Typography
| Structure Type: | Course |
|---|
| Code: | KH14BAGR16 |
|---|
| Type: | Compulsory |
|---|
| Level: | Bachelor |
|---|
| Credits: | 10.0 points |
|---|
| Responsible Teacher: | Savola, Esa |
|---|
| Language of Instruction: | Finnish |
|---|
Course Implementations, Planned Year of Study and Semester
| Curriculum | Semester | Credits | Start of Semester | End of Semester |
| MK-2013 |
1 spring |
10.0 |
2014-01-02 |
2014-07-31 |
Learning Outcomes
Students will learn about the early history of writing and the main features in the history of block letters and combine them with other trends in designing. Students will be able to apply this information in their designing work.
Students will understand the main principles associated with typographic designing. They will identify font categories and at least some of the letter styles in the categories in question. Students will know common designing principles pertaining to typesetting and the combining of font types as well as how to position them on a surface. They will be able to identify them from ready-made graphic products and using them in their own designing work.
Student's Workload
Lectures (a learning diary) 10h, exercises 80 h, independent study 40 h
Contents
History of typography
Font categories and choosing/combining types of fonts
Principles of typographic layouts
Recommended or Required Reading
Material will be announced at the beginning of the course and material distributed by the teacher.
Mode of Delivery / Planned Learning Activities and Teaching Methods
Lectures, assignments, independent study
Assessment Criteria
0 FAILED
1 SATISFACTORY (POOR)
Design process develops poorly with different stages unclearly defined, personal achievements and counselling in unbalance, specification(s), goal(s) and criteria for intended product(s) not clearly organized and analyzed, background work for design commission minimal, quantity and quality of design work (iteratively poor, routine like, mechanical) barely acceptable compared to time used, presentation(s) (customer meeting(s), portfolio, partial deliveries, assessment discussions, final delivery, complementary deliveries etc.) only moderately (overall comprehensiveness, visual and verbal quality) and mechanically developed by student.
2 SATISFACTORY (FAIR)
Design process develops satisfactorily with different stages at least partially defined, personal achievements and counselling still in some respect unbalanced, specification(s), goal(s) and criteria for intended product(s) satisfactorily organized and analyzed, background work for design commission in most respect satisfactory but with little source criticism, quantity and quality of design work (iteratively modest, routine like but with some personal traits) satisfactory compared to time used, presentation(s) (customer meeting(s), portfolio, partial deliveries, assessment discussions, final delivery, complementary deliveries etc.) satisfactorily (overall comprehensiveness, visual and verbal quality) and with some personal traits developed by student.
3 GOOD
Design process develops fairly good with different stages clearly defined, personal achievements and counselling are in most respect balanced, specification(s), goal(s) and criteria for intended product(s) in main respects well organized and analyzed, background work for design commission is good with adequate source criticism, quantity and quality of design work (iteratively good, fairly innovative and with clear personal traits) good compared to time used, presentation(s) (customer meeting(s), portfolio, partial deliveries, assessment discussions, final delivery, complementary deliveries etc.) good (overall comprehensiveness, visual and verbal quality) and with clear personal traits developed by student.
4 GOOD (VERY GOOD)
Design process develops very good with different stages very clearly defined, personal achievements and counselling are in all respect balanced, specification(s), goal(s) and criteria for intended product(s) in all respects well organized and analyzed, background work for design commission is very good with clear source criticism, quantity and quality of design work (iteratively very good, clearly innovative and with strong personal traits) very good compared to time used, presentation(s) (customer meeting(s), portfolio, partial deliveries, assessment discussions, final delivery, complementary deliveries etc.) very good (overall comprehensiveness, visual and verbal quality) and with very personal traits developed by student.
5 EXCELLENT
Design process develops independently with different stages sharply defined, personal achievements and counselling are excellently balanced, specification(s), goal(s) and criteria for intended product(s) in all respects excellently organized and analyzed, background work for design commission is extremely good with clear source criticism, quantity and quality of design work (iteratively excellent, very innovative and with artistic personal traits) excellent compared to time used, presentation(s) (customer meeting(s), portfolio, partial deliveries, assessment discussions, final delivery, complementary deliveries etc.) excellent (overall comprehensiveness, visual and verbal quality) and with strong and artistic personal traits developed by student.
Assessment Methods
work shop and assignments 85 %, a learning diary 15%
Back