INCM008 Nicosia Cyprus
INCM008 Nicosia,Cyprus
For those that have not been in Cyprus, here’s a report about the INCM in general and a summary of the discussions written by NCs by the end of the INCM. The final report will be done by the organizers as soon as possible.
Report INCM 2008 Nicosia
The INCM 2008 was organized in Nicosia, Cyprus. The organizers took over the task during the INCM 2007 in Motovun Croatia, and it should be mentioned that they were the only ones willing and enthusiastic at that time. The INCM 2008 could be considered as a rather unique case, due to the fact that the organizers are living in two different countries and they organized an event in their homeland and therefore worked on it from a distance and not on site.
This INCM took place in a city, which still faces an unusual state of division.
The organizers introduced this urban situation through walking tours, lectures and everyday crossing from one part to the other. It might seem that discussion time has been lost, but the opportunity to get informed and experience the character of the last divided capital of Europe has been offered.
What’s been mentioned above, along with the fact that the organizers were lonely members of the EASA community in Cyprus, resulted in their involvement mostly in the events organizational part, rather than in the actual INCM meetings.
The organizational part was very well taken care of. The INCM agenda was left in the hands of the NC’s who got actively involved in the meetings agenda and procedure. On one hand this facts strengthen the EASA spirit and makes the NC’s responsible for the discussion and decisions taken during the INCM 2008, on the other hand it is considered that better organization in advance could have led to more productive meetings.
The first attempt for beforehand meetings organization was made almost 2 months prior to the actual event through the blog, but unfortunately the feedback was not as expected.
It has been proposed during this INCM that essential preparation should be made, prior to each INCM, as far as agenda, moderators and meetings program is concerned.
The loose structure of meetings gave a clearer idea to everyone including new NC’s on how INCM meetings should be held and what matters are important to be discussed each year. Surprisingly many NC’s were actively involved to the discussion as a result to that structure.
In addition to that groups were formed during the meetings to have more constructive and effective discussions. Workgroups were also formed in order to upgrade EASA guide, promotional material, NC list and letter of motivation for lost countries.
The future organizers of INCM 2009 in Liechtenstein were coincidently very much involved in the agenda and moderation, which proved to be a helpful experience for an efficient upcoming meeting.
To conclude, we would like to highlight that many new NC’s joined this years INCM and brought refreshing energy to the network. This meeting was more about introducing EASA and its functions to new NC’s and not about making major changes to the EASA context.
We hope this experience will encourage new NC’s to get actively involved and feel confident to organize future EASA events.
Meetings INCM009 Nicosia
This is a short summary of the discussions being held during the INCM009. The major issues were “quota” and the biding for easa010 by the UK and Turkey. It is incomplete and unfinished. If you think that major points were forgotten, please add them so that we have a more complete version for the final report.
Discussions about easa
We split in small groups with NCs of different levels of experience in order to share knowledge and opinions and discuss easa in general. Themes of the discussions were i.e.:
- the duties of NCs
- easa’s flat structure
- concept of consensus
- aims of easa
- easa-spirit
- different approaches to find and select participants
Quota
During the discussion two approaches were discussed. One approach was to use the excel-sheet that was updated during the INCM008 in Motovun, which bases the quota of each country on a number of country-specific parameters such as Number of Schools or easa activity. The second approach was to give every country an equal amount of places and distribute the extra places due to further requests.
As neither one of the proposals could convince every NC a proposition was made to change the easa-guide:
”The quota is the number of people that can represent each country as defined by EASA.
The method of deciding the quota is of the discretion of the organizers but must reflect EASA:s commitment to inclusivity and equality of nations, true to the EASA spirit. The method should be presented at the INCM before the assembly. In the event of changes done to the method used, this should be communicated to the NC:s of each country and also discussed at the INCM after the assembly.
For organizers of future and previous major international EASA events, the quota-number should be higher than the norm but building giant teams should be avoided.
In the event of nations not filling their quota, the extra places will be pooled by the organizers for redistribution, using their preferred method to the nations that can attract extra participants. “
The NCs did not reach a consensus on this proposal therefore it will be discussed in future meetings
website
after a presentation of the website as it was developed since the INCM in Moscow few changes were suggested:
-the links should be subdivided in “network” and “official”
-material such as sponsor packs, participants-guide should be downloadable as In Design-files for further use by NCs and Organizers.
The FAQ was written.
The Logo-proposal from Motovun was discussed. The concept can be used but does not necessarily need to be used.
The Website will be uploaded soon after the INCM.
the domain will be easa000.net
easa-guide change
an addition in the easa-guide was proposed and reached consensus upon
”Due to it’s nomadic nature, EASA has a unique opportunity to explore different cultures, histories and people. Therefore EASA organizers are encouraged to use gestures, either physical or otherwise, to show appreciation for each community where EASA is held.”
NC-guide, participant-guide, sponsor-pack
revised.
Lost countries
there are only two left by now: Iceland and Estonia. A letter to them has been written and will be sent to the universities in those countries.
”To whom it may concern,
we are the European Architecture Students Assembly EASA and we would like to take this opportunity to write to you about our network.
EASA is a practical network for communication, meeting and exchange. Here architecture students can discuss their ideas, work together and exchange their experiences concerning architecture, education or life in general.
