1

Department of City Planning Faculty of Architecture University of Manitoba

Planning Theory 1 CITY 7030 A01

Fall Term 2013

Instructor Dr. Rae Bridgman, Professor, Dept. of City Planning Class Meetings Thursdays, 8:30 am – 11:15 am

(during period 9 September – 4 December 2013) Room 116, Architecture 2 Building

Available for consultation by appointment

office: Room 314, Architecture 2 Building telephone: 474-7179 email: rae.bridgman@ad.umanitoba.ca web: home.cc.umanitoba.ca/~bridgman

Credits 3.0 Calendar Description

“The principal ideas and ideals influencing planning thought and practice, ranging from rational comprehensive planning to theories of societal guidance, ethics and the human-environment interface. / 3.0 Credit Hours / Level: Graduate / Faculty of Architecture / City Planning Department”

COURSE DESCRIPTION

There are great challenges before you, from the overwhelming nature of climate change to the unfairness of an economy that excludes so many from our collective wealth, and the changes necessary to build a more inclusive and generous Canada. I believe in you. Your energy, your vision, your passion for justice are exactly what this country needs today. You need to be at the heart of our economy, our political life, and our plans for the present and the future. [Jack Layton, A letter to Canadians from the Honourable Jack Layton, 20 August 2011.]

Can we meaningfully learn from our past experiences, and creatively use the tools at our disposal, to address the complexity of planning problems today? Can we use planning as a tool to resolve some of the most vexing challenges facing Canadian communities? [Matti Siemiatycki, Planning in the public eye, 2010]

2

Why is it fair to suggest that community planning in Canada involves a constant tug of war between utopianism and pragmatism? [Jill Grant, A reader in Canadian Planning, 2008]

How has the discipline of planning evolved over time? What multi-dimensional dilemmas do planners

attempt to resolve in day-to-day practice? What contradictions animate their work? We will consider

some of the ethical pitfalls of planning practice; the professional roles that planners play; the

relationships among planning, the market and the state; environmental justice; planning for social

diversity and sustainability; and constraints under which planners operate.

The course focuses on histories and theories of planning relating to contemporary professional practice.

Traditions in philosophy, social theory and policy analysis all have a bearing on planning institutions,

contexts, and ethics. By debating major intellectual movements in relation to professional practice,

consider how to bridge the imagined gap between theory and practice—to recognize how practice is

informed by theory and how theory emerges from practice.

Evaluation of Students

Participation:

5% weekly submissions of questions inspired by the day’s assigned readings (at the beginning of class) for at least 5 seminars 10% general participation 5% in-class presentation of course readings (2.5% x 2 – responsibility for 2 readings)

Presentations/Group Work: (various dates -- consult syllabus)

30%

Final Paper:

5% proposal 40% final paper 5% oral report in-class

NOTE: PENALTIES FOR LATE WORK — 5% per day from total grade.

Written work should be submitted for grading in hard copy, and via email as a Word file, double-spaced

in Times New Roman 12. It must conform to the American Psychological Association (APA) style guide. A

brief guide can be found at: http://umanitoba.ca/libraries/units/dafoe/media/cite_APA.pdf. More

extensive documentation is available at: http://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/section/2/10/.

3

STUDENT WORK

1. Weekly participation 20%:

Your 20% participation grade comprises three components: 5% for submitting discussion questions

arising from the weekly readings at the beginning of class; 5% general participation, for participating in

class discussions, as well as engaging with course content in alternative ways; and 10% for taking

primary responsibility to present four of the course readings over the term (2.5% per reading). This is a

seminar course; you MUST come to class having done the readings.

Questions (5% of final grade)

You are expected to submit questions for AT LEAST FIVE of the seminars; you may submit more.

At the beginning of class, please submit TWO discussion questions (arising from that particular week’s

readings) in print copy to me (hand-written or in type). (Late questions will not be accepted.) Questions

should not involve questions of definition, or reference questions that can be answered through a web

search (e.g., via Wikipedia); they must pertain to the issues and concerns of the topic for the week and

draw from the readings themselves. There may be a random draw from the pool of questions for class

debate and discussion. (5% of your participation grade will be allocated for these questions.)

