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
a 0.5 faculty contract issued to Associate Professor Ellen Grimes. Professor Grimes collected
syllabus information 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 reworking and formatting of all course descriptions and the updating of the AIADO
MArch SPC matrices.
A committee structure with roles and responsibilities was developed to permanently instantiate a
regular MArch (and undergraduate) 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
director 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
Committee organization
o Membership to be elected by the voting membership of the AIADO faculty for a two
(2) year term with a committee chair serving in a 3 year renewable term.
o The committee will be comprised of members from the MArch, MArch w/Emphasis
in Interior Architecture, and undergraduate Architecture and Interior Architecture areas.
In Spring 2010 SAIC hired a consultant to assist AIADO in its accreditation planning and evidence
delivery. Former executive director of NAAB Sharon Matthews was contracted and has visited the
school in Spring 2010 and Fall 2010. Ms. Matthews conducted a review of the program’s learning
culture and course output from 17 of the 22 MArch classes. The review was followed by a report
that itemized clear instances of SPC evidence versus course content and documentation in need of
improvement. This important work also contributed greatly to the updating of all course descriptions
and matrices.
3) Common SAIC self-assessment procedures in AIADO
Student evaluations have became a significant contributor of students’ voice in the self-assessment
meetings AIADO faculty held after the last site visit. Armed with NAAB and student feedback,
AIADO faculty fine-tuned their curriculum in a number of ways including re-tooling the initial
summer session to be more skills-based; slightly revising design history requirements in consultation
with the Department of Art History, Theory and Criticism; and undertaking a two-year graduated
adjustment in advisors for students’ Thesis work in the sixth, final semester. These curricular
changes, in accordance with SAIC governance, were vetted by the curriculum committee and are
now in place.
An outgrowth of these self-assessment procedures of particular interest is the issue of course
fragmentation. In section 3.2 of SAIC’s 2006 APR, one self-cited weakness was a situation in which
one-and-a-half-credit classes courses had proliferated in AIADO. Because of these, faculty would
have to teach four or five partial classes rather than three-credit classes as is typical at SAIC.
Implementing an overlapping teaching structure, wherein more than one faculty member contributes
to “Integrated Technical Practice” courses, solved this.
Architecture Program Report | 40