This paper takes as its point of departure advocacy planning approaches’ consideration that urban renewal is incompatible with any kind of socially effective urban planning. It focuses on analysing the Architects’ Renewal Committee in Harlem (ARCH), the first organisation solely devoted to advocacy planning in the United States, and places particular emphasis on the critiques of urban renewal strategies in the late 1960s in the North-Eastern American context, and on the emergence of groups that aimed to struggle for the civil rights of African Americans. It closely examines how the Architects’ Renewal Committee in Harlem (ARCH) provided technical and design advice to communities who could otherwise not afford it, aspiring to democratize urban planning. It pays special attention to the analysis of ARCH’s program entitled “Architecture in the Neighborhoods” (1970), which aimed to recruit local black youth to become architects. In parallel, the paper compares the strategies of the Architects’ Renewal Committee in Harlem (ARCH) with those of other groups struggling over the rights of minorities and the democratization of urban planning, such as The Architects’ Resistance (TAR), and National Organization of Minority Architecture Students (NOMAS). The Architects’ Resistance (TAR) was a group formed in 1968 by architecture students from Columbia GSAPP, MIT Department of Architecture, and Yale School of Architecture and was “concerned about the social responsibility of architects and the framework within which architecture is practiced.” The National Organization of Minority Architecture Students (NOMAS) played a major role in the struggle over civil rights for African Americans in the United States. It was founded by a group of African-American architects in Detroit, Michigan in 1971 during the AIA National Convention and aimed to defend the rights of minority design professionals. The paper presents how the above-mentioned groups aimed to reshape urban planning models in order to respond to the call for a more democratic society. It sheds light on how they reinvented the relationship between architecture and democracy.
Contributors:Studhalter, Ueli T., Leuchter, Miriam, Tettenborn, Annette, Elmer, Anneliese, Edelsbrunner, Peter A. et al
Source:ETH Zürich Research Collection
Language is of utmost importance for a child's cognitive development, including the development of scientific skills and concepts (Haug & Ødegaard, 2014; Henrichs & Leseman, 2014; Saalbach, Grabner, & Stern, 2013; Saalbach, Leuchter, & Stern, 2010; Tomasello, 1999). The influence of language on children's cognitive development is at least three-fold (Tomasello, 1999): First, language affects children's development through parents, teachers, or other adults who provide instructions and explanations; second, language directs children's attention; and third, language prompts children to change perspectives. Language can thus be seen as the basis for the organization of children's cognitive activities and the construction of higher-knowledge structures (Saalbach et al., 2013). Against this background, our study examines the role of language in teacher talk as a scaffold for children's learning.,Learning and Instruction, 71,
Contributors:Mehrabi, Zia, Donner, Simon D. (Simon David), Rios, Patricia, Guha-Sapir, Debarati, Rowhani, Pedram et al
In an incredible story of human adaptation, the aggregate global risk of mortality to extreme weather declined by over two orders of magnitude over the past century. Yet the data show that large losses of lives to extreme weather disasters persist in nations typified by poor economic development, weak institutions, and political instability. And currently we are seeing spikes in mortality from extreme heat events in rich nations, including a wave of new reported deaths in Japan, Europe, and Canada during 2018. These events and future projections of increasing exposure suggest that we need to revisit adaptation strategies to deal with the adverse effects of extreme weather disasters across the world.