i. institutional support and commitment to continuous improvement

School of the Art Institute of Chicago
Department of Architecture, Interior Architecture, and Designed Objects
Master of Architecture
Master of Architecture with emphasis in Interior Architecture
II. EDUCATIONAL OUTCOMES AND CURRICULUM
II.2. CURRICULAR FRAMEWORK
II.2.3 Curriculum Review and Development
Below, departmental curricular procedures are described. After that, the process for School-wide cur-
ricular approval is briefly discussed.
A. Departmental review and development
The significant identity and progressive direction of the MArch program at SAIC are unique and appar-
ent in the work of the students and in the tenor of daily life in the Sullivan Center’s studios and halls.
The performance criteria are only a minimum standard of understanding and ability, but they are also a
foundation stone for the professional goals of the MArch program.
The MArch program’s Assessment and Archiving System has been operational for four (4) years, i.e.
December 2006. It has collected assessments of student performance on the subsets of the 32 NAAB
Student Performance Criteria for every required class in the MArch program. Faculty assessments of stu-
dent performance on NAAB SPCs are contained in metadata that has been collected with the PDFs of
student work. Starting in Fall 2009, the metadata has been pulled from the server and sorted according
to high pass and low pass numbers for each SPC. This allows the MArch program to assess where each
student performance criterion has been delivered poorly and where it can best be delivered.
Though committed to the idea of storing documentation of course work as digital media in a central-
ized system, currently the AIADO is investigating the option of disconnecting the archiving of student
work from its assessment, meaning no assessment data would be collected and stored with the ar-
chived work at the time of uploading. With the current system, student work is assessed by the faculty
assigned to a class, then uploaded. A new scheme would involve storing work using a commercial
web-based image archiving and viewing application, then reviewing and assessing work relative to SPC
evidence and “high-pass” vs. “low-pass” via a faculty committee once per term. This information could
then be added to instances of work as metadata and used to sort and retrieve work for NAAB purpos-
es or for the myriad of occasions were images of student work is useful for departmental promotion.
A recent example of this is a curriculum review instituted by the department and carried out via a 0.5
faculty contract issued to Associate Professor Ellen Grimes. Professor Grimes collected syllabus infor-
mation from all MArch program classes and reviewed course output to confirm course descriptions,
and goals with outcomes. This important work became the basis for the complete categorical rework-
ing and formatting of all course descriptions and the updating of the MArch SPC matrices.
Also, as a part of this work a committee structure with roles and responsibilities was developed to per-
manently instantiate a regular MArch (and BFA undergraduate pathways in Architecture and Interior
Architecture) curriculum review:
Committee abstract
o A standing curriculum review of the entire MArch and undergraduate courses in
Architecture and Interior Architecture starting in 2010–11
o Committee membership elected by the AIADO faculty
o Content of the committee charter defined by faculty consensus with program direc-
tor oversight.
Committee responsibilities
o Solicit, initiate and review proposals for new course work
o Recommend course revisions and deletions to director
o Provide for curriculum coordination and support
Architecture Program Report | 140