“Perhaps our largest challenge [as teachers] is to overcome the fear of disequilibrium – our own and that of our students – and trust that those instances in which the bedrock of our assumptions and understanding begins to waver mark the edge of new understanding” Naomi Mulvihill. How Do You Say Twos in Spanish, If Two is Dos? Language as Means and Object in a Bilingual Kindergarten Classroom. 

When designing for the child, architects must attempt to put themselves in the mind of their younger selves; with invention, imagination, investigation and exploration serving as primary drivers. The classroom becomes an experiential space where children are encouraged to discover and understand their relationship to the world around them. This will be an intensive studio about the design of educational spaces for children culminating in a public K-2 dual-language lab school in East Boston.  

Students will delve deep into the pedagogy and process of dual-language learning through architectural form, daylight, and environment. As practicing architects, we synthesize detailed information and multiple ideas in the design of buildings. The studio will promote programmatic and formal invention through an iterative design process that is grounded in deep engagement with how people use and experience architecture. How do we create architecture that bridges the relationship between the child and their community?

The program will be a dual-language lab school, of approximately 30,000 square feet, located in East Boston, MA. The school will serve students from kindergarten through second grade and provide spaces for the broader community. Dual-language schools are grounded in an approach to teaching young children their home language as well as English, in parallel. Beyond the classroom, this school model supports families within diverse immigrant communities. We will engage directly with teachers, who specialize in dual-language learning, to better understand the nuances and complexities of teaching multiple languages to young learners. 

The studio’s methodology will synthesize several areas of exploration sequentially: Within the classroom unit, how can the specific pedagogy of project-based dual-language learning lead to innovative design? How can daylight integrate with the performative and programmatic design of the classroom and the entire building? How can the aggregation of classrooms create a larger organizational strategy for the building that supports teachers, students, and their families? How can the school relate to the larger East Boston neighborhood and the city beyond?

Daylight conditions will be modeled using both Climate Studio software and physical models. The small size of the project will enable each student to study multiple design alternatives and variations for the program, site, massing, and envelope, using feedback gained from both analog and digital tools. 

The studio will meet twice weekly, Tuesdays and Thursdays (50% virtual, 50% in person). The studio will be taught primarily by Kim Yao and Adam Yarinsky. Their partner, Stephen Cassell, will attend key pin-ups and reviews. There will be a studio trip over Spring Break to New York City to visit relevant projects and  Architecture Research Office (ARO).  

The fourth edition of Amazonia Studio is located — one more time but with a more specific approach — in Manaus, the largest city in the region with 2.5 million people. Located at the border of Rio Negro, right before its junction with Rio Solimoes to become the Amazon River, Manaus has a hydrological condition that make it a cultural hub for ancestors and outsiders, as if it was a metropolis for native peoples well before its modern cosmopolitan incarnation after the arrival of post-Colombian colonizers. Today it remains a metropolis for two worlds at the same time.

The city of Manaus represents an extremely rich cultural amalgamation that produces artists whose work has been more and more recognized in their own voice, bringing the possibility of a horizontal intercultural dialogue.

With the proposed de-orbiting of the International Space Station in 2030 and the coinciding rise in commercial space flight operations, it is clear that human habitation of Low Earth Orbit (LEO) will dramatically increase, stimulating the design of human environments beyond earth. With NASA’s Artemis program, the surface of the Moon will once again harbor human activities, over fifty years after the final Apollo mission. It is imperative that we design the future of space architecture with not only the best technology and functional performance but also with a primary focus on the human dimension: social, cultural, ecological, and aesthetic values. Up to now, very little of the environments of space exploration have been designed primarily for human experience; rather, they are focused purely on performance and safety. Yet how, and even why we live in space is now a question open to the design fields in collaboration with engineering and others.

MIT has been home to innovation and a leader in human space flight since the 1960s; its graduates have provided over 15% of US astronauts, and its labs and workshops have constructed key technologies from the Apollo era to the present day. At the intersection of this experience and MIT’s current values lies essential work on how we will live in the future – in space and on earth.

The Space Architecture Options Studio will pilot a new undertaking in interdisciplinary design for space habitats by bringing together students from across MIT to imagine, design, prototype and test the future of Space Architecture. This studio will be run in parallel with Architecture/MArch, Aero/Astro Space Systems Engineering class and the Media Lab Space Exploration Initiative’s Operating in the Lunar Environments class. There will be shared lectures and activities, with the goal of bringing together students with varied backgrounds to create a synergy that will hopefully lead to new ideas about human habitation and activities on the Moon.

It is at the edges of the possible where we find important lessons for what we need to do here on earth. 

Mandatory lottery process.

A more detailed description will be posted here before the term begins.

Offers a broad range of advanced-level investigations in architectural design in various contexts, including international sites. Integrates theoretical and technological discourses into specific topics. Studio problems may include urbanism and city scale strategies, habitation and urban housing systems, architecture in landscapes, material investigations and new production technologies, programmatic and spatial complex building typologies, and research centered studies. Mandatory lottery process.

Builds on Core I skills and expands the constraints of the architectural problem to include issues of urban site logistics, cultural and programmatic material (inhabitation and human factors), and long span structures. Two related projects introduce a range of disciplinary issues, such as working with precedents, site, sectional and spatial proposition of the building, and the performance of the outer envelope. Emphasizes the clarity of intentions and the development of appropriate architectural and representational solutions.

Fosters a holistic understanding of the architectural-building cycle, enabling students to build upon the history of design and construction to make informed decisions towards developing innovative building systems. Includes an overview of materials, processing methods, and their formation into building systems across cultures. Looks at developing innovative architectural systems focusing on the building envelope. Seeks to adapt processes from the aerospace and automotive industries to investigate buildings as prefabricated design and engineering assemblies. Synthesizes knowledge in building design and construction systems, environmental and structural design, and geometric and computational approaches.

Provides instruction in designing and building a functional piece of furniture from an original design. Develops woodworking techniques from use of traditional hand tools to digital fabrication. Gives students the opportunity to practice design without using a building program or code. Surveys the history of furniture making. 

Additional work required of students taking for graduate credit.

UG: 4.118, G: 4.117

Dedicated to bridging the gap between the virtual and physical world, the subject embraces modes of computation that hold resonance with materials and methods that beg to be computed. Students engage in bi-weekly exercises to solve complex design problems. Each exercise is dedicated to a different computation approach (recursion, parametric, genetic algorithms, particle-spring systems, etc.) that is married to a physical challenge, thereby learning the advantages and disadvantages to each approach while verifying the results in physical and digitally fabricated prototypes. Through the tools of computation and fabrication, it empowers students to design as architects, engineers and craftspeople. 

Additional work required of student taking for graduate credit.