0
  • DE
  • EN
  • FR
  • Base de données et galerie internationale d'ouvrages d'art et du génie civil

Publicité

Three views on the RAE Design and the computer. RAE 1: a tool for fragmentation

Auteur(s):
Médium: article de revue
Langue(s): anglais
Publié dans: arq: Architectural Research Quarterly, , n. 4, v. 6
Page(s): 292-296
DOI: 10.1017/s1359135503211829
Abstrait:

I read with interest the detailed arguments presented by our colleagues at the Bartlett, complaining of the treatment of architecture by Unit of Assessment (UoA) panel 33 (arq 6/3, pp203–207). We and our colleagues from other disciplines at the University of Edinburgh were shocked at Architecture's Research Assessment Exercise (RAE) result. We had been confident of at least a 4, but were awarded a 3a. We spent a disappointing day with the architectural historian on the panel to ascertain how we could have been so wrong in the internal estimation of our rating. I also had private discussions with another architectural panel member. Those on the panel we spoke to seemed to know little about our work. Our portfolios of refereed designs were not called for. It seems that our groundbreaking books linking the history of engineering and architecture were too far removed from what engineers usually do, and were not rated. Our books and articles on theories of design and information technology seem to have been of no interest.

Structurae ne peut pas vous offrir cette publication en texte intégral pour l'instant. Le texte intégral est accessible chez l'éditeur. DOI: 10.1017/s1359135503211829.
  • Informations
    sur cette fiche
  • Reference-ID
    10362420
  • Publié(e) le:
    12.08.2019
  • Modifié(e) le:
    12.08.2019
 
Structurae coopère avec
International Association for Bridge and Structural Engineering (IABSE)
e-mosty Magazine
e-BrIM Magazine