Dear azarimy, I really appreciate your profound reply; it is beginning to paint a clearer picture in my mind (certainly enlightening me more).


BTW, I have missed out just a few details in my previous post;

The lecturers basically formed their own conclusions silently (in their minds) about the particular "student"; "that he/she really have no interest at all in this course"; thereby making him/her really hard to pass/make it; no matter what. (They were totally wrong; because the student really does indeed have plenty of interest in this course).

Secondly, (during the presentations); there was no sign, hint, or feedback that the student will be failing at all; everything just seems to be OK/Normal as usual...; but suddenly at the end, the student was downright "shocked" that he/she had obtained a "failed grade".

I mean come on; if I have been profoundly told off (by them) with the sense being knocked into my head and all regarding my work & the course itself; and they had explained to me the reason why I "would" have to fail, and that they would have to fail me for "these said reasons", plus being "transparent " about the grading "criteria" (which they are clearly not), and also by being opened/transparent about what they can really afford to give me (or not) based on my overall performance; then I will "willingly" accept my failure for not being able to satisfy/meet up with their predefined set of standard/criteria. (And not about - "I dislike you, I just don't like your personality; therefore it is good to failed you and you would always be failing as long as you are under me.") (Manipulating the standards to fit their desires based on emotions...)

All in all, the situation is just very volatile/unpredictable over here. If you can really please the lecturers (especially if you really attempt to), then your grades will be "Golden" (seriously). But if you are just not bothered about this sort of things, and you so happened to be under the one (this semester) who is completely against your type of person/thinking/personality/character, then it would be seriously tough luck in passing... (No matter how good you are.)

In short, I was unfortunately under the wrong clients/bosses this semester. (Who also so happened to be in-charged of my other core-subject too - "very-unfortunately"; which clearly & unsurprisingly suffered to the max too. But for my other subject; which I clearly did not do very well in - it got a pretty good grade, and obviously that subject was under a totally different lecturer.)

P.S., it is indeed very interesting to note that the lecturers which I was under "this semester" for Studio; they were supposed to be the "ultra" soft, lenient, and the "Alright" ones (according to the majority of students)... Wheres the ones whom I was under "last semester"; they were technically supposed to be the really harsh/hard/merciless/brutal (tell-you-off-in-the-face) ones in which students in history had greatly suffered & failed under countless of times (and these lecturers were traditionally reserved for the final Studio level in diploma & then now in Final Degree Level); but very surprisingly I had greatly excelled under them last semester and had also successfully obtained truly excellent grades. (It is also very interesting to note that this semester's bunch of lecturers for Studio; they do not get along very well with our last semester's group - as there were lots of arguments & disagreements at hand even in the studios itself.)

Additionally, last semester, we had the very good Ar. lecturers; but this semester, we had none (except cocky talk big & emo ones); who can either be very soft - lenient ---> or super hard & merciless (depending on who you are).

"The grades & standards are just being manipulated/messed around with; to fit their spur-of-the-moment desires & emotions." (There are certainly more cases to share; even one directly involving $$$$.)

Once again, you are either just lucky, or very unlucky over here.

Regards.

This post has been edited by Benjamin911: Jun 17 2011, 08:35 PM

No offence, but in my humble opinion, I think you are thinking too much about the lecturers instead of yourself. Stop depending on the lecturers and stop blaming other people. If you have failed, please find out why. Learn from your mistakes (and other people's mistakes) and progress from there.

that is certainly the wrong practice. when it comes to failing, we will inform the student immediately that he failed. this is so the student could make the necessary steps to appeal or request a reassessment. we have a code-of-conduct, a sort of manual where students can know their rights and the lecturers/school's rights.

the student also need to know their progress, meaning they must be informed of their grades right after the assessment of earlier projects. this is so the student could improve or decide to drop the subject. these should be made known to the students of ANY school. if ur school does not do this, clearly they're not abiding by the proper code-of-conduct required by LAM.

we avoided the whole "bodek lecturer" by having assessment by 3 different lecturers. this way, the student can bodek the tutor all they want, but the assessment will include 2 other lecturers that they might not come in contact before. sometimes one of the external is an external architect. but remember, if all 3 decides to fail u, it means u're really THAT bad . even so, like i said before, if u've been failed, there are ways to appeal and salvage the situation.

