|
- Developed
by Brian F. Davies & Laura Bunselmeyer
- Course
Objectives:
Within
the course offering described below, two distinct projects were initiated
to increase student understanding of the need for environmental sensitivity
in the practice of interior design. Due to the nature of the course,
both projects focused on the environmental impact of interior finish
materials. The first project sought to instruct students in a formalized
method for selecting interior finish materials based on criteria of
design intent, product performance and environmental quality. The objective
of the second project was to reinforce the issue of life-cycle impact
as an integrated, visible component of both the design process and the
resulting design presentation.
- Type
of course in which project or unit is used:
Because of its content and combination lecture/discussion format, the
existing course “Interior Finish Materials/ Design Applications”was
used as a vehicle for the integration of ecologically based interior
design instruction. The course itself focuses on the manufacture, performance,
and use of interior finish materials. It is organized around three principles:
the users' perceptual response to materials; the performance of materials
based on tests, standards and relevant codes: and the impact of selected
materials on the natural and indoor environments. [See
Syllabus and Course Schedule]
A prototypical tool entitled MEPS: Material Performance Evaluation System
[see] was developed by the authors for the rigorous
instruction of performance criteria in this course. The categories of
analysis included: design intent, anticipated installation cycle, initial
cost, reuse/recycle, manufacturer profile, and environmental performance.
For the second project, "Evaluating Materials"(EMs), students
were asked to apply the life-cycle analysis software, BEES: Building
for Environmental and Economic Sustainability, to their projects and
incorporate findings into a materials presentation. [See
student exemplars]
- Prerequisite
information:
“Interior Finish Materials/ Design Applications”is open
to under-graduate and graduate majors who have completed “Building
Construction” and “Interior Construction Elements”. These
prerequisite courses cover small-scale new commercial construction,
wood frame construction, and the interior build-out of multi-story spaces.
Students are also introduced to basic electrical and plumbing systems
in these prerequisites.
- Content
covered in lecture or discussion:
An overview of issues and glossary terms concerning sustainable materials
was presented with a focus on life expectancy and the impact of product
impermanence on design and ecology. Interactive lectures on MEPS introduced
students to a numerical assessment system based on a five-point scale.
A student/instructor discussion then examined the relevance of overall
performance assessments, which included questions of ease in gaining
vital product information, truth in company advertising, and the feasibility
of project implementation.
- Length
of project or unit:
MEPS was introduced over two and one half class periods for a total
of 200 minutes in class, plus an additional two hours of out of class
assigned work.
The corresponding “Evaluating Materials”project was assigned
as a two week project with one half of a class period or 40 minutes
spent introducing the project and re-familiarizing students with the
BEES software.
- Tasks
or activities assigned:
A group exercise over two class periods compared alternate materials
in a hypothetical, test interior to familiarize students with the following
categories in MEPS: anticipated installation cycle, manufacturer profile,
and environmental impact. [In-class exercise and test interior information]
An individual based project required each student to select at least
one finish material based on a life-cycle analysis performed using BEES.
The results of the BEES findings were then included, along with other
specification information, on the actual presentation boards. [See student
exemplar (link)]
NOTE: Because MEPS was introduced as an in-class exercise, individual
groups recorded their findings informally in class notebooks and specific
examples are not included with this submission.
- Reading
assignment(s):
BEES 2.0 reference manual
MEPS informational packet and glossary of related terms [See]
- Resources
needed:
The following resources would be needed to duplicate the MEPS and
EM’s projects: access to a materials library for physical product
samples and information, access to PC based computer system, internet
access for product and manufacturer information, and BEES 2.0 available
for free download at http://www.bfrl.nist.gov/oae/software/bees.html.
- Evaluation
criteria:
The in-class group exercise utilizing the MEPS system was considered
to be introductory information and was not formally graded.
The individual “Evaluating Materials” project was graded on
a scale of 100 points. Approximately 25 points were based on the students’
application of BEES life-cycle analysis. Visual integration of the BEES
analysis was assigned ten points. The remaining two thirds were awarded
based on initial material selections and design intent.
- Exemplars
of student outcomes:
Example One: Presented with permission by student designer Padru
C. Kang “Interior Development for New York Urban Forum” [See]
Example Two: Presented with permission by student designer Markus Brown
“Theater Expansion Project” [See]
- References
or bibliography used for project:
A Green Vitruvius: Principles and Practice of Sustainable Architectural
Design. (1999). London: James&James.
American Society of Interior Designers. (n.d.). Trends in Interior
Design. Available:
http://www.asid.org/design_basics/trends_forecasts/index.asp
Bower, J. (1989). The Healthy House. New York: Carol Communications.
Carnegie Mellon University. (n.d.). Green Design Initiative. Available:
http://www.ce.cmu.edu/GreenDesign/index.html
Crowther, R. L. (1992). Ecologic Architecture. Stoneham, MA:
Butterworth Architecture.
Dunham-Jones, E. (1997). Stars, Swatches, and Sweets: Thoughts on
Post-Fordist Production and the Star System in Architecture. Thresholds,
15, 16-21.
Easterling, K. (1999). A Short Contemplation on Money and Comedy.
Thresholds, 18, 12-16.
Edwards, B. (Ed.) (2001). Green Architecture. Architectural Design,
v71 n4.
Field, B., & Field, K. Environmental Economics: An Introduction
(3rd ed.). (2002). New York: McGraw-Hill/Irwin.
Fox, W. (2000). Ethics and the Built Environment. London: Routledge.
Hittinger, J. (2000, May). The Green Exchange: Inquiring Minds Want
to Know. Available: http://www.isdesignet.com
Hittinger, J. (2000, June). The Green Exchange: Do Your Homework.
Available: http://www.isdesignet.com
Jarzombek, M. (1999). Molecules, Money and Design: The Question of
Sustainabilityís Role in Architectural Academe. Thresholds,
18, 32-38.
Leinberger, C. & Davis, R. (1999). Financing New Urbanism.
Thresholds, 18, 43-50.
McCoubrie, A., & Treloar, G. (1996). Life-cycle Embodied Energy
in Office Furniture. Available: http://www.ab.deaking.edu.au/Researchinfo/EEseminar/
McDonough, W. & Baungart, M. (2002). Transforming Industry Cradle
to Cradle Design. Available: http://www.mbdc.com
|
|
 |
