Unit: Architecture
Program: Architecture (DArch)
Degree: Doctorate
Date: Wed Sep 23, 2015 - 4:54:10 pm

1) Institutional Learning Objectives (ILOs) and Program Student Learning Outcomes (SLOs)

1) Below are your program's student learning outcomes (SLOs). Please update as needed.

SLOs have been developed at the course level for all required courses and for the elective courses the instructors are required to define them individually; in both cases, the SLOs are included in the course syllabus.  The SLOs correspond to the National Architectural Accreditation Board (NAAB) Student Performance Criteria (SPCs) and are called "SPC" in compliance with the language of our accrediting agency. These are revised every three years by the accrediting agency. All mandatory graduate level classes have SPCs, all undergraduate classes have SLOs, and some core undergraduate classes have both SPCs and SLOs. For the SLOs/SPCs required in each ARCH class, please see the attached Curriculum Map File #1 and #2 (in question #3).

The students are very aware of the requirement for SPCs in every class and often evaluate the instructor with regard to whether these SPC were part of the objectives of the class.

Source: National Architectural Accrediting Board, 2014 Conditions,

http://www.naab.org/accreditation/2014_Conditions

 

Student Performance Criteria: The new NAAB SPC are organized into realms to more easily understand the relationships between individual criteria. 

Realm A: Critical Thinking and Representation:  
Graduates from NAAB-accredited programs must be able to build abstract relationships and understand the impact of ideas based on the study and analysis of multiple theoretical, social, political, economic, cultural, and environmental contexts. Graduates must also be able to use a diverse range of skills to think about and convey architectural ideas, including writing, investigating, speaking, drawing, and modeling. Student learning aspirations for this realm include:

·         Being broadly educated.

·         Valuing lifelong inquisitiveness.

·         Communicating graphically in a range of media.

·         Assessing evidence.

·         Comprehending people, place, and context.

·         Recognizing the disparate needs of client, community, and society.

The accredited degree program must demonstrate that each graduate possesses the following:

A.1. Professional Communication Skills: Ability to write and speak effectively and use representational media appropriate for both within the profession and with the general public.
A. 2. Design Thinking Skills: Ability to raise clear and precise questions, use abstract ideas to interpret information, consider diverse points of view, reach well-reasoned conclusions, and test alternative outcomes against relevant criteria and standards.
A. 3. Investigative Skills: Ability to gather, assess, record, and comparatively evaluate relevant information and performance in order to support conclusions related to a specific project or assignment.
A. 4. Architectural Design Skills: Ability to effectively use basic formal, organizational and environmental principles and the capacity of each to inform two- and three-dimensional design.
A. 5. Ordering Systems Skills:  Ability to apply the fundamentals of both natural and formal ordering systems and the capacity of each to inform two- and three-dimensional design.

A. 6. Use of Precedents: Ability to examine and comprehend the fundamental principles present in relevant precedents and to make informed choices about the incorporation of such principles into architecture and urban design projects.
A. 7. History and Global Culture: Understanding of the parallel and divergent histories of architecture and the cultural norms of a variety of indigenous, vernacular, local, and regional settings in terms of their political, economic, social, ecological, and technological factors
A. 10. Cultural Diversity and Social Equity: Understanding of the diverse needs, values, behavioral norms, physical abilities, and social and spatial patterns that characterize different cultures and individuals and the responsibility of the architect to ensure equity of access to sites, buildings, and structures.

Realm B: Building Practices, Technical Skills, and Knowledge: Graduates from NAAB-accredited programs must be able to comprehend the technical aspects of design, systems, and materials and be able to apply that comprehension to architectural solutions. In addition, the impact of such decisions on the environment must be well considered. Student learning aspirations for this realm include:

  • Creating building designs with well-integrated systems.
  • Comprehending constructability.
  • Integrating the principles of environmental stewardship.
  • Conveying technical information accurately

B. 1. Pre-Design: Ability to prepare a comprehensive program for an architectural project that includes an assessment of client and user needs; an inventory of spaces and their requirements; an analysis of site conditions (including existing buildings); a review of the relevant building codes and standards, including relevant sustainability requirements, and an assessment of their implications for the project;

B. 2. Site Design: Ability to respond to site characteristics, including urban context and developmental patterning, historical fabric, soil, topography, ecology, climate, and building orientation, in the development of a project design.
B. 3. Codes and Regulations: Ability to design sites, facilities, and systems that are responsive to relevant codes and regulations, and include the principles of life-safety and accessibility standards.


B. 4. Technical Documentation: Ability to make technically clear drawings, prepare outline specifications, and construct models illustrating and identifying the assembly of materials, systems, and components appropriate for a building design.


B. 5. Structural Systems: Ability to demonstrate the basic principles of structural systems and their ability to withstand gravitational, seismic, and lateral forces, as well as the selection and application of the appropriate structural system.