To be fair to Taylors SABD, the grade for "each" major projects of a student (including the assessment sheet itself) are being openly revealed; by being placed/pasted over the student's works/presentation boards after the presentation. (But this is only currently happening in the Degree Program today.) (While at the Diploma level, there have not been such a thing; everything was kept invisible from us; hence I am really wondering how had they been grading us then... )

Next, we also do have the "moderation process" that you are talking about, however, I would like to say that it is just "so-called" only... This is because the lecturers over here typically tend to be very "buddy-buddy" like among their very own 'cliche' or 'clan'; so in the end, all three of them can come into a one-united-cohort and then fail the particular student anyway; especially when the group consist of one who is in supreme complete authority & control, while the other two are always being completely neutral & agreeing; not having a voice of their own... (And finally, there is no such thing as having an outsider or an external practitioner/architect getting involved in the very "secretive" & "sensitive" in-house moderation process over here.) (All the three lecturers/tutors involved in the moderation were always the ones whom we had always been in contact with in the Studio subject - our very own lecturers... So it becomes very easy for them to show all the prejudice or favor they want...)

Some of the lecturers over here are indeed very selective/bias; they will generally "like" to fail only certain kinds/types of students...

But, they have not managed to fail me in any of the subjects in this program "ever". (Just in-case if any of you are wondering.) (However, my whole CGPA has indeed been severely affected because of this particular semester alone; where the total has now dropped to about 60%.)

(It was certainly very unfortunate to have had that "particular" lecturer in my other core-subject as well, where he certainly took the complete maximum opportunity & advantage to deliver even much-more of the "highly-desired" damage to my overall grades/GPA for this semester; he really seriously wanted to stop/halt my pursue of "Architecture"; he really wanted me to stay "out" of this profession altogether; he was really literally in total-desperation to fail me/to stop me; he is claiming that I am a "potential" "threat" to this profession; he is claiming in anguish that this profession would certainly do much better without a future architect like me... Just imagine having him as lecturer in both of my final core subjects in this final semester... )

Regards.

This post has been edited by Benjamin911: Jun 18 2011, 12:16 AM

hi. im interested in architecture. but the prob here, i dont have a strong drawing skills and also i kinda dont really think that i am a creative as an architecture student.

is my prob can be solve when i learn creative thinking?
btw, i plan to take foundation in natural n built envirnmnt at taylors by this july. any advice for newbie?

Young dude, my advice for you is that you would really have to start learning how to draw as well as start building up your creativity ASAP, and then quickly master those set of skills... You won't be learning all of it over here at Taylors... The classes are really huge over here in foundation & degree level and most of the time you would just be thrown out into the ocean to survive by your own capability, might, & will... You would be expected to discover & learn most of it by yourself and then apply all of those skills in style & perfection into your various exercises & projects; you don't make it you fail as simple as that. There are lecturers who are cold and won't be having time for you. Most of the time it is all centered on "you" to deliver, produce, keep on producing, and showing work instead of receiving & feeding on information from the lecturers. You will be lucky to have good lecturers who occasionally give "free" lectures or talks; but never put your bet on it. It is expensive, and all the "heat" is on you to produce & to keep on producing work & results in order to pass... You must be willing to "invest" on medias & materials, and not blink an eye when all of it goes to waste together with your effort after each weekly tutorial sessions with the ones who will always be making you miserable & disappointed.

Note that regardless of whether you are in an IPTA (public) or IPTS (private), both are basically the same and will "throw" you out into the jungle to survive; to get stuck in quicksands & be bitten by leaches, but ultimately to stay alive and get out successfully to learn with experience... The only biggest difference is that in an IPTS (private) you will "Pay" a hefty price tag "just" to have the opportunity to undergo it all... (Go figure...)

Finally, FNBE (the so-called foundation program) is marketing; I do not think that you will be learning much from it other than doing loads of "cheesy" or "childish" exercises & projects lead by really young tutors (some of them are probably still students), and the program is very expensive IMHO. (Then after that once you step into the actual degree program itself, suddenly everything becomes 20X harder and you realize that you can't cope, while those who came in from diploma level are performing much better than ever, than those from the foundation level...) In addition, all of the MQA subjects are also being cramped into that one year foundation program... Think how worth is that?

