ARC H3101

As you've probably heard, Todd is a very... interesting? strange? person. I'm going to give you some REAL quotes he said during critiques: "the fact that you're using round dowels disturbs me" "in my day, you wouldn't want anyone knowing you were at a club" "this concept really arouses me" Todd: I think [TA's name] and I are really on the same page with this assignment. TA: What He also has a weird obsession with the Helvetica documentary, and he talks about it at any possible opportunity. Even with his Fran Lebowitz hair, he was honestly a pretty good prof, even though the way he holds a pencil is the most chaotic thing ever.

A lot, but definitely manageable especially in relation to other architecture professors.

Firm but fair. The minimum required workload was substantial, but you could easily spend 30 hrs a week in the studio if you wanted to. She was very easy going with due dates, however, and would give ample time to tweak projects post-review.

Demanding but unfair compared to the very little that the professor dedicates to teaching

its a studio so expect to spend a lot of time there, not as much as some of the other studios, but defnitely was my most time-consuming class.

3 projects (social system, booklet, and fabrication), which is a ton of work, especially if illustrator, indesign, and rhino are new to you. Multiple all-nighters.

Oh boy was Madeline the worst professor I had in my two years of school. She picks favorites, and her biases seep through everything she says. During reviews with guest critics (critiques) she will defend students she likes and discuss their projects while simply glossing over others. She will take into consideration everything you do and not just your final project, meaning that if you had any mental block with your creative process throughout weeks of work, she will hold it against you. She's also very wishy washy and can change requirements last minute. People who like Madeline's class do so because it's very creative, but that doesn't necessitate her being a good professor.

I had Kim Yao Spring Semester of 2005 and I was surprised to find no one had written a review of her. I suspect that is because Kim is very very good, but might not inspire a fan base. Kim is thoughtful and attentive at desk crits, well organized, and fair in her critiques. She's not trying to push bounderies and shock students into or out of architecture like may professors who seem to feel the need to assume an "uber-maven" persona. She was always understandable and there was very little bullshit, if she lapsed into jargony arkhitectur-speak she usually was self-effacing about it and laughed it off. That was a tremendous breath of fresh air and I hope I have professors like her in grad school.

A visiting instructor from Cornell, this person simply lacked dedication and basic teaching skills that Columbia studnets normally expect from their professors. Her desk crits were inconsistent and her comments were never concrete enough so students were often left hanging in the air all confused and mystified. Classes always lagged behind the schedule and the quality of work produced was abysmally below standard compared to what was going on in Schwatzman's studio in the next aisle (ALL students, WITHOUT exception, appeared to produce portfolio-quality work in Schwatzman's studio). In short, avoid this professor at all costs; you will learn so little for so much that you pay.

not a good prof! she is laid back, but can get nasty. effort not taken into consideration, and she is not that helpful. she did not seem that interested and was not encouraging.