Blog 9: EQ

1. "I reviewed the rule of three for writing an EQ."

2. Tell us if it meets the rule of 3 criteria. Tell why it does or why it doesn't.

My Working EQ: "What is the best way for an architect to incorporate the natural surroundings in a building design?"

In response to the rule of 3 criteria: When carefully analyzing my EQ, I found that my EQ did fit the rule of 3 criteria, and below I have supported my response to each of the 3 criteria.

• Providing a framework for studies:

                  My current essential question allows me to access a wide-range of research, offering many open-ended questions. Within my EQ, my question states "what is the best way" this choice of words presents to any viewer that my question can be answered in more than one way. The reason why my EQ can be answered in multiple ways is that you can find many "best ways...to incorporate" nature into a building design; in which all answers can equally be considered "the best way." For example one of my current answers to my Essential Question is through the use of observation many architects can learn the forms of nature's structure and incorporate their observations into a project design. Another possible answer to my EQ is by literally incorporating nature into your design by designing a building that is engineered to mold around pre-existing land marks to purposely not harm the pre-existing cite.

• Taking a stance:

                 Overall my EQ offers an extensive outlook of research, which include facts, historic and modern examples, as well as methods of how to incorporate nature into your design. Keeping in mind that our EQ must argue or support our point can be represented with the word choice of arguing "what is the best way...to incorporate" nature into a building design. This phrase allows me to explore and support my EQ by defending my research supported response answers by finding the "best ways."

• Formatting:

                The wording within my EQ is grammatically correct as well as it uses appropriate language to offer an open-ended response. My EQ uses specific phrases in order to get a specific point across particularly pertaining to  the "best way."

2.
a.  What is the most important factor in healthy weight loss?

• This question does not meet the rule of 3 criteria since it can only be answered through a factual based standpoint tying to the stance criteria to argue a point.  

b.  What is most important to securing a conviction in a criminal investigation?

• This question does not follow the criteria, because its formatting is not specific to defining the EQ. For example "What is most important" instead of address the EQ in that format the EQ could have been worded like "What is the most important factor" (this way specific addresses a factor when securing a conviction.)

c.  What is most important in creating a hairstyle that best satisfies a customer?

• This question does not follow the criteria, because its formatting is not specific to defining the EQ. For example "What is most important" instead of address the EQ in that format the EQ could have been worded like "What is the most important factor" (this way specific addresses a factor when creating a hairstyle.)

d.  How can an Anesthesiologist best treat chronic pain?

• This question does follow the three rule criteria since it offers an elaborate study of different ways an Anesthesiologist can best treat chronic pain. In addition, this question takes a stances that can argue a variety of different standpoints on how to best treat chronic pain. Lastly the formatting on this quest does fit the criteria since it is very specific and clear on its point on "How...Anesthesiologist best treat chronic pain?"

3. Based on your review of the rule of 3 and your experience with assessing four EQs, please write another draft EQ for your senior project.

How can an architect sufficiently incorporate nature into a building design?