Regards.

This post has been edited by Benjamin911: Jun 18 2011, 04:37 AM

drawing skills and creativity

These are essential aptitudes/qualities to do architecture. If you don't have them, I'm afraid you're not suited to take up architecture. You need to have at least some of it for a start. Otherwise, you'd struggling through the course. You can have a string of A's in other subjects but it does not mean you will do well in architecture.

This post has been edited by tehtmc: Jun 18 2011, 10:30 AM

personally, i would put a lot of it on creativity. u'll learn how to draw from ur seniors and peers. we dont really teach u how to draw, but for a creative person, it'll naturally come to u. if u cant draw by hand, u can draw it using computers or model it using boards and glue. creativity has no limit, and it's up to u to explore the outer edge of ur capability.

but i have to caution u. architecture depends a lot on YOU. if u cant pull ur own weight, aint nobody gonna do it for u. benjamin already mentioned, first we chuck u in the sea, and we'll see who floats and who sinks.

omg..sounds like it's really scary things to involve in this course. my sister also adviced me for taking diploma. but, it might take a longer pathway as i am already 19 now.

i just finished my matriculation at kptm. but i dont get the interview for degree in archi, and i think it might be the best way to become an architect.

if u already have done matriculation, i seriously recommend going straight to degree. why waste time doing diploma when u're already able to do degree?

my results is below the entry requirement mr azarimy..
any suggestion for me, as u've a lot of experience in this field..

u can always opt for IPTS and somehow work for a credit transfer. if u've done matriculation, if it's above 2.00, u can always go somewhere for a degree.

halo aza, may i knw where is the tuition center architecture part time study for utm-space? according to the utm space website tat show architecture tuition center oni available in kl, may i knw is tat skudai, johor oso hv architecture part time study? if yes, wat is the different between of them? and should i need to do interview part? n hw many year should i need to spend to complete the course? of course, im talking about the degree lv? r u doing to incharge this part time study?

actually, a vast majority of UTM SPACE students are those working in KL. hence why the center normally only opens in KL. if in a current batch there's a bunch of people from JB or johor, they can shift the center to skudai.

there's no difference between the locations. they're taught by the same lecturers using the same content. perhaps the only difference is the environment and the group u're involved with.

if u're taking from 1st year, u will need about 8-9 years to finish. normal architectural degree is 5 years.

no, i'm not incharge of the part time study, nor am i teaching it. but i'm close with the coordinator of the part time programme for architecture.

Azarimy,
If I happened to have to sit for Lam Part I examination, would you reckon that the assessed knowledge includes historical & theoretical knowledge? As in hand in hand with design proficiency and technical knowledge of architecture?

As I've understood that the whole syllabus and curriculum of Bsc Arch is assessed, I believe that the 'full portfolio' in this sense includes assignments related to drawing skills and building construction. Nevertheless, I would like to check that beforehand with you if you happen to know the process.

If you can survive drawing 40-80 A1 sheets without drawing skill..


Thank God I'm done my Master,

This post has been edited by shiinkuro31: Jun 26 2011, 06:12 PM

where is this? taylors? LKW?

Lol, I wrote somewhere in between the pictures.

Deakin University.

they wont ask anything specific on history, but rather about concepts in history. for example, u cant escape from talking about modernism and how it changed architecture of today, but they wont go specific as in when and where was ronchamp chapel built. but whatever it is, it will almost always be in context of your design, unless u give them a reason to explore anything beyond that. for example, lack of knowledge in it, or if u did not manage to exhibit convincing amount of it in ur design.

it would be helpful to have everything u've done during part 1 alongside. i've seen people carrying a stack of reports/assignments for review in the exam, but i have no idea if those were actually assessed or not.

i think it's pretty obvious by the lack of chinese faces that this is not in malaysia .

im nt sure my situation nw, im jz graduate from poly malaysia. so, hw many year i need to spend to finish this DEGREE course? i mean, can i skip it?
beside tat, izzit tis Uni degree certificate lv equivalent with part II lv? i mean, after i finish tis 8-9 year course, can i register for part II exam privately?