By holding assemblies in different countries we have the chance to discover their cultural, historical, and environmental background. By exploring new dimensions of communication, reflection and presentation we can achieve a new perspective of dealing with the architectural profession.
The aim of the EASA is for those who participate to have an extraordinary experience.
We have just finished our National Contact Meeting which took place in Cyprus this year. Our aim is to include student representatives from all countries in Europe to come to our assemblies. We believe that you are one of very few, who is not represented. We would like to encourage you to become an active member in our network. We would be very happy for you to contact us with any queries you have. We are looking forward to hear from you.
Kind regards,
the national contacts of EASA”
Rita, the Portuguese NC made a poster and presentation in order to get new Portuguese participants. Whoever knows Portuguese students of architecture should contact Rita, forward the material and encourage them to join easa.
NC-list
updated
Fee-discussion
The fee for the easa in Ireland was higher than in previous years. The main reason was that easa was held in two places, Dublin and Letterfrack. The organizers of the easa in Italy will return to the previous system and charge a similar fee as in Greece.
The Irish organizers gave a rebate to tutors in order to attract more and higher quality workshops. In their opinion this approach was successful. Some NCs considered this as unfair, as money shouldn’t be a motivation for being tutor. It was suggested to the next organizers to charge tutors the full fee.
easa008 Letterfrack
the organizers managed to finish the final report and hand it over to the next organizers during the INCM. The extensive final report consists of three parts covering also the whole process of organizing an easa.
a short discussion and big applause succeeded the presentation of this memorable great event.
sesam009 Rome
Presentation and discussion
easa009 Italy
The organizers presented the event and prepared a discussion about some issues (excerpt from the minutes)
Workshop presentation
Luis: Agrees that we need to have a short presentation and a workshop fair.
Dade: we intact will separate them in different moments.
Excursion is clear.
Lectures
Franz: May be hard to have all of them in a row; in Ireland changes where not clear; one day lectures marathon is good but you need to create breaks.
Irina: One day is good for break in the workshop schedule.
Ina: Combined with workshop and a proper timetable.
Luis: Marathon is tiring; put lectures at the end of the day, keep it strict.
Andy: Be careful about doing complete opposite of the problem; try to find an in-between solution.
Paddy: Sometimes it’s lectures that cause changes, you need to adapt to lectures.
Dade: We will try to have lectures after dinner before party.
Ina: With theme need to have an holistic approach.
Open parties vs closed
Franz: Good idea to have them closed and have some outside. In Ireland locals caused problems.
Paul: Agrees with Italy’s plan.
Dade: We plan to have outside parties and a BBQ.
Paul: Small party space was good in Ireland.
Competition workshop
Ina: Statement of what you want to do for gates; can be right or wrong according to the theme.
Andy: But a general theme is good for the competition. The “gate” is confusing people a little.
Dade: We want to be surprised by entries. Solutions will probably be alternative.
Exchange the word “gate” with “entrance” sounds more open.
Vince: We will specify location for the gates in the competition entries.
Discussion desk
Dade: Is it good to have it as a workshop?
Chris: It’ s good for it to be timetabled and tutors will work around that.
Ina: It should be informal but giving ideas of topics; es: Monday-theme.
Dade: What people need at this point is someone to moderate and put ideas together to get outputs.
Luis: You need tutors to make discussion happen for getting output.
Moderator vs Tutor
Andy: Tutor. So you can have a small group of participants moderating.
Elsa: Can discussion desk people be NCs?
Dade: They could not be interested or experienced.
Luis: Not desk but wks, let tutor design the workshop.
Dade: This desk should be in a central and easy to find place for casual participants to join.
Daily workshops
Dade: Do you like the idea?
Paul: Works throughout event and not lasting just one day.
Ina: Call them something else than Wks.
Rune: I like the idea
Dimitar: Budapest produced daily games, they were fun and also unstoppable stick machine produced daily outputs.
NC’s duties
Dade: We follow the Swiss team experience.
Accommodation
Elena: separate class rooms? Or other way?
Dade: we have big spaces for communal activities, we can switch big and small places at will.
Vince: we will not use all the buildings, so we have choices.
Elena: separated by Nationality?
Dade: we will give a suggestion but it will still be open.
Elena: choice of easa spaces is crucial; there are problems in big and small places, there should be a good balance in density.
Dade: we already decided to not use all the buildings to not have dispersion feeling.
Chris: Make sure all people are in the same building: in Ireland tutor sleeping area was to far away.
Dade: we decided to use the classrooms for sleeping and we will take away the doors for prevent people to feel excluded.
Rune: keeping countries sleeping together is good for a strong foundation of national teams.
Franz: I like the idea of smaller intimate places.
Vince: Security? It’s not a big deal as we have just two entrances.
incm009 Liechtenstein
there was only one proposal wherefore no biding took place.
easa010
Two brilliant proposals were made by Turkey and the UK. Both teams were considered as extraordinarily well prepared, ambitious and capable of organizing an amazing event in 2010. UK proposed to have the easa in the city-centre of Manchester while Turkey would have gone to a abandoned industrial area at the shore, near to a rather small town. After a long and controversial discussion it was decided to choose Manchester for the main reason that easa should explore new situations and search for a high contrast from one event to another.
posted by incm008
Wed, 19 Nov 2008 01:27:08 GMT