Class Participation (10% of final grade)

Class discussions can offer a great way to polish your skills in public speaking. In the course of your

professional career, you may be called upon in groups both small and large to present your position,

provide comments, clarify issues, offer alternative proposals.... If you find yourself reluctant to speak in

public or feel unsure in discussion (or you simply want to brush up), please consult the following

websites: http://collegeuniversity.suite101.com/article.cfm/class_participation_tips and

http://learningcommons.sfu.ca/sites/default/files/218/seminars-guidelines.pdf

Class participation may also feature other ways of engaging with course material. FOR EXAMPLE — one-

on-one discussions with the instructor about themes arising may evidence participation; drawing

students’ attention to relevant issues through circulating additional articles or resources may also

evidence participation. These are merely two kinds of examples. There are many other ways of engaging

with the course material.

In-class presentation of course readings (2.5% x 2 = 5% of final grade)

REQUIRED: Please consider how to BRING THE ISSUES TO LIFE for you colleagues. For example, can the issues be represented through a brief in-class exercise (game, scenario, role-play, story-telling, rap song, dramatic re-enactment.....)? Consider how to present the material in a lively fashion, rather than merely reading from your notes. You are strongly encouraged to avoid reading verbatim from notes. Make eye contact with your “audience”. The following questions may assist in your preparations.

4

o What question or issue were the authors trying to address? o What did they find, discover or conclude? o What are the implications of their work? o How does this article related to other course readings and to the authors’ other work?

In other words, provide a larger context for this article.

2. Presentations by pairs/groups (30%)

The class will be divided into pairs/groups to lead presentations in the third hour of the class. The

presentations will be devoted to case studies that illustrate a particular issue or set of issues arising from

the weeks’ readings. [Note: There will be a common grade assigned to all members for their group

work.]

Presenters are expected to do the following:

1. In the third hour of class, provide a 2- to 4-page handout and a 30–minute presentation about the case study in question. Presentations should make use of theories and ideas embodied in readings of that week (and/or with themes arising from other weeks, as appropriate). They should not simply repeat or summarize the contents of a plan, case or reading. You may use PowerPoint (or comparable) and supplement your case study with material from additional readings or resources.

2. Identify a series of issues that arise from the case study in relation to the readings. These should include

a. a discussion of the history of the issue b. a presentation of the relevant planning documents and the role they played in the issue:

e.g., a strategic plan, a site plan, a municipal board or committee report or decision document, report from a public hearing, etc.

c. an interpretation of the issue through the themes raised in the readings d. some points for class discussion.

3. As with the ongoing weekly presentations, it is important to BRING THE ISSUES TO LIFE in alternative ways, to engage your colleagues and spark different ways of thinking about the issues.

3. Final paper: (please see the Major Paper Requirements under “assignments” folder posted on JUMP)

Major paper proposal 5%. Due Thursday, October 17 at the beginning of class. Proposals

submitted at the end of or after class will be counted as late (please submit a hard copy and

email an electronic copy to bridgman@ad.umanitoba.ca).

Final paper 40%. Due Thursday, November 28, at the beginning of class. Papers submitted

after this time will be counted as late. You must submit a hard copy and an electronic copy

(email to bridgman@ad.umanitoba.ca).

Oral report 5% in-class presentation (see schedule, November 28).

5

Readings: Please consult the syllabus and the course website on JUMP for course readings and

complementary resources. Much of the material is available electronically. Please note that additional

readings or resources may be assigned during the term, as appropriate. Students will be notified via

email about such resources.

NOTE: Certainly, materials drawn from websites and listservs will be useful. However, the written work you submit for the course must be based primarily on peer-reviewed sources, for example, articles drawn from journals, such as those listed in the weekly readings. The following texts all contain noteworthy or influential contributions to the history of planning thought. In some, the authors offer ideas about how settlements could be organized. In others, authors recount the histories of settlement. In still others, the authors portray how particular groups experience urban areas.

Bashevkin, S. (2006). Tales of two cities: Women and municipal restructuring in London and Toronto. Vancouver: UBC Press.

Blumenfeld, H. (1967). The modern metropolis: Its origins, growth, characteristics, and planning. Montreal: Harvest House.

Carver, H. (1975). Compassionate landscape. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.

Doxiadis, C.A. (1974). Anthropopolis: City for human development. New York: Norton.

Friedman, A. (2010). A place in mind: The search for authenticity. Montreal: Véhicule Press.

Fuller, B. (1938). Nine chains to the moon. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press.