B. 6. Environmental Systems: Ability to demonstrate the principles of environmental systems’ design, how design criteria can vary by geographic region, and the tools used for performance assessment. This demonstration must include active and passive heating and cooling, solar geometry, daylighting, natural ventilation, indoor air quality, solar systems, lighting systems, and acoustics.

B. 7. Building Envelope Systems and Assemblies: Understanding of the basic principles involved in the appropriate selection and application of building envelope systems relative to fundamental performance, aesthetics, moisture transfer, durability, and energy and material resources.

B. 8. Building Materials and Assemblies: Understanding of the basic principles used in the appropriate selection of interior and exterior construction materials, finishes, products, components, and assemblies based on their inherent performance, including environmental impact and reuse.

B. 9. Building Service Systems: Understanding of the basic principles and appropriate application and performance of building service systems, including lighting, mechanical, plumbing, electrical, communication, vertical transportation, security, and fire protection systems.

B. 10. Financial Considerations: Understanding of the fundamentals of building costs, which must include project financing methods and feasibility, construction cost estimating, construction scheduling, operational costs, and life-cycle costs.

Realm C: Integrated Architectural Solutions:
Graduates from NAAB-accredited programs must be able to demonstrate that they have the ability to synthesize a wide range of variables into an integrated design solution. Student learning aspirations for this realm include:

·         Comprehending the importance of research pursuits to inform the design process.

·         Evaluating options and reconciling the implications of design decisions across systems and scales.

·         Synthesizing variables from diverse and complex systems into an integrated architectural solution.

·         Responding to environmental stewardship goals across multiple systems for an integrated solution.

 

The accredited degree program must demonstrate that each graduate possesses skills in the following areas:

C.1 Research: Understanding of the theoretical and applied research methodologies and practices used during the design process.

C.2 Integrated Evaluations and Decision-Making Design Process: Ability to demonstrate the skills associated with making integrated decisions across multiple systems and variables in the completion of a design project. This demonstration includes problem identification, setting evaluative criteria, analyzing solutions, and predicting the effectiveness of implementation.

C.3 Integrative Design: Ability to make design decisions within a complex architectural project while demonstrating broad integration and consideration of environmental stewardship, technical documentation, accessibility, site conditions, life safety, environmental systems, structural systems, and building envelope systems and assemblies.

 

Realm D: Professional Practice:

 Graduates from NAAB-accredited programs must understand business principles for the practice of architecture, including management, advocacy, and the need to act legally, ethically, and critically for the good of the client, society, and the public. Student learning aspirations for this realm include:

·         Comprehending the business of architecture and construction.

·         Discerning the valuable roles and key players in related disciplines.

·         Understanding a professional code of ethics, as well as legal and professional responsibilities.

The accredited degree program must demonstrate that each graduate possesses skills in the following areas:

D.1 Stakeholder Roles in Architecture: Understanding of the relationships among key stakeholders in the design process—client, contractor, architect, user groups, local community—and the architect’s role to reconcile stakeholder needs.

D.2 Project Management: Understanding of the methods for selecting consultants and assembling teams; identifying work plans, project schedules, and time requirements; and recommending project delivery methods.

D.3 Business Practices: Understanding of the basic principles of a firm’s business practices, including financial management and business planning, marketing, organization, and entrepreneurship.

D.4 Legal Responsibilities: Understanding of the architect’s responsibility to the public and the client as determined by regulations and legal considerations involving the practice of architecture and professional service contracts.

D.5 Professional Conduct: Understanding of the ethical issues involved in the exercise of professional judgment in architectural design and practice and understanding the role of the NCARB Rules of Conduct and the AIA Code of Ethics in defining professional conduct.

 

2) Your program's SLOs are published as follows. Please update as needed.

Department Website URL: www.arch.hawaii.edu
Student Handbook. URL, if available online:
Information Sheet, Flyer, or Brochure URL, if available online:
UHM Catalog. Page Number: online
Course Syllabi. URL, if available online: NAAB SPCs and UHM SLOs are included in all syllabi (available on Laulima)
Other: National Accrediting Board; http://www.naab.org/accreditation/2014_Conditions
Other:

3) Please review, add, replace, or delete the existing curriculum map.

Curriculum Map File(s) from 2015:

4) For your program, the percentage of courses that have course SLOs explicitly stated on the syllabus, a website, or other publicly available document is as follows. Please update as needed.

0%
1-50%
51-80%
81-99%
100%

5) Did your program engage in any program learning assessment activities between June 1, 2014 and September 30, 2015?

Yes
No (skip to question 16)

6) What best describes the program-level learning assessment activities that took place for the period June 1, 2014 to September 30, 2015? (Check all that apply.)

Create/modify/discuss program learning assessment procedures (e.g., SLOs, curriculum map, mechanism to collect student work, rubric, survey)
Collect/evaluate student work/performance to determine SLO achievement
Collect/analyze student self-reports of SLO achievement via surveys, interviews, or focus groups
Use assessment results to make programmatic decisions (e.g., change course content or pedagogy, design new course, hiring)
Investigate curriculum coherence. This includes investigating how well courses address the SLOs, course sequencing and adequacy, the effect of pre-requisites on learning achievement.
Investigate other pressing issue related to student learning achievement for the program (explain in question 7)
Other:

7) Briefly explain the assessment activities that took place in the last 18 months.

