Unit: Architecture
Program: Architecture (DArch)
Degree: Doctorate
Date: Fri Nov 16, 2018 - 11:32:32 am

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

1. Realm A: Critical Thinking and Representation. Graduates from NAAB-accredited architecture 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 DArch 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: 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.8 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.

(1. Demonstrate comprehensive knowledge in one or more general subject areas related to, but not confined to, a specific area of interest., 3. Apply research methodology and/or scholarly inquiry techniques specific to one’s field of study., 4. Critically analyze, synthesize, and utilize information and data related to one’s field of study., 5. Proficiently communicate and disseminate information in a manner relevant to the field and intended audience., 6. Conduct research or projects as a responsible and ethical professional, including consideration of and respect for other cultural perspectives., 7. Interact professionally with others.)

2. 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 The accredited degree program must demonstrate that each graduate possesses skills in the following areas 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; and a definition of site selection and design assessment criteria. 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.

(1. Demonstrate comprehensive knowledge in one or more general subject areas related to, but not confined to, a specific area of interest., 4. Critically analyze, synthesize, and utilize information and data related to one’s field of study., 5. Proficiently communicate and disseminate information in a manner relevant to the field and intended audience.)

3. 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.

(1. Demonstrate comprehensive knowledge in one or more general subject areas related to, but not confined to, a specific area of interest., 2. Demonstrate understanding of research methodology and techniques specific to one’s field of study., 3. Apply research methodology and/or scholarly inquiry techniques specific to one’s field of study., 4. Critically analyze, synthesize, and utilize information and data related to one’s field of study., 5. Proficiently communicate and disseminate information in a manner relevant to the field and intended audience., 6. Conduct research or projects as a responsible and ethical professional, including consideration of and respect for other cultural perspectives.)

4. 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 processclient, contractor, architect, user groups, local communityand the architects 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 firms business practices, including financial management and business planning, marketing, organization, and entrepreneurship. D.4 Legal Responsibilities: Understanding of the architects 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.

(1. Demonstrate comprehensive knowledge in one or more general subject areas related to, but not confined to, a specific area of interest., 3. Apply research methodology and/or scholarly inquiry techniques specific to one’s field of study., 4. Critically analyze, synthesize, and utilize information and data related to one’s field of study., 5. Proficiently communicate and disseminate information in a manner relevant to the field and intended audience., 6. Conduct research or projects as a responsible and ethical professional, including consideration of and respect for other cultural perspectives., 7. Interact professionally with others.)

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

Department Website URL: http://www.arch.hawaii.edu/#accreditation
Student Handbook. URL, if available online:
Information Sheet, Flyer, or Brochure URL, if available online:
UHM Catalog. Page Number:
Course Syllabi. URL, if available online:
Other: Architecture Program Report for 2018 NAAB Visit for Continuing Accreditation (http://www.arch.hawaii.edu/sites/default/files/University%20of%20Hawai%CA%BBi%20SOA%20APR_final_rev_04.01.18.pdf)
Other: National Architectural Accrediting Board (NAAB) Conditions for Accreditation

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

Curriculum Map File(s) from 2018:

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) Does the program have learning achievement results for its program SLOs? (Example of achievement results: "80% of students met expectations on SLO 1.")(check one):

No
Yes, on some(1-50%) of the program SLOs
Yes, on most(51-99%) of the program SLOs
Yes, on all(100%) of the program SLOs

6) Did your program engage in any program learning assessment activities between June 1, 2015 and October 31, 2018?

Yes
No (skip to question 17)

7) What best describes the program-level learning assessment activities that took place for the period June 1, 2015 to October 31, 2018? (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)
No (skip to question 17)
Investigate other pressing issue related to student learning achievement for the program (explain in question 7)
Other: National Architectural Accrediting Board (NAAB) re-accreditation application and review during AY 2017-18.

8) Briefly explain the assessment activities that took place.

Doctor of Architecture (DArch) program course work, specifically design studio student work, is assessed at the end of each semester in a day-long 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 to improve program learnign outcomes.

In addition--and importantly--during the academic year 2017-18 the DArch degree underwent a National Architectural Accrediting Board (NAAB) re-accreditation self-evaluation, documentation, and review. In this process, in preparation for NAAB review, the school’s faculty collected, evaluated, and documented 3 “high pass” and 3 “low pass” examples of student work from every required DArch course. An exhibition of course work provided examples and evidence how every single NAAB SPC was met in required courses. The school passed its recent NAAB reaccreditation with flying colors (a full 8-year reaccreditation). Per the NAAB visiting team report, all curricular criteria and SPC for the professional DArch degree were met, some with distinction.

 

9) What types of evidence did the program use as part of the assessment activities checked in question 7? (Check all that apply.)

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
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
Assessment-related such as assessment plan, SLOs, curriculum map, etc.
Program or course materials (syllabi, assignments, requirements, etc.)
Other 1: Exhibition of 3-years of student work for every single required DArch course with marked-up SPC for 2017-18 NAAB accreditation review
Other 2:

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

Every instructor of a required DArch course submitted course materials and 3 examples each of "high pass" and "low pass" (indicates how SPC are met) student work for the academic years 2014-15, 2015-16, 2016-17 for subsequent faculty review, assessment, exhibition, and NAAB accredotation documentation and review. 

Additionally, each semester, on the day of the end-of-semester all-faculty studio review session, each instructor presents deliverables for two high and one low pass student projects (indicates how well SPC are met) 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 years covered by this report, all instructors of required DArch courses submitted evidence that each included the work of, on average, three students, please see above.

11) 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: April 2018 NAAB accreditation visiting team

12) 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:

13) Summarize the results of the assessment activities checked in question 7. For example, report the percentage of students who achieved each SLO.

As mentioned above, according to the 2018 NAAB visiting team report that summarizes our DArch degree's 8-year reaacreditation evaluation, all curricular requirements and SPC were met, some with distinction. 

14) 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:

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

During and after every end-of-semester faculty studio review and, particuluarly, NAAB accreditation visiting team exhibition preparation and reporting, the faculty, program directors, and the dean discuss in great detail and perform necessary SPC adjustments accross required DArch courses.

16) 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.

We consider the recent 8-year NAAB accreditation (8 years is the maxiumum a program can achieve) at the end of spring 2018, during which the visiting team found that DArch student work and thus the curriculum met all NAAB SPC, significant evidence of the success of past DArch assessment exercises, student advising, instruction, and student learning.

17) If the program did not engage in assessment activities, please justify.

NA