Grandin, G. (2009). Fordlandia: The rise and fall of Henry Ford’s forgotten Jungle City. New York: Metropolitan Books.

Grant, J. (2006). Planning the good community: New urbanism in theory and practice. New York: Routledge.

Grant, J. (2007). A reader in Canadian planning: linking theory and practice. Toronto: Nelson.

Harris, R. (2004). Creeping conformity: How Canada became suburban, 1900-1960. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.

Healey, P. (2006). Collaborative planning: Shaping places in fragmented societies. (2nd ed.) New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

Hodge, G., & Gordon, G. (2003). Planning Canadian communities: An introduction to the principles, practice and participants. (5th ed.) Toronto, Canada: Nelson.

Jacobs, J. (1961). The death and life of great American cities. New York: Vintage Books.

Kunstler, J.H. (1996). Home from nowhere: Remaking our everyday world for the twenty-first century. New York: Simon & Schuster.

6

Lash, H. (1976). Planning in a human way: Personal reflections on the regional planning experience in Greater Vancouver. Ottawa: Ministry of State for Urban Affairs.

Layton, J. (2004). Speaking out: Ideas that work for Canadians. Toronto: Key Porter Books.

Milroy, B.M. (2009). Thinking planning and urbanism. Vancouver: UBC Press.

Nelson, J.J. (2008). Razing Africville: A geography of racism. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.

Owen, D. (2009). Green metropolis: Why living smaller, living closer, and driving less are keys to sustainability. New York: Riverhead Books.

Schumacher, E.F. (1974) Small is beautiful: Economics as if people mattered. New York: Harper & Rowe.

Sewell, J. (2004). A new city agenda. A new city agenda. Toronto: Zephyr Press.

Soleri, P. (1969). Arcology: The city in the image of man. Cambridge: MIT Press.

Some Useful Links

http://www.righttothecity.org/ http://www.plannersnetwork.org/ http://www.mppi.mb.ca/links.asp http://www.cip-icu.ca/ http://www.planetizen.com/

See also the great American Planning Association (APA) presentation series (click on a particular presentation to hear audio and download PowerPoint file): http://www.planning.org/tuesdaysatapa/previous.htm

SYLLABUS

INTRODUCTION

SEPT 12

Week 1. Introduction

Schneekloth, L. H. (1997). Unredeemably utopian: architecture and making/unmaking the world. Utopian Studies 9(1), 1-25. Spain, D. Sustainability, feminist visions, and the utopian tradition. Journal of Planning Literature, 9(4), 362-369.

7

Bridgman, Rae. (1998). The architecture of homelessness and utopian pragmatics. Utopian Studies, 9(1), 50-67. Friedmann, J. (2012). The good city: In defense of utopian thinking. In S. Fainstein & S. Campbell (Eds.),

Readings in Planning Theory (3rd ed.) (pp. 87-104). Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.

Harvey, D. (2003) Can we build an urban utopia? The Times Higher Education (14 February). Available

online http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/story.asp?storycode=174773

See also: Klosterman, R.E. (2011). Planning theory education: A thirty-year review. Journal of Planning Education and Research, 31, 319-331. Frank, Nancy. 2002. Rethinking planning theory for a Master's-level curriculum. Journal of Planning

Education and Research, 21(3), 320-330.

Wolfe, J.M. (2002). Reinventing planning: Canada. Progress in Planning, 57, 207-235.

UTOPIAS PAST … AND PRESENT

SEPT 19

Week 2. The best laid plans...Modernism is dead: Long live modernism.

Holston, J. (1989). Premises and paradoxes (Chapter 1), Blueprint utopia (Chapter 2), and The plans --

hidden agenda (Chapter 3). In The Modernist City (pp. 3-30; 31-58; 59-98). Chicago: University of

Chicago Press.

Sandercock, L. (2003). Modernist Cities and Planning. Oh, what a lovely paradox. In Cosmopolis II:

Mongrel cities in the 21st century (pp. 13-35). London: Continuum.

Zhang, L. (2006) Contesting spatial modernity in late-socialist China. Current Anthropology, 47(3), 461-

484

Bageen, S. (2007). Brand Dubai: The instant city or instantly recognizable city. International Planning

Studies 12(2), 173-197.

See also:

Fishman, R. (2012). [1977]. Urban utopias: Ebenezer Howard and Le Corbusier. In S. Campbell & S.