Doctor of Architecture program course work, specifically design studio work, is assessed at the end of each semester in an all-faculty studio review session, during which all School of Architecture faculty and the Dean gather for one day and evaluate student learning outcomes (SPC for graduate-level courses) and discuss how studio courses and the overall program curriculum might be adjusted. During the period in question, these faculty reviews took place on December 13, 2014, and May 9, 2015; the next one is scheduled for December 12, 2015.

8) What types of evidence did the program use as part of the assessment activities checked in question 6? (Check all that apply.)

Direct evidence of student learning (student work products)


Artistic exhibition/performance
Assignment/exam/paper completed as part of regular coursework and used for program-level assessment
Capstone work product (e.g., written project or non-thesis paper)
Exam created by an external organization (e.g., professional association for licensure)
Exit exam created by the program
IRB approval of research
Oral performance (oral defense, oral presentation, conference presentation)
Portfolio of student work
Publication or grant proposal
Qualifying exam or comprehensive exam for program-level assessment in addition to individual student evaluation (graduate level only)
Supervisor or employer evaluation of student performance outside the classroom (internship, clinical, practicum)
Thesis or dissertation used for program-level assessment in addition to individual student evaluation
Other 1:
Other 2:

Indirect evidence of student learning


Alumni survey that contains self-reports of SLO achievement
Employer meetings/discussions/survey/interview of student SLO achievement
Interviews or focus groups that contain self-reports of SLO achievement
Student reflective writing assignment (essay, journal entry, self-assessment) on their SLO achievement.
Student surveys that contain self-reports of SLO achievement
Other 1:
Other 2:

Program evidence related to learning and assessment
(more applicable when the program focused on the use of results or assessment procedure/tools in this reporting period instead of data collection)


Assessment-related such as assessment plan, SLOs, curriculum map, etc.
Program or course materials (syllabi, assignments, requirements, etc.)
Other 1:
Other 2:

9) State the number of students (or persons) who submitted evidence that was evaluated. If applicable, please include the sampling technique used.

On the day of the end-of-semester all-faculty studio review session, each instructor presents the deliverables for two high
and one low pass student projects of every major assignment of the semester. The entire faculty discusses how successfully the student learning outcomes/ student performance criteria are met for each class reviewed.
During the 2014-15 faculty reviews, all faculty members submitted evidence (approximately 20) that each included the work of, on average, three students, please see above.

10) Who interpreted or analyzed the evidence that was collected? (Check all that apply.)

Course instructor(s)
Faculty committee
Ad hoc faculty group
Department chairperson
Persons or organization outside the university
Faculty advisor
Advisors (in student support services)
Students (graduate or undergraduate)
Dean/Director
Other: The School's faculty as a whole during the required end-of-semester all-day review sessions

11) How did they evaluate, analyze, or interpret the evidence? (Check all that apply.)

Used a rubric or scoring guide
Scored exams/tests/quizzes
Used professional judgment (no rubric or scoring guide used)
Compiled survey results
Used qualitative methods on interview, focus group, open-ended response data
External organization/person analyzed data (e.g., external organization administered and scored the nursing licensing exam)
Other: Individual faculty members in their presentations present to the group as a whole how SPC were met

12) Summarize the results of the assessment activities checked in question 6. For example, report the percent of students who achieved each SLO.

During the end-of-semester faculty reviews (December 13, 2014, and May 9, 2015), student work satisfied Student Performance Criteria (SPC) as set for the courses under review.

13) What best describes how the program used the results? (Check all that apply.)

Assessment procedure changes (SLOs, curriculum map, rubrics, evidence collected, sampling, communications with faculty, etc.)
Course changes (course content, pedagogy, courses offered, new course, pre-requisites, requirements)
Personnel or resource allocation changes
Program policy changes (e.g., admissions requirements, student probation policies, common course evaluation form)
Students' out-of-course experience changes (advising, co-curricular experiences, program website, program handbook, brown-bag lunches, workshops)
Celebration of student success!
Results indicated no action needed because students met expectations
Use is pending (typical reasons: insufficient number of students in population, evidence not evaluated or interpreted yet, faculty discussions continue)
Other:

14) Please briefly describe how the program used the results.

The DArch program uses the review/assessment results to continually check for SPC and curricular adjustments. This past
academic year none were considered immediately necessary. However, the Curriculum Committee uses assessment results to discuss slight curricular modifications that would strengthen the program outcomes.

15) Beyond the results, were there additional conclusions or discoveries? This can include insights about assessment procedures, teaching and learning, and great achievements regarding program assessment in this reporting period.

See above.

16) If the program did not engage in assessment activities, please explain.