Agriculture Reference
In-Depth Information
left-brain content in presenting the material, and walks students through
grading as basically problem solving, learning to apply mathematical
formulas. Another explanation that I can get my arms around—one that
is not so slippery to defend—is that students do not necessarily under-
stand what it means to be a well-rounded and effective professional
landscape architect or designer. So it is important, in the introductory
grading course, to describe the context of grading in the continuum
of academic preparation and professional practice. Students must be
taught that grading is not an accessory but a key element in the design
process, leading through design development, contract drawing prepara-
tions, and finally to the building of their projects. Grading can be the
generative basis of arriving at a design concept. Given the generative
potential of site grading, an introductory course in grading should be
approached as a design activity. Like design, grading can be approached
as a reiterative process and not a straight-line process with a beginning-
to-end trajectory. Additionally, students should think of grading as the
framework for design. Solving site-grading problems, like design, is a
process grounded on in a body of knowledge that students must come to
understand and master. Another parallel to design: Site grading involves
the mastery of representational graphic skills necessary for clearly com-
municating a design intention, as well as for problem solving. Lastly, I
alert students to the fact that in order to become licensed professionals
they will have to successfully pass all portions of a landscape architec-
ture licensure examination (a national examination administered by
individual states) that tests for competency not only in planning and
design but also in grading, drainage, professional practice, history,
plants, and topics unique by state in some cases
1
.
1 Most states require an additional section to the LARE (Landscape Architect Registration Exam-
ination) to test the knowledge and competency of candidates in topics unique to the individual
state. For instance, Alaska requires candidates to take and pass an arctic engineering course, while
California and other Southwestern states test candidates for water management and plant selection
considering drought conditions.