Fainstein (Eds.), Readings in Planning Theory (3rd ed.) (pp. 27-53). Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.

Harvey, D. (1997) New urbanism and the communitarian trap. Harvard Design Magazine, 1-3.

8

Hall, P. (1988). The city of monuments (Chapter 6). In Cities of tomorrow: An intellectual history of

urban planning and design in the twentieth century (pp. 188-217). Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.

FILM: Brooklyn Matters

(See: http://www.brooklynmatters.com/)

CHALLENGES AND OPPORTUNITIES (+ UN/INTENDED CONSEQUENCES)

SEPT 26

Week 3: Environmental and Social Equity

David Harvey. (1996). The environment of justice. In Justice, Nature and the Geography of Difference

(pp. 366-402). Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.

Campbell, S. (1996). Green Cities, Growing Cities, Just Cities. Urban Planning and the Contradictions of

Sustainable Development. Journal of the American Planning Association 26(3): 296-312.

Pulido, L. (2000) Rethinking environmental racism: White privilege and urban development in southern

California. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 90, 112-140.

Harvey, D. (2003) The right to the city. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research 27(4), 939-

41.

Erenhalt, A. (2008). Trading Places: The demographic inversion of the American City. The New Republic

(August 13), 13-22.

GROUP 1 PRESENTATION: DUMPSITE 41

OCT 3

Week 4. Planning and (Post?) Colonial Relations

Krueckeberg, D. (1995). The Difficult Character of Property: To whom do things belong? Journal of the American Planning Association, 61(3), pp. 301-09.

Little Bear, L. (2004). Aboriginal Paradigms: Implications for relationships to land and treaty making. In K.

Wilkins (Ed.), Advancing Aboriginal Claims: Visions/Strategies/Directions (pp. 26-38). Saskatoon,

Saskatchewan: Purich Publishing Ltd.

Borrows, J. (1997). Living between water and rocks: First Nations, environmental planning and

democracy, University of Toronto Law Journal, 47(4), 417-468.

Porter, L. (2006). Planning in (post)colonial settings: Challenges for theory and practice. Planning Theory

& Practice, 7(4), 383 – 396.

9

FILM: Kanehsatake 270 Years of Resistance (119 min.)

[Note: This film is available in Elizabeth Dafoe Library]

See: http://www.cjc-online.ca/index.php/journal/article/view/1153/1072;

http://www.umanitoba.ca/cm/vol16/no1/alanisobomsawin.html

OCT 10

Week 5. Constraints and Opportunities – Markets, Planning and Democracy

Kipfer, S. And Keil, K. (2000). Toronto, Inc.? Planning the competitive city. Antipode, 34(2), 227-264.

Weber R. (2002). Extracting value from cities. Neo-liberalism and Urban Redevelopment Antipode, 519-

540.

Harvey, D. (1989). From managerialism to entrepreneurialism: the transformation of urban governance.

Geografiska Annaler, 71, 1 3-17.

Leslie, D. (2005). Creative Cities? Geoforum, 36, 403-405.

Pratt, A.C. (2011). The cultural contradictions of the creative city. City, Culture and Society, 2, 123-130.

GROUP 2 PRESENTATION: PLANNING THE SHRINKING CITY

THE TERRAIN OF PLANNING THEORY

Your proposal for your major paper is due Thursday, October 17th. Please submit it at the beginning of

that class; and please email it to the Librarian Liv Valmestad (c.c’d to Rae.Bridgman@ad.umanitoba.ca)

by noon (October 17) in preparation for the October 24th class. Proposals submitted at the end of class

(or emailed to Liv after noon-time) will be counted as late.

OCT 17

Week 6. The Tools

10

Lindblom, Charles (1959). The Science of ‘Muddling Through.’ Public Administration Review 19(2), 79-88.

Etzioni, Amitai. (1967). Mixed-scanning: A ‘Third’ Approach to Decision-making. Public Administration

Review 27(5), 385-92.

Grant, J. (Ed.) (2008). The tools of the trade (Chapter 14) and Debates about growth (Chapter 15). In A

reader in Canadian planning (pp. 339-358; 367- 390). Scarborough: Thomson Nelson Canada.

Grant, J. (2002). Mixed use in theory and practice. Canadian experience with implementing a planning

principle. Journal of the American Planning Association 68(1), 71-84.

