Abstract
Con qualche settimana di ritardo rispetto alla programmazione,
dovuto al grande numero di studiosi
partecipanti ed al rigoroso processo di revisione dei
contributi, sono usciti due di una serie di numeri tematici
scaturiti dalla FAM 2015 International Call For
Papers.
La Call era suddivisa in tre sezioni tematiche generali
(Città, Teoria, Educazione) all’interno delle quali
altrettanti curatori (Enrico Prandi, Lamberto Amistadi,
Giuseppina Scavuzzo) hanno ideato uno specifico
sottotema, (rispettivamente “Il progetto intelligente
per la città intelligente / Smart design for a Smart
city”, “Dispositio e composizione in architettura” e
“Costruire e/è costruirsi. Il complesso rapporto tra
architettura e educazione”) articolandolo in un documento
di indirizzo, successivamente coordinato la
fase della peer review ed infine effettuato la selezione
degli articoli accompagnando il numero della rivista
(in alcuni casi più di uno) con un saggio introduttivo.
La call ha richiamato un centinaio di contributi internazionali
dei quali 35 per la linea tematica “Città”, 31
per la linea tematica “Teoria” e 29 per la linea tematica
“Educazione”.
Dei 35 della tematica “Città”, 10 sono stati accettati
dai revisori con giudizio pienamente positivo; 8 sono
stati accettati con indicazioni da parte dei revisori di
perfezionarne/modificarne alcune parti (che gli autori
hanno eseguito); 10 contributi sono stati respinti e gli
autori incoraggiati ad una revisione e una riproposta
sulla base di alcune linee migliorative che i revisori
hanno predisposto; 5 sono stati respinti e gli autori
incoraggiati a presentarli in altre sedi ad esso più
confacenti; 2 sono risultati non conformi, deliberatamente
out of topics o di qualità non sufficiente.
Non molto diverse sono state le suddivisioni delle
altre sezioni a conferma della qualità e della preparazione
degli studiosi partecipanti che noi consideriamo
il pubblico principale della rivista.
A few weeks later than expected, due to the large
number of scholars taking part and the rigorous
revision of the contributions, two of a series of themed
issues following the FAM 2015 International
Call For Papers have now been published.
The Call was divided into three general sections
on different themes (City, Theory, and Education)
within which the same number of editors (Enrico
Prandi, Lamberto Amistadi, and Giuseppina Scavuzzo)
created specific sub-themes, (respectively
“Smart design for a Smart city”, “Dispositio and Architectural
Composition” and “Building and/is Building
Ourselves. The complex relationship between
architecture and education”) turning them into
orientation papers, subsequently coordinating the
peer review phase to finally select the articles to
appear in a magazine issue (in some cases more
than one), with an introductory essay.
The Call attracted a hundred or so international
contributions of which 35 dealt with the “City” theme,
31 “Theory” and 29 “Education”.
Of the 35 on the “City”, 10 were accepted by
revisors with a fully positive assessment; 8 with
instructions from the revisors to refine/alter some
parts (which the authors did); 10 contributions
were rejected and the authors encouraged to
revise and re-submit them in the light of some guidelines
for improvement from the revisors; 5 were
rejected outright and the authors urged to submit A few weeks later than expected, due to the large
number of scholars taking part and the rigorous
revision of the contributions, two of a series of themed
issues following the FAM 2015 International
Call For Papers have now been published.
The Call was divided into three general sections
on different themes (City, Theory, and Education)
within which the same number of editors (Enrico
Prandi, Lamberto Amistadi, and Giuseppina Scavuzzo)
created specific sub-themes, (respectively
“Smart design for a Smart city”, “Dispositio and Architectural
Composition” and “Building and/is Building
Ourselves. The complex relationship between
architecture and education”) turning them into
orientation papers, subsequently coordinating the
peer review phase to finally select the articles to
appear in a magazine issue (in some cases more
than one), with an introductory essay.
The Call attracted a hundred or so international
contributions of which 35 dealt with the “City” theme,
31 “Theory” and 29 “Education”.
Of the 35 on the “City”, 10 were accepted by
revisors with a fully positive assessment; 8 with
instructions from the revisors to refine/alter some
parts (which the authors did); 10 contributions
were rejected and the authors encouraged to
revise and re-submit them in the light of some guidelines
for improvement from the revisors; 5 were
rejected outright and the authors urged to submit
A few weeks later than expected, due to the large
number of scholars taking part and the rigorous
revision of the contributions, two of a series of themed
issues following the FAM 2015 International
Call For Papers have now been published.
The Call was divided into three general sections
on different themes (City, Theory, and Education)
within which the same number of editors (Enrico
Prandi, Lamberto Amistadi, and Giuseppina Scavuzzo)
created specific sub-themes, (respectively
“Smart design for a Smart city”, “Dispositio and Architectural
Composition” and “Building and/is Building
Ourselves. The complex relationship between
architecture and education”) turning them into
orientation papers, subsequently coordinating the
peer review phase to finally select the articles to
appear in a magazine issue (in some cases more
than one), with an introductory essay.
The Call attracted a hundred or so international
contributions of which 35 dealt with the “City” theme,
31 “Theory” and 29 “Education”.
Of the 35 on the “City”, 10 were accepted by
revisors with a fully positive assessment; 8 with
instructions from the revisors to refine/alter some
parts (which the authors did); 10 contributions
were rejected and the authors encouraged to
revise and re-submit them in the light of some guidelines
for improvement from the revisors; 5 were
rejected outright and the authors urged to submit
them elsewhere to more suitable journals; 2 were
non-compliant, knowingly outside the topic or of
poor quality.
The subdivisions of the other sections were not
much different as proof of the quality and competence
of the participating scholars whom we
consider the magazine’s main audience