History of Architecture and Urban Design: Prehistory to Mannerism
Winter 2017 - I took both ARCH & UD 10A and 10B with Sebastiano in preparation for applying to the Architectural Studies major. Sebastiano is a PhD candidate, so he is relatively new to lecturing and teaching students the material. Despite this, he does make an effort to engage students with the material through his use of detailed architectural vocabulary and genuine interest in the subject. Lecture can be quite boring at times, but at its core, the buildings and themes discussed are very intriguing. 10A focuses primarily on architectural history up to the Baroque, while 10B examines architecture from the end of the Baroque to Postmodernism. 10A and 10B both view architecture as a cultural production and use this lens in its examination of buildings. Both classes do not require a textbook and are largely based off of lectures. Grading is relatively simple; 35-40% is from reading responses, 15-20% is from the midterm, and the remaining percentage is from attendance in discussion and the final. The class should be a cake walk if you are good at memorization and can learn basic architectural vocabulary. All the TAs are great! I had Megan Meulemans for 10A and Kyle Stover for 10B. Both were wonderful and extremely knowledgeable. Put in a bit of effort, and this class will leave you with a greater understanding and appreciation of architecture.
Prof Favro is nice, but talks in a monotone voice. Honestly your grade depends on your TA. I had Iman and he is the most nit picky, non helpful TA there is!!! SO BEWARE OF HIM. If it weren't for him I would gotten an A in this class. Pretty easy GE but you will fall asleep everyday in class.
Winter 2018 - Very straightforward class and engaging topic if you're interested in art history and architectural history . He speaks a bit quickly, but he's very clear about what you need to know and what the important themes are (which is helpful for the midterm and final). The workload is very easy with readings and one reading response a week. I would highly recommend Professor Fox.
I took 10A and 10B. He's a great lecturer, pretty amusing most of the time, and he's been all over the place, so he's seen a lot of the buildings he talks about, and he's an architect so he has a personal take on a lot of them. He tends to go pretty fast, so pay attention, but you don't need to bother writing down dates/locations of buildings- he supplies you with everything you need to memorize for the midterm (and it's not too bad- just make a powerpoint flashcard set with pictures). Make SURE you keep track of themes throughout the class, because the midterm short essay and the final paper tend to be baased on what he harped on the most. (For example, 10A was nature, 10B was style debates.) It's a pretty enjoyable series overall, although I started to get tired of it later on in the second quarter.
Winter 2016 - A basic architectural history class cut at the Renaissance. Gray's lectures are condensed versions of the textbook. Reading is a choice but if you pay attention in lecture and take care to write good notes, attend discussion weekly, and do the responses, you should be able to succeed. What I found new was that the weekly reading responses are worth more of your grade than the midterm or final. The hardest part are the weekly readings and responses. Gray time stamps the responses so they are due Friday mornings before discussion. Gray posts a study guide for both exams so you know which buildings to focus on memorizing. TAs were valuable in preparing for the final's essay question as the TAs provided us with practice questions that appeared on the actual final. Overall, this class is an interesting, easy GE that isn't time-consuming.
Winter 2021 - The lectures were irrelevant to any of the grading, do not need to attend to complete the final paper that contributes to most of the grade. So pretty easy to get through, not sure how he is as a professor. Readings are only relevant to the discussion posts, not even the paper, but can just be skimmed, and discussion section is very laid back. Definitely an easy A if you just do the work on time with the syllabus.
Winter 2020 - This is literally the most ridiculous thing i've ever seen in my life. The class goes over a few 3-4 prehistoric architecture projects ( think huts and caves) and the lecture material is light, doesn't cover anything in depth, and honestly never answers the questions. I guess because it's a prehistoric period nothing is known for sure, but it bugged me so much whenever the professor would ask a question from the class and go on to say "yeah, i dont know it either because no one knows and we can only assume stuff". whatever, so the lecture is already freaking dry as it is. THen comes the glorious reading responses that are to be based on ur reading of some PhD LEVEL reading material that revolves around the ethical philosophy of preservation culture, and monumentality, and elaborate descriptions of contemporary engineering projects, which are all very difficult to understand ESPECIALLY when literally none of that was dicussed in class. Like, I could just read a random difficult architecture article online and decide to analyse it on my own but im not gonna pay a 60k a year to do that like what? Isn't the lecture supposed to dive into the reading responses or at least in the very least be in the same range of topics? Imagine learning to add 2 and two in class, and having to do calculus for a homework. Ha no