Talen, E. (2012). Introduction (Chapter 1) and Reform (Chapter 6). In City rules: How regulations affect

urban form (pp.1-18; 175-200). Washington, D.C.: Island Press. (See also the Foreword by Andres

Duany.)

GROUP 3 PRESENTATION: “Muddling through”...public toilets

TRANSFORMATIVE PRACTICES

OCT 24 Week 7. Introduction to the U of M Libraries with Liv Valmestad, Reference Librarian

OCT 31

Week 8. Participation and Partnerships

Kennedy, M. (1996). Transformative community planning: empowerment through community

development. Planners Network, 117.

Talen, E. (2008). New urbanism, social equity and the challenge of post-Katrina rebuilding in Mississippi.

Journal of Planning Education and Research 27, 277-293.

Reardon, K. M. (2009). Neighborhood planning for community renewal. In R. A. Philips & R. Pittman

(Eds.), An introduction to community development (pp. 266-283). London: Routledge.

Forester, J. (1989). Planning in the face of power. In Planning in the face of power (pp. 27-47). Berkeley:

University of California Press.

FILM: Holding Ground: The rebirth of Dudley Street

(See: http://www.newday.com/films/Holding_Ground.html)

11

NOV 7

Week 9: Plans and Others/Others’ Plans [Difference and the politics of identity]

Sandercock, L. (1995). Voices from the borderlands: A meditation on a metaphor. Journal of Planning

Education and Research, 14(2), 77-88.

Rahder, B. and R. Milgrom (2004). The Uncertain City: Making Space(s) for Difference, Canadian Policy

and Planning, Canadian Journal of Urban Research 13(1) (supplement), 27-45.

Sandercock, L. (2003). Rewriting planning history: Official and insurgent stories and mongrel cities: How

can we live together? In Cosmopolis II: Mongrel Cities of the 21st Century (pp. 37-57; 85-105). New York:

Continuum.

Yiftachel, O. (1998). Planning and social control: Exploring the dark side. Journal of Planning Literature,

12, 395-406.

FILM: Africville

(See: http://halifax.ca/archives/AfricvilleSources.html

GUEST: Michael Gordon

Nov 14

Week 10: Advocacy and Communicative Action

Krumholz, N. (1982). A retrospective view of equity planning: Cleveland, 1969-1979, Journal of the

American Planning Association 48(2), 163-83.

Briggs, Xavier de Sousa (1998). Doing democracy up-close: Culture, power, and communication in community building. Journal of Planning Education and Research, 18(1), 1-13.

Healy, P. (1992). Planning through debate: the communicative turn in planning theory. Town Planning Review 63(2), 367-384.

Huxley, M. (2000). The limits to communicative planning. Journal of Planning Education and Research,

19(4), 369–377.

Sandercock, L. (2003). Out of the closet: The importance of stories and storytelling in planning practice.

Planning Theory & Practice, 4(1), 11-28.

PRESENTATION GROUP 4: People Plan Toronto

)

12

Nov 21

Week 11 Where are all the women? Where are all the children?

Hayden, D. (1980). What would a non-sexist city be like? Speculations on housing, urban design and

human work. Signs, 5(3) (supplement), 167-184.

MacGregor, S. (1995). Deconstructing the man-made city: Feminist critiques of planning thought and

actions. In M. Eicher (Ed.), Change of plans: Towards a non-sexist sustainable city (pp. 25-49). Toronto:

Garamond Press.

Greed, C. (2005). Overcoming the factors inhibiting the mainstreaming of gender into spatial planning

policy in the United Kingdom. Urban Studies, 42(4), 719-749.

Karsten, L. & van Vliet, W. (2006). Increasing children's freedom of movement - introduction. Children,

Youth and Environments, 16(1), 69-73.

______. (2006). Children in the city: Reclaiming the street. Children, Youth and Environments, 16(1), 151-

167.

Bartlett, S. (2005). Integrating children’s rights into municipal action: A review of progress and lessons

learned. Children, Youth and Environments, 15(2), 18-40.

Hendler, S. (2005). Towards a feminist code of planning ethics. Planning Theory and Practice, 6(1): 53-

69. 2005.

Hendler, S. (2002). It’s the right thing to do – or is it? Contemporary issues in planning ethics. Plan

Canada, 42(2), 9-11.

See also:

Federation of Canadian Municipalities. (2004). Increasing women’s participation in municipal decision-

making processes: Strategies for more inclusive Canadian communities. Ottawa: Federation of Canadian

Municipalities. Available online:

http://www.fcm.ca/Documents/reports/Women/Increasing_Womens_Participation_in_Municipal_Deci

sion_Making_Strategies_for_More_Inclusive_Canadian_Communities_EN.pdf

Yates, B. (2005). Building a child impact assessment tool for the City of Edmonton. Children, Youth and

Environments, 15(2), 371-377.

As well:

http://charretteinstitute.org/blog/kids-charrettes/

https://www.placestogrow.ca/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=48&Itemid=66

13

NOV 28

Week 12 PLANS, FRAMEWORKS AND TOOLS

Students will present on the findings from their final papers. Make sure to bring the issues to life in

alternative ways!

14

UNIVERSITY REGULATIONS — GENERAL INFORMATION

Style Guide Course work must credit the sources of all materials (textual and visual) not the student’s own in standard scholarly fashion. Please use APA style (Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association). Please use 1” margins, double-space, and size 12 font (Times New Roman) when submitting papers. An online guide to APA practices is available from the Online Writing Lab at Purdue University:

http://owl.english.purdue.edu/handouts/research/r_apa.html

Attendance Required A sign-in sheet may be used. University of Manitoba General Academic Regulations and Policy allow debarment from classes and examinations for persistent non-attendance. (Unless a specific number of days or percentage of class time is listed, students cannot be disciplined). Students must attend all lectures, laboratories and studios in accordance with the sections assigned on the University of Manitoba Website. Students who attend the wrong section or course will receive a grade F or F/NP. Students must also attend and participate in all final studio reviews. Regular attendance is expected of all students in all courses. The Department Head/Program Chair may initiate, at the request of an instructor, procedures to bar a student from attending classes, studios and final examinations, and/or from receiving credit where unexcused absences exceed 20 per cent of the scheduled classes. Students so barred will have failed the course.

Weighting for Final Grades

Grade G.P.A. Range

A+ 4.5 4.26 – 4.50 90-100 Exceptional

A 4 3.76 – 4.25 80-89 Excellent

B+ 3.5 3.26 – 3.75 75-79 Very Good

B 3 2.76 – 3.25 70-74 Good

C+ 2.5 2.26 – 2.75 65-69 Satisfactory

C 2 1.90 - 2.25 60-64 Adequate

D 1 1.00 – 1.89 50-59 Failure

F 0 0-49 Failure

NOTE: C is a failure for Premaster's and Master's students, but passing for undergraduate students; D is a failure for undergraduate students in this faculty.

Voluntary Withdrawal

Fall Term – Wednesday November 16, 2011

Winter Term and full-term courses – Friday March 16, 2012

15

Students should refer to the General Calendar for the procedures involved. Students are advised to seek an

appointment with the course instructor to discuss their individual performance in the course prior to the

withdrawal date if they are concerned or are considering withdrawal.

Written Evaluative feedback must be given to students before the final date for voluntary withdrawal.

Late Submissions Students must speak to the Instructor and provide a medical note to the instructor and to the General Office for the student’s file. Requests for deferrals are to be submitted to the General Office, Architecture 2 Building, for circulation to the Course Instructor.

Incomplete Status Students are reminded that it is their responsibility to initiate an application for Incomplete Status in the course. Approval of an incomplete grade classification is not automatic and will depend on the assessment of the circumstances by the Course Instructor. Work must be handed in on due dates regardless of the state of completion in order to be considered for Incomplete Status. An incomplete grade will not be assigned except for medical reasons or for compassionate grounds at the discretion of the Course Instructor. An Incomplete Grade form must be submitted by the instructor with the grade register or the incomplete will not be recorded.

ROASS (Responsibilities of Academic Staff with Regard to Students)

Students should refer to the current General Calendar for The University of Manitoba Policy on the Responsibilities of Academic Staff with Regard to Students, Sexual Harassment Policy and responsibility of the Office of Student Advocacy.

Regulations on Appeals

Term Work Appeals Students may formally appeal a grade received for term work provided that the matter has been discussed with the instructor or Department Head in the first instance in an attempt to resolve the issue, without the need of formal appeal. Term work grades normally may be appealed up to ten working days after the grades for the term work have been made available to the student. Students may obtain the form Application for Appealing a Grade Given for Term Work from the general office.

Final Grade Appeals Final grades may be appealed up to 21 days after final grades have been released. Grade Appeal forms are available from the Registrar’s Office. Again, every effort must be made to discuss the matter with the instructor in an attempt to resolve the issue before resorting to the appeal process. For both the Appeal for Term Work and Final Grade Appeals, there is a charge per appeal, which is refundable if the grade is raised. No grade may be lowered as a result of filing an appeal.

Rules and Regulations Students are encouraged to seek out the Course Instructor if they feel in any way uncomfortable with the class procedures or if they feel that they need additional feedback on their progress or on issues like course content,procedures or any other aspect of the course work. All assignments must credit the sources of all materials (visual, verbal and written) that are not the student’s own and a style guide must be given (this will be a department decision). All illustrations, tables and diagrams should have captions that identify what they are and explain what relevance they have to the text. All students must conduct themselves according to the essential standards of academic integrity. They should refer to the current General Calendar for the University’s General Academic Regulations and Policy governing, inter alia, Attendance, plagiarism and cheating, Debarment, Incompletes, deferred Examinations, Appeals Probation and Academic Suspension, Voluntary Withdrawal from Programs and Courses, and Hold Status. It is strongly advised that students keep copies of course outlines provided by Instructors. Course Calendar descriptions of outlines are available on the Web and the Registrar’s office can provide official copies at a fee. If students request the extended version of outlines from the Faculty, they will be charged $25.00 per course outline.

Plagiarism, Cheating and Fraud The University of Manitoba General Calendar states that Plagiarism or any other form of cheating in examinations, term tests or academic work is subject to serious academic penalty (e.g.

16

suspension or expulsion from the faculty or university). Cheating in examinations or tests may take the form of copying from another student or bringing unauthorized materials into the exam room (e.g. crib notes, pagers or cell phones). Exam cheating can also include exam impersonation. (Please see General Academic Regulations and Requirements of the University of Manitoba General Calendar on Exam Personation). A student found guilty of contributing to cheating in examinations or term assignments is also subject to serious academic penalty. The following website provides additional information on Plagiarism (http://umanitoba.ca/student/student_guide.html). In addition, the University of Manitoba Learning Assistance Centre (http://umanitoba.ca/student/u1/lac/) has handouts and workshops available on research, writing essays, and on referencing, citing, and paraphrasing.

To plagiarize is to take ideas or words of another person and pass them off as one’s own. In short, it is stealing something intangible rather than an object. Plagiarism applies to any written work, in traditional or electronic format, design studio and graphic communication work, as well as orally or verbally presented work. Obviously, it is not necessary to state the source of well-known or easily verifiable facts, but students are expected to appropriately acknowledge the sources of ideas and expressions they use in their written work, whether quoted directly or paraphrased. This applies to diagrams, statistical tables and the like, as well as to written material, and materials or information from Internet sources.

To provide adequate and correct documentation is not only an indication of academic honesty but is also a courtesy, which enables the reader to consult these sources with ease. Failure to provide appropriate citations constitutes plagiarism. It will also be considered plagiarism and/or cheating if a student submits a term paper written in whole or in part by someone other than him/herself, or copies the answer or answers of another student in any test, examination, or take-home assignment.

Working with other students on assignments, laboratory work, take-home tests, or on-line tests, when this is not permitted by the instructor, can constitute Inappropriate Collaboration and may be subject to penalty under the Student Discipline By-Law.

An assignment that is prepared and submitted for one course must not be used for a different course. This is called duplicate submission and represents a form of cheating because course requirements are expected to be fulfilled through original work for each course.

When in doubt about any practice, ask your professor or instructor.

The Student Advocacy Office, 519 University Centre, 474-7423, is a valuable resource available to students dealing with Academic Integrity matters. See: http://umanitoba.ca/student/advocacy/ and http://www.umanitoba.ca/student/resource/student_advocacy/cheating_plagiarism_fraud.html

Students should also refer to the current General Calendar for the University of Manitoba, Faculty of Architecture’s Regulations and Coursework Requirements.

Vandalism Vandalism to personal and University property, including library materials, is punishable under the University Student Discipline Bylaw and the Criminal Code. Students are reminded that punishment can include expulsion from the University.