Student Achievement Assessment Committee

Learning outcomes

Assessment Methods

Inferences from Assessment

Action Taken

• Analyze architectural and urban design problems and synthesize solutions at different levels of complexity, scope, and building types.

1. Critiques/Reviews (First through Third Year)

a)      Design project reviews (typically two or three over the semester)

b)      Design Charettes (short, intense, brain-storming exercises)

c) “Mid-Way” review (two-part review to test architectural knowledge and design ability at the end of the Second Year)

2. Senior Project Juries

a) Intermediate Juries

b) Final Juries

c)      Senior project excellence awards

3. Student Portfolio

4. Design Competitions

5. Exhibits

6. Documentation of Students Work (by faculty)

7. Engagement Projects (with community, business)

8. Co-op Experience (placement, reports, etc)

9. Study Abroad

10. Job Placement

11. Access to Graduate School

12. Alumni information

13. Speakers

14. Field trips

15. Student Leadership

Analysis and synthesis abilities are acceptable, but learning methodologies to develop them seem not streamlined.

Design problems’ diversity for complexity, scope, and building types is exists, but project specifications accommodate these parameters seem to be individual instructors’ discretions.

Create  and communicate an overall strategy for developing student problem solving ability

Clarify and communicate a frame work for design problem complexity, scope, and building types across the curriculum

• Employ the oral, written, and graphic modes of communication for expressing research work and design efforts at different stages of the design process.

Oral: because of the steady requirements for oral defense, students become more comfortable speaking, but potential for oral effectiveness is not harnessed

Written: students steadily perform below average at best;

Graphic: Students becoming steadily proficient in using digital media, but their discretion on how to use this media is not sophisticated. Manual skills to support independent creativity and design process are becoming weaker.

Overall: Absence of a Program’s communication guiding mechanism

Create an overall mechanism for developing student communication abilities in the oral, written, and graphic mode

• Apply the concepts of architectural history and theory in shaping buildings, cities, and other spatial environments – encompassing international traditions as related to aesthetics, environment, society, and human behavior.

Steadily increased student grasp of history and theory concepts.  These concepts are yet to be better articulated in design studios, historic preservation, and others.

Improve coordination between history/theory courses and other courses—for the purpose of integration.

• Understand the basic principles that inform the design of the structural, material, and mechanical/electrical systems and to assess, select, and integrate such systems into a comprehensive building design.

Below average student grasp of these principles, especially in structures courses;

No emphasis on integrating the systems in the upper level design studios. 

Develop the Program’s planned structures sequence courses

Include integration as part of upper division course, especially Arch 322 and Arch 422.

• Make sound judgment concerning career, professional practice, and human diversity.

Students are becoming more alert to these issues and more involved in commensurate activities.

Active AIAS Chapter

No Program clear statement on these issues

Continue support the AIAS

Develop a Program’s statement on these issues