Door audit
The first piece of graded work — a written survey of ten real doors, judged on whether a stranger could tell what each one does before touching it
Due: 15 March 2027 · Weight: 20%
The brief#
Find ten doors. For each one, say what it wants you to do, what you actually did the first time, and whether those were the same thing.
A door audit is not a complaint file. Anyone can list ten doors that are annoying; the studio is a semester on why, and “why” needs categories that survive contact with the next building. Use whatever vocabulary you’ve picked up from the hardware clinic and lectures — push plate versus pull handle, signifier versus affordance, the difference between a door that’s wrong and one that’s merely unfamiliar — and apply it the same way across all ten, so a reader can compare door three against door seven and trust that the standard didn’t move.
Doors that work are part of the assignment too. A survey that finds nothing but failure has usually stopped looking, or picked its ten doors to make a point rather than to test one.
What you submit#
A written audit, one entry per door: a photo or sketch, the location, and your judgement against the criterion you’re applying. Ten to fifteen hundred words total is enough if the categories are doing real work; padding a thin argument with more doors doesn’t help.
Bring the doors you’re least sure about to the week 4 studio crit before you submit — that’s what the session is for.
The spec
The brief poses the problem and leaves room for a response. The spec is the fixed part: what a marker checks. Some lines can be checked mechanically; the rest call for judgement.
- ten doors, each a different building or hardware set, no two from the same corridor
- every door is judged against a stated criterion, not just described
- at least one door in the set is judged to work well, and you say why
How it is marked
| Criterion | Weight |
|---|---|
| Accuracy of the survey | 40% |
| Quality of the argument | 40% |
| Clarity for a reader who wasn't there | 20% |