assessment Criteria:

Unsatisfactor y per formance, below minimum expected level. Poor or incomplete work, which shows a significant lack of understanding of the topic or its context.

Satisfactory performance. Addresses assessment requirements and demonstrates acceptable understanding of the issues entailed.

Good

Very Good performance. Demonstrates superior ability to consider the course and its assessment requirements from a number of perspectives and to explore their interrelation.

Outstanding performance. Indicates the student has produced excellent work, and demonstrates a high level of understanding, appl ication and synthesis of the assessable criteria.

performance.

Demonstrates

analysis and

contextual

thinking.

Understands/p

resents

alternative

points of

view/perspecti

 

ves and

 

supporting

 

evidence.

Quality of research into the Bauhaus philosophy and understanding of the social and cultural background to the project

         

Conce ptual innovation of the final design outcome

         

Level of proficiency in the use of workshop machinery and technical skills

         

Appropriateness of the materials used in response to function and aesthetics

         

Quality of jointing methods and finishes in the final design outcome

         

FL (Fail) – PS (Pass) – CR (Credit) – DN (Distinction) – HD (High Distinction) TOTAL GRADE

 

Comments: