architecture program report - School of Architecture

Transcription

UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA SCHOOL OF ARCHITECTURE ARCHITECTURE
PROGRAM REPORT OCTOBER 2008
PREFACE
This document was prepared in accordance with The National Architectural Accrediting Board (NAAB)
Conditions for Accreditation for Professional Degree Programs in Architecture, 2004 Edition. The front matter
of the report includes a Table of Contents and List of Tables and Figures. Sub-headings have been added to
most sections in order to fully address each question or topic.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0
2.0
INTRODUCTION TO THE PROGRAM
1.1
HISTORY AND DESCRIPTION OF THE INSTITUTION
1-1
1.2
INSTITUTIONAL MISSION
1-4
1.3
PROGRAM HISTORY
1-5
1.4 PROGRAM MISSION
1-11
1.5
1-24
PROGRAM SELF - ASSESSMENT
PROGRESS SINCE PREVIOUS VISIT
2.1
SUMMARY OF RESPONSES TO THE TEAM FINDINGS
2.2 SUMMARY OF RESPONSES TO CHANGES IN THE NAAB CONDITIONS
3.0
2-1
2-21
THE THIRTEEN CONDITIONS OF ACCREDITATION
3.1
PROGRAM RESPONSE TO THE NAAB PERSPECTIVES
3.1.1 ARCHITECTURAL EDUCATION AND THE ACADEMIC CONTEXT
3.1.2 ARCHITECTURAL EDUCATION AND THE STUDENTS
3.1.3 ARCHITECTURAL EDUCATION AND REGISTRATION
3.1.4 ARCHITECTURAL EDUCATION AND THE PROFESSION
3.1.5 ARCHITECTURAL EDUCATION AND SOCIETY
4.0
PAGE
3-1
3-1
3-5
3-7
3-10
3-12
3.2 PROGRAM SELF - ASSESSMENT PROCEDURES
3-15
3.3
3-19
PUBLIC INFORMATION
3.4 SOCIAL EQUITY
3-23
3.5
3-27
STUDIO CULTURE
3.6 HUMAN RESOURCES
3-29
3.7 HUMAN RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT
3-35
3.8 PHYSICAL RESOURCES
3-49
3.9 INFORMATION RESOURCES
3-59
3.10 FINANCIAL RESOURCES
3-65
3.11 ADMINISTRATIVE STRUCTURE
3-69
3.12 PROFESSIONAL DEGREES AND CURRICULUM
3-73
3.13 STUDENT PERFORMANCE CRITERIA
3-77
SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION
4.1 STUDENT PROGRESS EVALUATION PROCEDURES
4-1
4.2 STUDIO CULTURE POLICY
4-7
4.3 COURSE DESCRIPTIONS
4-11
4.4 FACULTY RESUMES
4-81
4.5 VISITING TEAM REPORT FROM THE PREVIOUS VISIT
4-151
4.6 ANNUAL REPORTS
4-153
4.7 SCHOOL CATALOG
4-157
5.0
APPENDICES
APPENDIX A :
A NEW CURRICULUM STRATEGY BOOKLET
5-1
APPENDIX B :
AD - HOC CORE CURRICULUM REPORT
5-3
APPENDIX C :
FACULTY WHITE PAPER ON DESIGN
APPENDIX D :
MEMOS REGARDING THESIS CHANGES FOR
APPENDIX F :
3 YEAR WORKPLAN FOR FACULTY
APPENDIX G :
ALUMNI SURVEY
APPENDIX H :
TRANFORMING THE U AND COLLEGE OF DESIGN TASK FORCE
5-27
APPENDIX I :
REVIT SUCCESS STORY FOR COMPREHENSIVE STUDIO
5-29
APPENDIX J :
GRADUATE STUDENT HANDBOOK
5-31
APPENDIX L :
ADJUNCT FACULTY POLICIES AND PROCEDURES
5-33
APPENDIX M :
M . ARCH ADMISSIONS STANDARDS
5-39
APPENDIX N :
LIST OF PRACTITIONERS TEACHING COMPREHENSIVE STUDIO
5-41
APPENDIX O :
DOCUMENTS RELEVANT TO PROMOTION AND TENURE
5-43
APPENDIX P :
FACULTY HANDBOOK INCLUDING STUDIO POLICIES
5-45
APPENDIX Q :
GRADUATE ADVISORY CHARGE AND LIST OF STUDENTS
5-47
+ TECHNOLOGY
2009
5-13
5-17
5-23
2008
5-25
TABLE OF FIGURES
PAGE
FIGURE
1-0
TIMELINE OF DEGREE PROGRAM CHANGE
1993-2008
1-9
FIGURE
1-1
TIMELINE OF CURRICULAR CHANGE
FIGURE
1-2
STORYBOARD OF CURRICULAR TRANSFORMATION
1-32
FIGURE
1-3
CHANGES TO ADVISING STRUCTURE
1-33
FIGURE
2-1
LEADERSHIP CHANGES
FIGURE
2-2
GRADUATION STATISTICS ON MATRICULATION AND DEGREES CONFERRED
2-17
FIGURE
3-1
ORGANIZATIONAL CHART OF SCHOOL OF ARCHITECTURE
3-71
FIGURE
3-2
PROGRAM PLAN
3-74
2005-2008
1-31
1999- PRESENT
2-5
TABLE OF TABLES
PAGE
TABLE
1-1
MECHANISMS FOR INPUT AND ASSESSMENT
1-25
TABLE
1-2
ASSESSMENTS OF STRENGTHS AND OPPORTUNITIES
1-26
TABLE
1-3
CURRICULAR CHANGE BASED ON ASSESSMENT AND ANALYSIS
1-28
TABLE
2-1
EFFECTS OF STRATEGIC POSITIONING ON THE COLLEGE AND SCHOOL
TABLE
2-2
COMPARISON OF COLLEGE OF ARCHITECTURE AND LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE ( CALA )
IN 2003 WITH CURRENT COLLEGE OF DESIGN
2-3
TABLE
2-3
SCHOOL OF ARCHITECTURE FACULTY DEMOGRAPHIC CHANGES
TABLE
2-4
TENURE AND TENURE TRACK FACULTY CHANGES SINCE
TABLE
2-5
CURRENT STUDENTS , PROFESSIONALS AND ALUMNI PARTICIPATION ON COMMITTEES 2-13
TABLE
2-6
LENGTH OF TIME TO DEGREE
TABLE
3-1
LEADERSHIP AND SERVICE TO COLLEGE
1999-2008
2003
2-2
2-6
2-6
2-17
3-2
TABLE OF TABLES ( CONT .)
PAGE
TABLE
3-2
FACULTY LEADERSHIP AND SERVICE TO THE UNIVERSITY
3-3
TABLE
3-3
STUDENT OPPORTUNITIES FOR ACADEMIC AND PROFESSIONAL ACHIEVEMENT
3-5
TABLE
3-4
ARCHITECT REGISTRATION EXAMINATION PASS RATES FOR
UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA 2005-2007
3-8
TABLE
3-5
GENDER AND ETHNICITY OF FULL TIME FACULTY
3-24
TABLE
3-6
STUDENT EQUITY
3-25
TABLE
3-7
DEMOGRAPHICS OF STUDENTS BY EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND
TABLE
3-8
ADMISSION SELECTIVITY AND RETENTION
3-30
TABLE
3-9
COURSE FORMATS , TYPES , AND RATIOS
3-32
TABLE
3-10
LIST OF VISITING LECTURERS AND EXHIBITS SINCE
TABLE
3-11
STUDIO BASED FIELD TRIP ACTIVITIES
3-40
TABLE
3-12
FACULTY SABBATICALS AND LEAVES
3-42
TABLE
3-13
DEVELOPMENT OPPORTUNITIES FOR NEW SKILLS & KNOWLEDGE SINCE
TABLE
3-14
FACULTY ROLES AND CONTRIBUTIONS TO PROFESSIONAL MEETINGS
AND ORGANIZATIONS
3-45
2002-2007
2003
3-26
3-36
2003
3-43
TABLE
3-15
BUDGET FOR CDES WORKSHOP
3-53
TABLE
3-16
COMPUTER LAB HOURS
3-56
TABLE
3-17
COMPUTER LAB SPECIFICATIONS
3-56
TABLE
3-18
LIBRARY COLLECTION EXPENDITURES
3-61
TABLE
3-19
LIBRARY USAGE
TABLE
3-20
LIBRARY STAFF EXPENDITURES
3-63
TABLE
3-21
COMPARATIVE REVENUE AND EXPENSES BY UMN PROFESSIONAL SCHOOLS
3-65
TABLE
3-22
COMPARATIVE TUITION BY UMN PROFESSIONAL SCHOOLS FY 2008
3-66
TABLE
3-23
SNAPSHOT OF SCHOOL OF ARCHITECTURE BUDGET FY 2008
3-67
TABLE
3-24
COMPARATIVE REVENUE , EXPENSES , AND O & M BY UNITS IN CDES
3-68
TABLE
3-25
OFF CAMPUS PROGRAMS
3-75
TABLE
4-1
STUDENT DATA FROM ANNUAL STATISTICS
4-153
TABLE
4-2
FACILITIES DATA
4-154
TABLE
4-3
FACULTY DATA
4-154
TABLE
4-4
FACULTY SALARY DATA
4-155
TABLE
4-5
FACULTY EQUITY DATA
4-155
2005-2008
3-62
1.0 INTRODUCTION TO THE PROGRAM
History and Description of the Institution
1.1
HISTORY AND DESCRIPTION OF THE INSTITUTION
This section should include a brief history and description of the institution.
Chartered in 1851, seven years before the Minnesota territory became a state, the University of Minnesota has
risen from its humble beginnings to become one of America’s pre-eminent research universities. The main
Twin Cities campus of the University is really two campuses approximately three miles distant from each
other. Twelve of the nineteen collegiate units of the Twin Cities campus are located on a site just east of
downtown Minneapolis. Overlooking the banks of the Mississippi, the Weisman Art Museum serves as the
gateway to this metropolitan campus.
The Saint Paul Campus, by contrast, adjoins a quiet residential area and the state fairgrounds, and is
considerably smaller in terms of its enrollment (approximately 3,500 students). It is the home for the
disciplines most often associated with a land grant university—agriculture, forestry, home economics,
biological sciences, and veterinary medicine. There are co-ordinate campuses in Duluth, Morris, and
Crookston.
At present, the College of Design (CDes) is split between the two campuses; housed in two buildings: Rapson
Hall, located on the East Bank of the Minneapolis, and McNeal Hall on the Saint Paul Campus. Along with
larger units like the college of Liberal Arts and the Institute of Technology, the classrooms and studios of the
School of Architecture and Department of Landscape Architecture in College of Design enjoy the more urban
location of the two campuses.
Today, after more than 150 years of contributions to higher education, Minnesota is one of the largest and most
respected land grant universities in the country. Approximately 59,000 students are enrolled statewide; of
these, 45,00 are pursuing degrees at the Twin Cities campus. System wide, 3,500 international students
represent about 130 different countries. Minority enrollment (Asian or Pacific Islander, African American,
Hispanic, and American Indian or Alaskan) accounts for approximately 11% of all students.
The Twin Cities campus ranks among the top three public research universities in the nation; only the
University of California, Berkeley and the University of Michigan achieve similar results in sponsored funding.
The University is governed by the Board of Regents, a 12-member body appointed by the State Legislature. The
Regents are responsible for the governance of the University as a whole. Current members are: Chair Patricia
Simmons, Vice Chair Clyde Allen, Anthony R. Baraga, Dallas Bohnsack, Linda Cohen, John Frobenius, Venora
Hung, Steve Hunter, Dean Johnson, David Larson, David Metzen, Maureen Ramirez. The President of the
University is Robert Brunicks, Provost is Tom Sullivan.
1-1
History and Description of the Institution
In 1997, former president Mark Yudof began several initiatives – five interdisciplinary areas were selected for
investment and development: digital technology, molecular and cellular biology, medical sciences, new media,
and design. Another initiative was the improvement of the University’s physical facilities. On the Twin Cities
campus alone more than 20 capital improvement projects were completed between 1997-2003. From the
School of Architecture’s perspective the most important of these was the construction of an addition,
completed in 2001, more than doubling Rapson Hall for the former College of Architecture and Landscape
Architecture.
The most far-reaching change to the University’s academic life was implemented in 1996 when the Board of
Regents adopted standards for the conversion of the academic calendar from quarters to semesters. Every
department was required to convert its curriculum and degree requirements to their semester-based
equivalents by 1999. The process was time-consuming and comprehensive, and it involved decisions from
content and credit hours to course numbering.
Under President Brunicks, an ambitious strategic positioning process was launched in 2005. Extensive and
holistic, it examined every operation and function of the institution. The following statement, “Why Strategic
Positioning” conveys the essence of this new direction:
WHY STRATEGIC POSITIONING
The goal of strategic positioning is to make the University of Minnesota one of the top three
public research universities in the world within a decade.
We must invest in core strengths of the University: Minnesota’s economy and quality of life are
directly linked to the quality of its only research university.
The changes we make now and in the future will benefit the University’s students, faculty,
stakeholders and the entire state by strengthening the quality of its education, research and
public service.
In today’s competitive world, standing still means falling behind. We must:
•
Keep the state’s only research university strong and of the highest quality as global
competition for resources, high-ability students and top faculty grows.
•
Respond to declining state funding. The University must make wise, but sometimes
difficult choices in the face of declining state support. Dollars saved through academic
redesign and administrative reform can be reinvested in improved education, research
and outreach.
•
Respond to changing demographics that will change the numbers, diversity, age and
needs of the student population.
Source: http://www1.umn.edu/systemwide/strategic_positioning/why_sp.html.
The University strategic positioning offered opportunities for the School of Architecture, most significantly
with the changes at the college level, as the College of Architecture and Landscape Architecture was
transformed to the College of Design in 2006. More information on specific impact of the new college and
other strategic planning affects are described in section 2.0
1-2
Institutional Mission
1.2
INSTITUTIONAL MISSION
This section should include the institution’s mission statement and the date of its adoption or last revision.
MISSION STATEMENT
Subd. 1. Mission. The University of Minnesota (University), founded in the belief that all people
are enriched by understanding, is dedicated to the advancement of learning and the search for
truth; to the sharing of this knowledge through education for a diverse community; and to the
application of this knowledge to benefit the people of the state, the nation, and the world.
The University's mission, carried out on multiple campuses and throughout the state, is
threefold:
•
Research and Discovery - To generate and preserve knowledge, understanding, and
creativity by conducting high-quality research, scholarship, and artistic activity that
benefit students, scholars, and communities across the state, the nation, and the world. •
Teaching and Learning - To share that knowledge, understanding, and creativity by
providing a broad range of educational programs in a strong and diverse community of
learners and teachers, and prepare graduate, professional, and undergraduate students,
as well as non-degree seeking students interested in continuing education and lifelong
learning, for active roles in a multiracial and multicultural world.
•
Outreach and Public Service - To extend, apply, and exchange knowledge between the
University and society by applying scholarly expertise to community problems, by
helping organizations and individuals respond to their changing environments, and by
making the knowledge and resources created and preserved at the University accessible
to the citizens of the state, the nation, and the world.
Subd. 2. Guiding Principles. In all of its activities, the University strives to sustain an open
exchange of ideas in an environment that:
•
embodies the values of academic freedom, responsibility, integrity, and cooperation; •
provides an atmosphere of mutual respect, free from racism, sexism, and other forms of
prejudice and intolerance; •
assists individuals, institutions, and communities in responding to a continuously
changing world; •
is conscious of and responsive to the needs of the many communities it is committed to
serving; •
creates and supports partnerships within the University, with other educational systems
and institutions, and with communities to achieve common goals; and •
inspires, sets high expectations for, and empowers the individuals within its community.
Adopted by the Board of Regents: January 14, 1994 Amended: February 8, 2008
Source:http://www1.umn.edu/regents/policies/boardoperations/Mission_Statement.pdf
1-3
1-4
Program History
1.3
PROGRAM HISTORY
This section should contain a brief history of the existing accredited degree program or, in the case of a candidacy visit, a history of the planning for
the proposed program .
In 1877, the University of Minnesota awarded its first professional degree in architecture. Thirty-five years later,
the University constituted a Department of Architecture within the College of Engineering and Architecture.
Under the leadership of Frederick Mann (1913- 1937) and Roy Jones (1937-1954), an era that saw the acceptance
of the Ecole des Beaux-Arts and then of the Modern movement, Minnesota’s reputation as one of the strongest
architectural schools in the United States was established.
In 1954 the University of Minnesota appointed Ralph Rapson, who had studied at Cranbrook, worked with Eero
Saarinen, and taught at the New Bauhaus in Chicago, as Head of what had by then become the School of
Architecture. During his thirty years of leadership, the School acquired a reputation for graduates with
outstanding skills in architectural drawing and design and a commitment to professional practice. In addition
to Rapson’s international reputation as an architect and an educator, esteem for the School was measured by
the numerous faculty and students who became fellows in the AIA and who earned local and national design
awards, the Rotch Traveling Fellowship, and American Academy in Rome Fellowships.
The School of Architecture took a visible step toward the independence accorded other professional schools
when, in 1961, it moved into its own building. It became the School of Architecture and Landscape (SALA) in
1966; and in 1967-68 it began granting a degree in landscape architecture (in conjunction with the Department
of Horticulture).
After Ralph Rapson retired in 1984, Harrison Fraker succeeded him as Head of SALA. Fraker maintained the
school’s commitment to design excellence while also strengthening its support architectural research and
scholarship. Several new faculty appointments enhanced the school’s capacities in building technology,
architectural history, and computer-aided design, adding vigor to design studio instruction.
In 1989, there were significant modifications to SALA’s administrative structure and governance. Up to this
time, the school had retained its affiliation with the Institute of Technology (IT), where it was the smallest
element in a large collegiate unit composed of scientific and engineering disciplines. As Head and the school’s
chief academic officer, Harrison Fraker reported to IT’s Dean. But with a newly revitalized faculty and
curriculum, the school was ready to assume a greater, more visible, and more independent leadership role
within the University, the State, and the region. To this end, the School of Architecture and Landscape decided
1-5
Program History
to separate from IT to form an independent college similar to other professional schools in the university, and
to many peer schools elsewhere.
On July 1, 1989, SALA became a collegiate unit with a new name, the College of Architecture and Landscape
Architecture (CALA). Harrison Fraker was appointed its first Dean, and Roger Clemence its Associate Dean, a
position primarily concerned with faculty matters and academic affairs. The College established its own
constitution and bylaws, a specificity statement on promotion and tenure, and a College Assembly. CALA has
had two deans and one interim dean. In 1995, when Harrison Fraker left to become Dean of the College of
Environmental Design at U.C. Berkeley, Professor Roger Clemence became Interim Dean while a national
search was conducted through the winter and spring of 1996 for Fraker’s replacement. In July, Tom Fisher,
former editor or Progressive Architecture, became CALA’s new dean.
When CALA was established, Architecture and Landscape Architecture became separate departments with
their own heads and their own governance structures. From 1989 to 1991, Associate Professor Gunter Dittmar
was appointed interim Head and a national search was conducted. In the summer of 1991, Professor Garth
Rockcastle was appointed Head of Architecture by Dean Fraker for a three-year term and was re-appointed after
an internal search for an additional three years. When he stepped down in 1997, Lee Anderson was appointed
by Dean Tom Fisher to serve as interim head through Spring Semester 1999, during which the Department
held discussions about alternative leadership and governance policies. Subsequently, in Fall 1999, William
Conway became the Department’s new Head following a national search.
During the 2000-2001 academic year the faculty explored new options for governance, with an emphasis on
shared governance and leadership. The result was the appointment of four co-Heads with Garth Rockcastle,
William Conway, Katherine Solomonson, and Stephen Weeks sharing the duties of Head — an arrangement
that provided leadership for the 2001-2002 academic year while further options were evaluated. The
department simplified its administrative structure by designating to two co-Heads: Katherine Solomonson,
Head of Faculty and Academic Affairs, and Stephen Weeks, Head of Operations. In Fall 2002 the Department
also created the position of Director of Design, served by Renee Cheng, to develop greater coherence and
integration in the design curriculum. In 2004 the Department chose to return to a single Head model and
after an internal search, Renee Cheng was appointed to the position of Head.
In 2006 the new College of Design was created by joining the former CALA with a department from the
College of Human Ecology, Design, Housing and Apparel (DHA). In this new context, it was appropriate for
the Department of Architecture to revert back to its previous name, School of Architecture. The Board of
Regents approved this request in 2006.
1-6
Program History
PROGRAM CHANGES
For decades, the principal professional degree in architecture was the Bachelor of Architecture (B.Arch.),
typically a five-year undergraduate degree providing a broad foundation required for architectural practice.
More recently, many schools have developed Master of Architecture (M.Arch.) programs phased out the
B.Arch. The degree program at the University of Minnesota had granted the B.Arch degree since 1887. It was a
momentous decision in 1992 when faculty voted to move to a professional degree at the graduate level. The
discussion focused on which type of program would best capture the School’s traditional strengths and offer
the most promising trajectory for the future. The three-year M.Arch. was established in 1998 as the only
professional degree. The B.Arch was phased out with the last degrees granted in 1998. The undergraduate
degree program of the Bachelor of Science with a major in Architecture (B.S.) was added in 1999, creating a
degree housed within the CALA as an alternative to the established Bachelor of Arts with a major in
Architecture (B.A.) housed in the College of Liberal Arts. These changes required major restructuring of both
undergraduate degrees and creation of a new graduate level degree. Change was more difficult as a result of the
concurrent University-wide shift from quarter to semesters mentioned above.
Some six years later, architecture as a discipline expanded into significant new areas of research and the
knowledge base grew rapidly. Throughout the United States, numerous architecture programs responded to
the need for specialization by establishing research-oriented degree programs – and in 2004 the School created
a new Masters of Science (M.S.) degrees in Architecture with two topic areas: Sustainable Design Track and
Heritage Preservation Concentration.
Later in 2004, School faculty were ready to examine the delivery of both undergraduate and graduate programs
along with support for the new M.S programs. Considering broadly the transformations in practice and society,
it was evident that changes were needed in the demand for professionally trained architects. The School
assessed that the traditional path to a mainstream practice would always have value, but there was likely to be a
significant shift in market demands. While a traditional stream may be greatly reduced, there appeared to be a
simultaneous increase in the value of “design thinking” in the “design economy”. Books like Daniel Pink’s A
Whole New Mind, discussed the importance of open-ended creative thinking typically found in design training.
While there are many vehicles for design education, architecture was seen to be uniquely positioned to address
a wide range of scales, social/human dimensions, technical and philosophical issues.
Reflecting on these broader issues in the context of undergraduate architectural education, the faculty at the
School valued two approaches: pre-professional and liberal-arts based. Assessment in 2004 led to several
undergraduate program changes; a new four-course foundation design sequence was created for all degree
paths; three building technology courses were added to the B.S. to create a more focused pre-professional track;
architecture requirements were reduced for the B.A. to allow for fully rounded liberal arts study; and Bachelor
1-7
Program History
of Design in Architecture BDA was created as a broad interdisciplinary design-based education. The school
believed that all three types of preparation are well suited to the traditional definition of the architect as “master
builder.” Notably, the BDA introduced a new course type to the program, the BDA Workshop, a 2-credit halfsemester course that would be offered in a “hot-seat” studio setting (shared desks with storage space). The
flexibility and variety that this half-semester format offered became a topic of interest as the graduate curricular
discussions unfolded.
After the undergraduate programs were clarified and student advising and support systems were greatly
improved with the new college system, focus shifted to the graduate program in 2005-8. These discussions
evolved from an understanding of the need for new skills to address pressing issues of society and the
profession. The faculty were also cognizant of the potential for expanding the range of roles for professionally
trained architects. Ironically, to prepare graduates for this new and unfamiliar future, long-established
architectural principles seemed more important than ever. Architecture and buildings needed to be understood
from their social and historical context as well as aesthetic and technical issues. Teaching the maddeningly
slow-to-learn process of design – resolving seemingly contradictory demands – was seen as essential. The
School projected that successful professional program in the future would offer a fundamentally sound
architectural education yet prepare graduates with design skills that might be applied to fields outside those
traditionally defined as architecture. Two faculty members wrote in 2007 ACSA White Papers (prepared for the
NAAB Accreditation Review Conference):
Architects in the 21st century will be expected take a leadership role in stewardship of our global
environment. To accomplish this goal students of architecture should find, infused through their education,
a philosophy that acknowledges the connected principles of ecology, social justice, and economics. This
philosophy should be substantiated by providing future architects with the technical knowledge necessary
for precise, expert, and wise architectural action.
-Mary Guzowski
Traditional systems of higher education, those determined by old notions of disciplines or driven by the
utility of specialized knowledge, fail when confronted with the dynamic character of changes triggered by
globalization and new technologies. A few years ago, the New York Times published an article exploring a
growing trend—the fact that the most successful corporations employ people with advanced degrees in
fields such as cultural or political studies because they are trained to understand difficult non-quantitative
issues. These individuals were shown to be more productive than those who come with the specialized
expertise of business or production. These apparent outsiders, the article suggested, come with intellectual
attitude and skills that are essential for shaping the global economy and responding to change.
-Andrzej Piotrowski
These discussions and writings eventually led to the graduate program changes in place for the Fall 2008.
Since the previous site visit in 2003, curriculum development has been at the forefront of our aim to make
continuous and incremental quality improvements to our program. A more in-depth discussion of the strides
taken in curriculum development is provided in Section 1.5 Self Assessment. Additionally, Appendix A contains
text, student work and brief descriptions illustrating major themes in the curriculum.
1-8
Program History
FIGURE 1-0 TIMELINE OF DEGREE PROGRAM CHANGE 1993-2008
Current degrees at Minnesota: B.A., B.S., M.Arch, M.S.
• Professional degree in architecture awarded since 1877
• 1877-1997: B.Arch professional degree (5 year undergraduate degree)
• 1998-present: M.Arch professional degree (3 year graduate degree)
The current B.A. curriculum objectives were initiated in fall 1993 as part of the shift to the Master of
Architecture as our primary professional program. All programs underwent significant revisions with the
University-wide conversion to semesters in fall 1999.
• 1974 M.Arch created for students with undergrad degrees in fields other than
architecture. Program ran parallel to B.Arch degree.
• 1993-1994: B.A. curriculum revision, adjustments for addition of M.Arch as sole
professional degree
• 1999-2000: B.A. curriculum revision, adjustments for the addition of the B.S.
• 2000-2001: B.S. degree added, B.A. curriculum enriched with study abroad (Oaxaca
program), honors seminars, studio teaching seminars
• 2005: formalization of summer intensive program to create 3+ path to M.Arch degree
for students with non-architecture undergraduate degrees
• 2003-4: Analysis of undergrad programs leads to discussion on a broad design-based
undergraduate program that would complement the B.S.
• 2004: Four-course design foundation formalized, Bachelor of Design in Architecture
(BDA) created, B.S. enriched with more building technology and architectural
electives, B.A. clarified as a liberal arts degree.
• 2004: creation of M.S. in Architecture. One track (Sustainable Design) and four
concentrations (Heritage Preservation, Digital Design, Metropolitan Design,
History/Theory/Culture) created.
• 2005 first class of M.S. students admitted to Sustainable Design track.
• 2008 first class of M.S. students admitted to Heritage Preservation concentration
• 2005-8: major revisions to the M.Arch program as discussed throughout this report.
1-9
1-10
Program Mission
1.4
PROGRAM MISSION
This section should include the accredited degree program’s mission statement, the date of its adoption or revision, and the
date of its endorsement by the institution.
This section contains the School of Architecture’s strategic plan. It was first adopted by a vote of the faculty on
December 2, 2002, and subsequently updated in September 2008.
STRATEGIC PLAN
Building a Community of Learning/Inquiry/Practice
Composed by Strategic Planning Committee, incorporating ideas and contributions from School of
Architecture faculty, staff, and students.
PART
1.
INTRODUCTION
The School of Architecture flourishes within a dynamic physical, social, and cultural context. As an academic
unit within the College of Design, it benefits from the activity generated by the College’s research activities in
its Center for Sustainable Building Research, the Metropolitan Design Center, the Center for Rural Design, as
well as the Department of Landscape Architecture, Department of Design Housing and Apparel (DHA). As
part of a major research university, the School also benefits from association with highly ranked colleges,
departments, and programs outside the College of Design which conduct work related to architectural design
and research, such as the Humphrey Institute, Civil Engineering, Computer Science, Cultural Studies,
Geography, American Studies,. And as part of a land-grant University, the School of Architecture receives
support for the strong tradition of community and regional outreach and service that has long been at the core
of its mission. Its Twin Cities location anchors the School in a thriving architecture and arts community, a
complex and expansive metropolitan environment, and a region offering many economic and ecological assets
and challenges.
Over the past several years the faculty and students of the School of Architecture have met to assess the
School’s programs as they stand and explore possibilities for the future. In large and small groups under a
variety of circumstances, these ongoing discussions have considered how the School can amplify its existing
strengths, develop new initiatives, establish partnerships beyond College of Design, address ongoing concerns,
and above all, support and prepare students for a changing profession by building a stronger community of
inquiry, learning, and creative practice.
1-11
Program Mission
These discussions have occurred during a period of transition. The School of Architecture has seen growth and
change in its faculty and its academic programs, an increase in the number and diversity of its students,
transformations in technology, the completion of its building addition, shifts in administrative structure and
personnel, and the expansion and increased complexity of the College. In the context of the University, the
School has dealt with administrative and structural changes, and a difficult fiscal climate. Regionally, the
School operates within the context of explosive metropolitan growth and ecological vulnerability, shifting
demographics, and increasing interconnectedness with a global economy — all of which have a considerable
impact on architectural education and practice.
Within these changing conditions, the School of Architecture has maintained its ongoing mission, defined new
goals, assessed the challenges and opportunities we face, and shaped new strategies to make the most of them.
COLLEGE OF DESIGN MISSION
Discussed in 2007-8, awaiting 2008-9 discussion and vote by the newly created faculty assembly.
The College of Design is a new, multidisciplinary college incorporating the departments of architecture,
landscape architecture, and design, housing and apparel, and associated research and outreach units. The new
college aspires to be an international and national leader in multidisciplinary research, creative production,
teaching, and public engagement in a wide variety of design-related fields.
The School of Architecture’s Strategic Plan is consistent with the College of Design’s broader mission and
goals.
SCHOOL OF ARCHITECTURE MISSION
The School of Architecture’s central mission is the education of professional architects and the advancement of
architectural knowledge and creative practice through design-centered teaching and research. It addresses this
mission through:
•
The education of students at all levels through effective and innovative teaching.
•
The pursuit of new knowledge through the production and publication of research.
•
The creative design, planning, and construction of buildings and environments.
•
Service to the School, the University, national organizations, and related disciplines.
•
Service to and linkages with professional practice and communities beyond the university.
The School’s mission needs to be understood within the context of several significant factors: the University of
Minnesota’s overall mission of research, teaching and service, and its status as a land-grant institution; the
School’s role as the only accredited program of architecture in the state of Minnesota; and the composition of
1-12
Program Mission
the School’s faculty of both academics and practicing members of the profession. All of these have a bearing on
how we approach the dual nature of architecture as both a profession and a discipline.
The discipline. The School of Architecture recognizes that as a discipline, architecture draws heavily from the
thought, ideas and findings of the other arts, the humanities, science, and engineering to guide its theoretical
explorations, education, and practice. But, more than an amalgam of other fields, architecture is a discipline in
its own right, with its own modes of thought, knowledge base, and operation. The complex task of planning
and creating environments of cultural, historic, artistic and sustainable, technological integrity demands modes
of thinking and reasoning that transcend the mere synthesis of diverse sources of knowledge. As a holistic and
heuristic process, it fuses imagination and logic, creative exploration and systematic inquiry.
The profession. The School also recognizes that as a profession, architecture has a responsibility to serve
society. It requires a well-rounded, comprehensive education, and a thorough understanding of the natural,
social, cultural, political, economic and technological forces that shape the environments within which we
work. Above all, it requires the capacity to find a constructive balance and creative synthesis in the discourse
between the individual and the community, between private economic interests and the public good, and
between nature, technology, and humanity. Implicit in this is the ethical obligation to respect our heritage from
the past (architectural, cultural, and environmental), to foster a better quality of life in the present, and to
develop sustainable possibilities for the future.
SUMMARY OF GOALS
The Strategic Plan, outlined on the pages that follow, is organized around these goals:
•
Academic Programs. Reinforce excellence in design-centered education by fostering effective teaching;
curricular clarity and interconnection; specialization and experimentation.
•
Research. Promote inquiry by fostering innovative research, scholarship, and creative work.
•
Faculty, Staff, and Student Development. Support and develop the strengths of our diverse faculty,
staff, and student body.
•
Community. Cultivate an inclusive, sustaining, and collegial community united in common values
while affirming diversity.
•
Outreach. Build upon our long-standing tradition of creative partnerships, collaboration, and service
beyond the School and University.
•
Resources. Ensure that the School has the resources, both financial and physical, that it needs to attain
its goals and sustain its mission.
•
Sustaining Practices
1-13
Program Mission
As we pursue these goals, we will sustain our commitment to the following:
•
Recognizing and enhancing the vital role of the architectural profession in the design and care of the
physical environment.
•
Promoting design excellence, high standards, and leadership in practice, through professional
education.
•
Supporting academic inquiry and social responsibility within both the discipline and the profession of
architecture.
•
Ensuring that students are prepared to meet the challenges of a changing profession within our global
society.
•
Facilitating interconnections between: architecture and other disciplines, research and teaching,
academics and practice, the university and the community, the local and the global.
•
Cultivating diversity in the broadest sense (e.g., ideological, ethnic, gender, cultural).
•
Developing an inclusive, stimulating, respectful, and supportive environment for faculty, staff, and
students.
•
PART
Accepting and embracing change by defining and expanding the terrain for innovation.
2.
THE PLAN
The material that follows amplifies on the goals and values outlined above. Although this section is organized
according to our goals, the values that sustain the School thread through each section.
1. A C A D E M I C P R O G R A M S
Reinforce excellence in design-centered education by fostering effective teaching; curricular balance, clarity and
interconnection; specialization and experimentation.
TEACHING
•
Recognize the centrality of effective teaching in achieving our mission.
•
Promote excellence in teaching and take action where it is not occurring.
•
Cultivate a challenging and supportive learning environment.
•
Encourage and reward experimentation and innovation.
CLARITY, BALANCE, AND INTEGRATION
•
Refine the objectives and requirements of the B.A., B.S., and M.Arch. Programs, and the knowledge
areas and skills that students are expected to master in each.
•
Re-examine and elucidate the relationship between graduate and undergraduate programs.
•
Encourage and facilitate integration and collaboration across the curriculum.
1-14
Program Mission
•
Enhance connections between research and teaching.
•
Develop a School plan for digital media addressing present and future teaching, research, and
communication needs of School faculty, students, and staff.
INTERDISCIPLINARITY
•
Sustain the School’s tradition of interdisciplinarity.
•
Strengthen links between the School’s academic programs and the College’s research centers (e.g.,
Design Center for American Urban Landscape, Design Institute, Center for Sustainable Building
Research, Center for Rural Design).
•
Encourage collaboration between Architecture’s programs and other Schools and programs in College
of Design and the University (e.g., Landscape Architecture, Geography, and Planning).
FLEXIBILITY, DIVERSITY, AND CHOICE
•
Develop greater flexibility in course offerings and the times when they can be taken.
•
Expand and diversify elective offerings in architecture and in related disciplines, especially in areas
that enhance cultural diversity.
•
Support varying points of view and modes of inquiry and design.
•
Capitalize on the School’s ability, through its use of Cass Gilbert funds, to invite distinguished guests
who bring new dimensions to the program.
SPECIALIZATION
•
Facilitate specialization, to contribute to the changing profession and discipline, and to prepare
students for a range of career paths.
•
Continue to develop and implement a Master of Science degree program that builds on the School’s
and College’s current and emerging strengths in digital design, urban design, sustainable design,
professional practice, and cultural criticism.
•
Establish and conduct searches for new tenure-track or tenured positions to support development of
these areas.
•
Explore the viability of developing a Ph.D. program in Architecture.
2. RESEARCH, SCHOLARSHIP, AND CREATIVE WORK
Promote inquiry by fostering innovative and interdisciplinary research, scholarship, and creative work.
INTERCONNECTION
•
Facilitate the integration of teaching, research, and creative work.
1-15
Program Mission
•
Sustain student involvement in faculty research and creative work through seminars and research
assistantships.
•
Create new opportunities for faculty and student research, scholarship, and creative work through a
variety of means, including the Master of Science program (see above).
•
Continue to use case studies involving local environments, engaging professionals and community
members in various kinds of projects.
•
Promote connections between faculty research, scholarship, and creative work and the work of College
of Design’s centers for research and design.
RESOURCES
•
Commit organizational effort and financial resources to support those areas that will attract, support,
and retain the best faculty and the most diverse students.
•
Improve and expand facilities and equipment for research, scholarship, and creative work.
•
Enhance financial support for research, scholarship, and creative work, and for participation in
conferences and related events for regular and term faculty, as well as for students.
•
Encourage, promote, and expand our strong working relationship with University Libraries to
strengthen the identity and effectiveness of the only dedicated architecture library in the region, for the
use of the profession as well as the academy.
•
Develop resources to fund publications and exhibitions arising from within the School.
DISSEMINATION
•
Continue to seek and develop opportunities for the dissemination of faculty and student research
within and beyond the university (see Outreach, below).
1-16
Program Mission
3. FACULTY, STAFF, AND STUDENT DEVELOPMENT.
Support and develop the strengths of our diverse faculty, staff, and student body.
FACULTY DEVELOPMENT
ROLES, RESPONSIBILITIES, AND PROCEDURES
•
Clarify roles, responsibilities and expectations for all faculty members, and continue developing
avenues for communicating them (e.g., through annual meeting; orientation; publications; teaching
workshops; coordination of design studio and drawing courses).
•
Pursue clear and fair procedures and standards for hiring, assignment, review, and promotion of term
faculty, bringing our practices into alignment with the University’s policies and personnel plan, while
recognizing our School’s own distinctive culture.
•
Assess faculty workload and establish guidelines that ensure equity while providing flexibility in the
proportion of teaching, research and service.
•
Refine hiring practices for term faculty by bringing positions into alignment with the University
personnel plan, while recognizing our School’s own distinctive culture; and by clarifying and
improving hiring procedures.
EXCELLENCE IN RESEARCH AND TEACHING
•
Offer opportunities for development of teaching and research through seminars, workshops, etc., and
encourage use of existing resources on campus.
•
Provide opportunities and support for development of new skills and knowledge, especially in digital
technology.
•
Augment financial support through faculty development funds, information about grants and
fellowships, and funding for necessary equipment, training, and software.
NEW TENURE-TRACK POSITIONS
•
Establish new tenure-track positions in designated areas of strength (see above)
•
Continue to build up the School’s junior faculty.
•
Continue to increase diversity among the regular faculty.
EVALUATION
•
Follow our criteria and procedures for evaluating and rewarding performance in teaching, scholarship,
and service, for both regular and term faculty.
•
Follow our defined criteria and procedures for term faculty promotion.
1-17
Program Mission
STAFF DEVELOPMENT
•
Roles, responsibilities, and procedures.
•
Clarify responsibilities and expectations for all staff.
•
Maintain effective coordination.
•
Encourage teamwork.
•
Facilitate cross training.
CAREER AND SKILLS DEVELOPMENT
•
Support participation in workshops and courses to develop skills and knowledge base.
•
Encourage the pursuit of other educational opportunities within and outside the university.
PERFORMANCE EVALUATION
•
Continue to Implement, assess and refine criteria and procedures for evaluating and rewarding
performance.
STUDENT DEVELOPMENT
ADVISING
•
Distribute graduate program advising more broadly by formalizing faculty advising, and establishing
advanced graduate students as mentors.
•
Expand career services activities through advising, service learning, and internships at both the
graduate and undergraduate levels.
STUDENT LIFE AND CULTURE
•
Enrich student life and culture by continuing to support community-building efforts such as Design at
Noon talks, and by encouraging new initiatives.
•
Support student leadership positions and develop more effective student participation in Schoolal
decision-making processes
•
Maintain or establish funding of student efforts such as T/here, exhibitions, Greenlight, Search for
Shelter, and Freedom by Design .
•
Develop effective mechanisms through which student concerns can be conveyed, heard, and
addressed.
RECRUITING
•
Increase diversity in our student body by developing a recruiting plan that targets groups underrepresented in the field of architecture.
1-18
Program Mission
•
Facilitate recruitment of students from liberal arts backgrounds by strengthening programmatic
connections with regional liberal arts colleges and by continuing to develop the summer 3+ Program
(for students without a background in architecture).
•
Amplify marketing and communication efforts with redesign of admission materials and processes
including web-based resources
•
Continue to improve campus visits by encouraging interviews with faculty, facilities tours, and time
with graduate student “ambassadors.”
ADMISSIONS AND SCHOLARSHIPS
•
Clarify admissions procedures for the different “streams” entering our M.Arch. Programs (students
from B.S. in Architecture programs, liberal arts programs, our accelerated program, and our summer
3+ program).
•
Continue to expand scholarship support.
4. COMMUNITY
Cultivate an inclusive, sustaining, and collegial community united in common values while affirming diversity.
ADMINISTRATIVE STRUCTURE, GOVERNANCE AND DECISION-MAKING PROCESSES
•
Clarify procedures and policies for School administration, deliberation, decision-making,
implementation, and assessment to ensure fair process and accountability.
•
Ensure appropriate representation and participation in deliberation and decision making for all
faculty, staff, and students.
•
Ensure open and effective communication, with respect for voices in all dimensions of the School:
staff, students, term faculty, regular faculty.
•
Establish a well-developed School governance document.
•
Expand opportunities for student participation in School discussions, deliberations, committees, etc.
relative to academic, physical, and social environment of the School and college.
DIVERSITY
•
Foster a community that embraces diversity and respects differences in culture and point of view.
•
Establish, disseminate, and enforce a code of conduct for School faculty, students, and staff.
•
Celebrate the creative tension born of the varying perspectives of our diverse faculty (academic,
research, and practicing), staff, and students.
COMMUNITY IDENTITY
•
Enhance, develop, and/or resurrect practices that reinforce our identity as a community.
1-19
Program Mission
•
Maintain and enhance annual beginning-of-the-year meetings.
•
Expand and enrich orientations for new faculty and students.
•
Magnify celebratory occasions such as awards ceremonies and receptions to welcome new faculty,
staff, and students.
COMMUNICATION AND EXCHANGE
•
Improve communication through development of an effective information distribution system
(bulletin board, kiosk, listserv, , CDESMemo RSS feed, website) to inform faculty, staff, and students
about activities, deliberations, and decisions.
•
Expand opportunities to share research and exchange ideas within the School and college through
workshops, lectures, informal presentations, exhibitions, and symposia.
•
Provide social and bread-breaking spaces in Rapson Hall for interaction of faculty, staff, students, and
visitors.
5. OUTREACH
Build upon our long-standing tradition of creative partnerships, collaboration, and service reaching beyond the
School and University.
DISSEMINATION OF RESEARCH, TEACHING, AND CREATIVE WORK
•
Recognize existing opportunities and develop new initiatives to communicate work within and beyond
the university (lectures, informal talks, symposia, conferences, publications, exhibitions).
•
Continually update School website to reflect ongoing activities and recent initiatives by the School and
its faculty, staff, and students.
•
Continue to encourage and support faculty, student, and staff involvement in conferences and other
activities outside the University.
PROFESSIONAL PRACTICE
•
Continue to capitalize fully on our location within a thriving community of outstanding practitioners
by strengthening connections with practice.
•
Continue to enhance practitioners’ involvement in the program by the Professor in Practice advisors
•
Sustain our mentorship program, which counts among the largest in the University.
•
Expand internship opportunities for students.
•
Strengthen career-related advising to prepare students for diverse career paths.
1-20
Program Mission
COMMUNITY AND CIVIC ENGAGEMENT
•
Sustain our long-standing tradition of community outreach in teaching and research.
•
Explore additional educational opportunities offered by our location in the Twin Cities metropolitan
area.
•
Develop service learning opportunities.
INTERNATIONAL EXCHANGE
•
Maintain and enhance current programs that facilitate international exchange and increase
understanding of and engagement with architectural practice in a global context.
•
Sustain and extend the School’s commitment to international education by sustaining and
strengthening our study-abroad and exchange programs (the Port Cities, Netherlands, and Mexico
Programs) and by exploring additional options.
•
Encourage continued innovation in programs such as the Port Cities program, which provides
students and faculty with the experience of working with local practitioners/educators in developing
design research into common issues.
•
Enhance courses currently offered at the Twin Cities campus by incorporating more material and
discussion devoted to cross-cultural and global issues.
6. RESOURCES
Ensure that the School has the resources, both financial and physical, it needs to attain its goals and sustain its
mission.
FINANCIAL EQUILIBRIUM
•
Enhance financial equilibrium by managing growth in relation to resources.
•
Develop an enrollment plan for both undergraduate and graduate programs informed by faculty
teaching load, availability of space, and tuition revenues.
•
Increase faculty compensation and pursue salary equity adjustments to establish parity with
institutional peers.
•
Facilitate appropriate allocation of College of Design resources to the School especially in proportion to
tuition generated and per capita spending for students and faculty
1-21
Program Mission
DIGITAL TECHNOLOGY RESOURCES
•
Review current digital technology capability (hardware, software, protocols, capability) in relation to the
School’s technology needs (for teaching, research and administration) and work with College to
achieve them.
SPACE FOR SCHOOL OPERATIONS, PROGRAMS, AND RESEARCH
•
Establish and implement a plan that defines space needs for undergraduate and graduate programs in
relation to design pedagogies and enrollments, projected growth, enrollment management. Effectively
explain the space needs for studio teaching to University scheduling and room assignment entities.
•
Assess and address space needs for faculty offices, research, and meetings so that all have appropriate
spaces for their work.
•
Define a vision for the College of Design buildings and grounds that expresses the School’s and
College’s consistent values and aspirations.
1-22
Program Self-assessment
1.5
PROGRAM SELF-ASSESSMENT
This section should briefly outline the program’s strengths and challenges and include a plan to address those challenges. Candor in conducting and
reporting the self-assessment increases its value to the accredited degree program and to the NAAB.
Comments from previous site visits (most recently 2003) and our own self-assessment processes have been key
to improving the quality and effectiveness of our program. We measure our progress and assess goals for the
future based on continuous feedback from students, faculty, program administrators, and professionals. We
are particularly cognizant of the changing demands of the profession, and the pressure for architects to reduce
the negative impact of the built environment in the world.
Over the course of the past several years, we recognized the potential to achieve new and higher goals in
architectural education while responding to the need to leverage the strengths of our program more effectively.
This led to a thorough examination of the graduate curriculum beginning in 2005. Faculty members engaged
in a myriad of strategies and venues that required self-reflection and input from a wide range of stake-holders
internally, locally and nationally. The outcome was a curriculum that has since won the 2008 American
Institute of Architects (AIA) Education Honor Award, deemed worthy of recognition based on the “holistic
goals of the program—collaboration with professionals, coordinated design studios, infusion of workshops,
and focus on critical thinking.”
from: http: //www.aia.org/aiarchitect/thisweek08/0314/0314n_edawards.cfm
1.5.1
PROGRAM STRENGTHS AND CHALLENGES
The following is an overview of the processes that led to development of the new curriculum. This
curriculum—in an illustrated overview—is provided in Appendix A.
1-23
TABLE
MECHANISM
RESPONSIBILITY
OF …
1-1
MECHANISMS FOR INPUT AND ASSESSMENT
AUDIENCE
Alumni survey on
line with letter
invitation
College Alumni
Director Lori
Mollberg
alumni
Student exit
interviews
School Director of
Admissions and
student services
(Terry Rafferty)
Student panels
RECORDING
ACTIONS TAKEN
FREQUENCY
On-line data
Tracking
Completed Sept
2008
Non-matriculating
students - all are
tracked
Notes
Input to strategic
planning for
recruiting, plan for
curriculum
marketing potential
Annual
Terry Rafftery
Prospective
students
Verbal
recruitment
Annual open house
events
Design Review
(described in text
below)
Head with CTL if
appropriate
Faculty, Students,
Outside guests
Notes
Faculty interviews
(9)
UMN HR
organizational
effectiveness
consultant
Advisory to Head
Holistic verbal
feedback
Annual evaluation
of Head
CDes HR director
(Jan Batt)
Advisory to Dean
Written annual
review
Faculty annual
review
Faculty Committee
and Head
Advisory to Dean
Written evaluations
Merit increase
Annual
Curriculum
presentations
Head and faculty
varies
notes
feedback
See timeline
Feedback to
curricular dev’t,
CTL followup
Shift in
communication
style & method of
communication
Strategies
developed for
moving School and
College agendas
forward
Annually each
spring
Spring 2008
Annual
The recent alumni survey was first extensive survey done since a series of major changes during 1996-2006
time period. Profound changes (described in more detail in the 1.3 history and 2.0 progress) included the
discontinuation of the B.Arch degree and introduction of the M.Arch degree, shift from quarter system to
semesters system, introduction of the BS degree, change to the College of Design.
The Director of Admissions and Graduate Student Services, Terry Rafferty, has implemented a number of
effective feedback venues since he arrived in 2004. Among those are panels of current students to directly give
assessment to prospective students, exit interviews to track those students who were admitted and declined to
enroll.
The School has a tradition of spring Design Review with outside guests, faculty and students discussing one
slice of the curriculum. Spring 2008 Design Review was held with the usual audience in addition to Center for
Teaching consultants. It provided encouraging evidence that we have achieved several of our goals for the
1-24
spring modules – opening up new venues of work, taking advantage of the contrasting the pace of work
between fall and spring, shifting responsibility of establishing trajectory within the program to the students.
Overall the quality of the student work was excellent.
Faculty have also engaged in reflective and projective activity as an internal feedback process. Notably, the
following list of the program’s strengths and opportunities was developed over the course of the Fall semester
2006 by an Ad-hoc Core Curriculum Committee and summarized in their report issued January 2007
(Appendix B)
TABLE
1-2 ASSESSMENT OF STRENGTHS & OPPORTUNITIES
ASSESSED STRENGTHS
OPPORTUNITIES TO LEVERAGE
Strong sense of social good – the architecture of engagement –
strong faculty and student values
A more diverse student body would provide wider range of of
views and approaches
Sustainable design breadth and depth especially related to
connection to CSBR and MS-SD
Sustainable design can be broadened beyond building
technology
Tradition of design teaching and reputation for strong design
graduates
Diverse points of view among faculty should contribute to
productive discussion, particularly on balance of design and
technology
Connection to the profession including excellent adjunct faculty
Adjunct faculty range in their availability and interest in
curricular discussions beyond their own courses, need a range
opportunities
Location in Twin Cities creates vibrant energy
Variety of offerings from museums and events can be
complementary to School events with advanced planning and
communication
Some areas of curriculum well coordinated with attempt to
overlap and connect exercises
Coordination can integrate material but demands integrative
thinking and methods of working, need to provide support.
Resources available but limited at University, College and School
Resources should grows to reflect undergrad changes that have
leveraged substantial financial gain for the College
Rapson Hall provides good communal spaces and studios, but
University pressure to be efficient increasing
University recognizes design education as distinct from lab or
humanities but needs to allow our space intensive teaching
methods in design studios
Table based on Ad-hoc Core Curriculm Task Force Report, Jan 2007
The assessment of strengths and opportunities to leverage our particular program was placed in context to
three forces acting upon the profession and larger society:
1-25
1.
The built environment is responsible for nearly half the energy consumption in the world, architecture can
play a substantial role in mitigating the negative impacts of climate change. Particular skills and ways of
thinking about energy should be informed by good design decisions.
2.
Data technologies have generally transformed communication globally and, particular to architecture, has
changed practice in fundamental ways. Architectural education can inflect the trajectory of this change
with new ways of thinking about data, form and technology.
3.
Design thinking is increasing recognized as valuable to fields other than those traditionally defined as
design. Proving the value proposition of design is essential to creating a powerful voice for design in a wide
range and scale of issues.
Through the process of identifying the program strengths in context with larger needs of the profession, the
School has a clear set of goals for architectural education and a strategy for achieving it – build on tradition,
embrace challenge and expect change. The School’s traditions are based in a long history of design teaching
and ties with the profession. Challenge can come in many forms, but at this moment, issues arising from
climate change and technological shifts must be engaged. Change comes from a flexible and agile set of
electives that draw from the diversity and richness of our faculty and the community. In the new curriculum,
for example, elements such as the 4 day catalyst workshops allow for a variety of short but memorable
interchanges, capitalizing on our position within an actively engaged professional and arts community, our
interdisciplinary College and Research I University. Table 1-3 provides an overview of curricular change based
on assessment and analysis.
See table following page.
1-26
TABLE
ASSESSMENT
1-3
CURRICULAR CHANGE BASED ON ASSESSMENT AND ANALYSIS
ANALYSIS AND / OR NEED FOR
IMPROVEMENT
ADDRESSED BY THESE CURRICULAR CHANGES OR ACTIONS
CURRICULUM
Design thinking taught in
design studio is strong
Time-consuming and often out
of proportion to credits
Change credits for some of the studio courses
Strong technology faculty using
design in course work
Design-based tech competes for
time with design studio
Three types of response (see appendix C- Task Force on
Technology and Design):
1. Integrate completely
(Tech 1 and GD1)
2.Tech becomes design (Tech 2)
3.Tech parallel w/studio
(Tech 3)
Variety of approaches among
faculty
Can appear contradictory, not
enough elective offerings to
leverage the variety
Allow spring to be diverse, agree on shared fall principals.
Create spring modules to increase number of elective options
Some areas coordinated
Some not
Not all courses or faculty are well
suited to coordination
Strategically target coordination only where critical and most
beneficial
Comprehensive studio is strong
and meets criteria
Placement of comp studio in the
curriculum competes with study
abroad or thesis prep
Technical development module builds from fall semester
studio and compresses to one module
Thesis
Thesis process and outcome
uneven, stressful for students
and workload of faculty
Major changes to thesis prep (see appendix ___ thesis memo)
and thesis advising
Study abroad is valued
Can be disruptive to curriculum
flow, seems too heavily weighted
Increase M-term offerings, explore possible modular study
abroad
3 yr time allows students to
fully explore their trajectory in
the curriculum and for
substantial faculty contact with
students
Length of time of program more
costly and difficult to compare
with 4+2 programs
Focus on providing “value-added” within the 3 year degree for
students with a BS background thru dual degrees or possible
practice track with internship opportunities
STUDENTS
Strong studio culture
Needs geographic and ethnic
diversity
Increase recruiting, marketing of new curriculum, increase
scholarship development
Activist/idealist students
Needs exposure to broad range of
issues around architecture
including global economic and
policy
Keep ties with AFH, develop ties with Carlson School of
Management. Shift in foci in pro-practice class
Most students expect to enter
the profession as licensed
architects
Need exposure to practices
beyond this region
Explore possible IDP placement to national and intern’l firms
Close to 50% work in offices
during school
Approximately 40% work as
teaching or research assistants
Need to manage schedule and
workload to achieve balance
Possible practice track. Monitor changes in IDP for 15
hours/week minimum duration
Students are hard working
Sometimes risk adverse
Catalysts encourage high risk high reward (see syllabus
Arch5110)
1-27
ASSESSMENT
ANALYSIS AND / OR NEED FOR
IMPROVEMENT
ADDRESSED BY THESE CURRICULAR CHANGES OR ACTIONS
AIAS traditionally strong
AIAS traditionally undergrad
only
Expand offerings to be attractive to grad, required AIAS or IDP
membership part of pro-practice class
Students come from diverse
educational preparations
Students with pre-professional
background and those with
liberal arts backgrounds both can
feel misaligned with some course
material
Establish strong studio community and curricular
opportunities for a variety of levels to run in parallel
FACULTY
Good relations between senior
faculty and junior faculty
Some overload on junior faculty
and some uneven loads on senior
faculty
Three year workplan extends planning horizon, point system
allows for transparency (see appendix F)
Recent hires push boundaries
of interdisciplinary teaching,
research and creative practice
Interconnection relies on good
communication
Need for communication with University and professional
community. Continue clear support for tenure cases of
“hybrid” promotion packages
Excellent pool of adjunct faculty
Pace of work in offices can be
unpredictable
Need for good communication and adjustment of planning
horizons
RESEARCH
College research centers offer
extraordinary opportunities
Faculty often overstretched and
need time
Workload planning and possible lighter loaded in spring
RESOURCES
Faculty and student interest in
digifab is high
Resources are insufficient for
existing fabrication, no strategies
exist to address this concern
Need for additional laser cutting and digifab equipment
New materials library under development
The Curriculum Development Timeline on the following page is a graphic depiction of the variety of parallel
and overlapping processes that led to the conception and early implementation of the new curriculum.
1-28
This page left intentionally blank.
Next page: Figure 1-1 Timeline of Curricular Change 2005-2008
1-29
The graphic on the facing page shows a series of events feeding into a critical moment in late spring 2008,
graphically highlighted in a vertical white bar. During a period of two weeks in April and May, faculty
discussions led to near unanimous vote on 15 courses that comprised the changes needed to adopt the new
curriculum. Design reviews of the spring modules were events for students, faculty and the Center for
Teaching consultants. Two national presentations of the curriculum in late May allowed us to reflect back on
the past year and project forward to the next.
Faculty discussions starting in 2005 fed into the work of three task forces (shown in the top horizontal bar).
The first task force was led by a senior faculty member and broadly represented the faculty as a whole. Their
report presented strengths and weakness of the program (listed in the table below), the group presented 5
possible models, designated as Models A-E. The second task force was comprised of our junior faculty (at that
time, 4 people) charged by the governing faculty to develop one model. They worked in a “black box” process
over the summer with input from Head and Director of Graduate Studies (DGS) and limited interaction with
the broader group of faculty. The resulting model “T” was presented in the Fall 2008 and has been the
framework for the new curriculum. The model has evolved and strengthened through testing and input from a
variety of constituents.
Parallel to the faculty discussion, small faculty groups were interested in testing some of the principals of a new
curriculum by introducing new material or new formats within the old curricular structure and existing classes
(shown in the second horizontal bar). Some groups relied heavily on Center for Teaching resources during the
development phases, others used CTL to measure outcomes.
University resources (shown in the third horizontal bar) were accessible for organizational change. There were
two resource tapped, one related directly to curricular content and teaching techniques and the other
supporting broader organisational change and processses to achieve it. Both types of support were helpful as
faculty and students worked through change. The Center for Teaching team was comprised of 3 people with
complementary expertise who were part of the “teaching through change” resources at the Center. An
organizational expert was provided by the Human Resources Office for Organizational Effectiveness to mentor
the Head to lead change and provided feedback through 9 individual faculty interviews and other more
informal venues. The expert also facilitated some meetings to focus discussion on both the content and
decision process of the curriculum change.
Both internal and external to the University, the School pursued multiple opportunities for discussion and
presentation of both the curriculum and its development process (shown in the last horizontal bar). In addition
to multiple presentations to students, adjunct and regular faculty, staff and administration, there were several
high level external venues for presentation, discussion and feedback, most prominent of which were related to
the successful blind-peer reviewed submission for AIA Education Honors Award.
1-30
SCHOOL OF ARCHITECTURE
CURRICULUM DEVELOPMENT
2005-06
fall
TASK FORCES
Ad-hoc Curriculum
Model T
White Paper Groups
2006-07
spring
summer
fall
report
presented
to faculty
Grad
Curriculum
proposal
first discussed
2007-08
spring
summer
fall
final report
presented
to faculty
2008-09
spring
summer
White
Paper
review
drafts
presented of tech
to faculty sequence
fall
review
of studio
portion
FACULTY DISCUSSIONS
CURRICULAR
CHANGE
UNV.
INPUT
R. Cheng
& 4 asst.
profs. approved
for curr.
charrette
Model T
presented
to facultyapproved to
move forward
draft of
White
Paper
presented
for disc.
White Papers
Group formed
VOTES / APPROVALS
GRAD SCHOOL OFFICIAL
COURSE CHANGES
STUDENT INPUT
GD1 MODIFIED COURSE
MATERIAL
LIGHTING / THERMAL
MODULE MODIFIED
SPRING PROJECT MODULES
CATALYST
COMPREHENSIVE
DESIGN
JULIUS - ORG. MANAGEMENT
CENTER FOR TEACHING
ACSA ADMIN. CONF.
EXTERNAL & INTERNAL
PRESENTATIONS
beginning
discussionCurriculum
proposal
AIA MN - CONVENTION
MODEL T PRESENTATIONS
TO STUDENTS & FACULTY
AUBURN FUTURE OF EDUC.
SYMPOSIUM
AIA BOSTON TAP PRE-CONV.
CHANGE THE WORLD
AIA BOSTON CONVENTION
EDUC. HONOR AWARDS
LARGE FIRM ROUND TABLE
letter of intent sent to
Shirley Garner, Assoc.
Dean of Grad. School
New Curr.
Proposal
presented at
governing
faculty retreat
Grad. School
Letter of Intent
approved
Head
proposes
three week
work plan
governing
faculty approve
New Curriculum
submission of
credit changes to
the Grad. School
DESIGN REVIEW
DISCUSSION &
GOVERNANCE
proposal
for alt.
studio
times
spring
The structural transformation between the old and new curricular structure is shown below.
CURRICULUM EVOLUTION
fall
0
current curriculum
The current graduate school
curriculum is relatively symmetrical from fall to spring. Students
take one six credit studio and
three or four three credit lecture
courses and seminars. There is
little room in this model for students to take electives.
3
03 cr
06 cr
09 cr
12 cr
required
elective
fall
grow + shrink
The first step in creating difference between fall and spring is
to shift studio credit hours from
spring to fall. One large studio
anchors the fall, while smaller,
more nimble workshops occupy
the spring.
attach + divide
To avoid spreading students’
attention over too many courses at any given time, lecture
classes are attached to studio
in the fall. Course content is directly tied to studio work. Spring
semester is divided into two
halves, giving students more variety and choice.
03 cr
06 cr
09 cr
12 cr
spring
4
03 cr
catalysts
Spring courses focus on specific
knowledge areas (sustainability,
urbanism, emerging practice issues, historic preservation). Students can concentrate their
spring semesters around particular topic areas. Courses are
supplemented by one-weeklong , intensive
“catalysts”
where outside visitors can lecture on areas of expertise.
06 cr
09 cr
12 cr
fall
spring
15 cr
15 cr
2
reduce
To further reduce workload
spread over too many classes,
one class is removed from the
fall, leaving three, interrelated
courses. Credit hours in the
spring, per course, are reduced,
further amplifying the difference
between fall and spring.
15 cr
1
fall
spring
5
combine + mix
Finally, modules in the spring
are highly flexible. They can
be combined in different ways
to accomodate the particular
requirements of various topic
areas. For example, short (1-2
week), medium (4-6 week), and
long (8-12 week) study abroad
courses can be offered while
still fitting within the structure of
the semester. Courses are nimble and experimental.
06 cr
09 cr
12 cr
15 cr
spring
fall
spring
03 cr
06 cr
09 cr
12 cr
15 cr
spring
03 cr
fall
03 cr
06 cr
09 cr
12 cr
15 cr
Fig 1-2 Storyboard of Curricular Change
1.5.2
PLAN TO ADDRESS PROGRAM CHALLENGES
The School has placed highest priority in aggressively addressing several issues described below:
1.
Continue to develop the new curriculum in both content and format shifts. In addition to the curricular
development and teaching strategies, there are many logistical challenges offered by the new curriculum:
• increased need for course planning and diverse offerings,
• increased need for student advising as they choose elective paths,
• adapting material to either the coordinated fall semester or the short half-semester
module,
• faculty workload planning to maximize opportunities for blocks of research time and
well-timed elective offerings that might advance their research.
1-31
We have recently established processes that address these issues. Below shows changes in advising
structure.
Fig 1-3 – Advisory Structure Changes
The pathways to and from the new curriculum need study and development. The connection to our own
BS and BDA degrees to M.ARch, transition after graduation for all streams of students needs to be guided
and tracked. Grad surveys, such as the one completed this fall, will support us in achieving this goal.
We value feedback from students currently in the program as well as alumni. Longitudinal tracking of
graduates shows that they all mention a relatively high level of satisfaction (see appendix G). We cross
reference their satisfaction level with information about when they graduated so that we know the curricula
that they experienced while in school and can project the amount of practice experience that might be
informing their survey rating. Our 2008 survey will provide a baseline for us to measure the effects of the
new curriculum on recent graduates as they progress towards licensure. We are hoping that the particular
strengths of the new curriculum as a design-based practice education will lead to licensed professionals
1-32
that are not only satisfied with how their education prepared them for a changing practice, but have
increased potential for leadership positions. We will remain intensively interested in the successes of
graduates of the program as we track alumni for the next 5-10 years. Additional metrics are needed to
assess the impact of the curriculum change.
The School needs to move from a regional program to one that has a national presence. More national level
recruiting and promotion is needed.
2.
Address new space allocation systems of the College and University. There has been increasing pressure
from the University to use space effectively and in this climate it has been difficult to explain space needs
inherent to studio teaching. Flexible meeting spaces for pin-up, discussion and projection has been
reduced each year. Without this space, studio teaching will have to alter – becoming less fluid and
responsive. Reverting back to a model of unvarying desk crits would be extremely detrimental to the
School’s studio culture.
3.
Financial allotment within the college does not appear to be proportional to size of student body, number
of full time faculty or tuition income (see section 3.10). While recent gains in faculty salary have been
beneficial to the program, there is still need for improvement. Ideally, resources would be more equitably
dispensed – particularly with approximately $300K of new resources anticipated in fall 2009 achieved by
additional tuition generated by a change to Freshman admitting for Architecture undergraduates. If
resources were available, the new curriculum would have sufficient support for course development –
currently expected to be absorbed into faculty workload. Additionally, programs such as study or work
abroad would have support instead of funded by increasing fees and tuition. Lastly, we would use funds to
attract high quality out of state and international students who current pay almost twice as much as in-state
students.
1-33
2.0 PROGRESS SINCE THE PREVIOUS SITE VISIT
PROGRESS SINCE THE PREVIOUS SITE VISIT
Summary of Responses to the Team Findings
2.1
SUMMARY OF RESPONSES TO THE TEAM FINDINGS
This section must include the school’s response to the previous Visiting Team Report (VTR) for conditions “not met” and to the “causes of concern.”
A copy of the 2003 visiting team report is included in Section 4.4 of this document. This section begins with a
survey of relevant University, College and School changes of which the team should be made aware. Section
2.1.1 indicates the name and description for each of the four conditions not met from the 2003 report, followed
by our response. Similarly, Section 2.1.2 provides our response to two causes for concern expressed by the 2003
visiting team, and Section 2.1.3 addresses observations noted in the visiting team report with respect to
conditions met or minimally met.
The following sets the context for the 2009 team visit:
UNIVERSITY CHANGES
University strategic re-positioning, “Transforming the U”, is a major initiative started in 2005. The Provost led
a process in which the entire institution was asked to evaluate and rethink the ways that it functioned. The
thoroughness of the effort is perhaps most evident in the high participation rate: 300 faculty and staff
participated as members task forces, over 1000 members of the community participated in focus groups, town
hall style meetings and group blog forums. The then College of Architecture and Landscape Architecture was
included in this effort through faculty and staff representation on 8 of the 34 task forces and the College was the
entire focus of the task force charged with evaluating the possibility of creating a new College of Design out of
CALA and allied design disciplines in the Department of Design Housing and Apparel (DHA), housed at that
time in the College of Human Ecology. CALA became one of six “Wave One” colleges - colleges which were
either substantially restructured or eliminated. (see appendix H on Transforming the U) The College of Design
task force had several recommendations (also in appendix H) that recognized the potential of joining these
departments to create a new college.
In addition to several new colleges and realignments of departments across the University, the strategic
positioning process resulted in policy changes and resource shifts that have changed the institutional
environment in which the College of Design operates. Several of those changes have been very positive,
including “star faculty” competitive funds for which the School of Architecture was awarded funds almost
$100,000 of permanent increase to operating expenses for faculty salaries. The tenure code and tenure
processes across the University were revised and units were asked to review their departmental documents and
create new language to address specific areas.
2-1
The strategic re-positioning had many dimensions, but there were specific shifts in University priorities that
offer opportunity for the College of Design and all its units, including the School of Architecture. The
professional M.Arch program has only been tangentially affected but undergraduate and advanced nonprofessional degrees in the school are impacted.
TABLE
2-1
EFFECTS OF STRATEGIC POSITIONING ON THE COLLEGE AND SCHOOL
GOAL OF REPOSITIONING
OPPORTUNITY FOR COLLEGE
IMPACT ON SCHOOL
Admininstrative streamlining: reorganisation of several colleges,
elimination of two large colleges
College of Architecture and Landscape
Architecture joins with Dept of Design
Housing and Apparel to form the new
College of Design
Dept of Architecture changes its name back to
School of Architecture. Now exists in a context of a
broader multidisciplinary College.
Globalization encouraged, some
funding established
Existing UNESCO program recognized
as valuable. Funded request granted for
faculty line for College.
Accelerated timeline for development of M.S. in
Architecture with concentration in Heritage
Preservation approved in 2004. Funding provided
for recent faculty hire in the School
Interdisciplinary work encouraged,
funding incentives established mostly
through the Institute for Advanced
Studies
Allied design disciplines in one college.
Value of BDA recognized, increased opportunity for
cross-disciplinary research and teaching. Faculty
fellowship opportunities in Institute for Advance
Studies
Honors and Writing centrally
administered by University
Possible cross disciplinary honors
courses
School can determine parameters of new honors
within Architecture major
New initiative on Arts and Humanities
administered by University
College disciplines eligible to apply for
funding
School faculty may get additional development
funds
Support for teaching through change
and leading through change
Resources available for “Wave One”
colleges (6 colleges substantially
restructured in 2006), including College
of Design
CTL consultants for new curriculum,
coaching/process mapping for Head and staff
through Human Resources Office.
2-2
COLLEGE CHANGES
The new College of Design is larger and more complex than the old CALA. Degree programs expanded to
include the five disciplines within Design Housing and Apparel (DHA): Housing Studies, Interior Design,
Graphic Design, Retail Merchandising and Apparel Design. The number of faculty has approximately doubled,
the number of undergraduates has more than tripled, the number of graduate students has had a small
increase. In most shared college administrative areas, personnel has more than tripled. Academic resources
housed in Rapson Hall are now shared with students from both campuses with no additional personnel.
TABLE
2-2
COMPARISON OF COLLEGE OF ARCHITECTURE AND
LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE ( CALA ) IN
CALA IN
2003 WITH CURRENT COLLEGE OF DESIGN
2003
COLLEGE OF DESIGN IN
2008
College Administration total:
12.5
42
Student Services
4
13
Research & Outreach
0
2
Information Tech
3
9
Human Resources
.5
336% increase
2
Finance/Accounting
3
7
Development
1
3.5
0
3.5
Communications
PERCENTAGE CHANGE
Alumni Relations/Cont.Ed
1
2
Academic Resources total:
7
7
Workshop
2
2
Imaging Lab
2
2
Digital Collections
3
3
Students total:
500
1,395
Undergraduate
275
1,085
Graduate
225
310
Faculty total:
52
102
Tenured/Tenure Track full time
26
48
FTE non-tenured
26
54
0%
279% increase
196% increase
The increase in College staff has resulted in better service to the students and faculty, though new practices and
additional paperwork in the new College has taken some adjustment. College level communication has taken
2-3
on an incremental increase in scale and new habits of checking the RSS feed or College blog are just now
starting to enter the culture for students, staff and faculty. College graphic identity has just recently been
finalized and we are looking forward to adapting this for the School identity.
Several changes to College practices have been implemented that have enhanced the School’s operation.
Section 3.1.1.4 has more information, but to name a few areas of impact:
•
annual reviews for staff and faculty had been irregular or non-existent until regular annual
review processes started in 2005 within the units and checked at the Dean’s level.
•
IT requests are tracked and planned at set times of the year
•
Promotional material are gathered more systematically,
•
Alumni are tracked more consistently,
•
Student services and advising have improved,
•
Development meetings/strategy are conducted more regularly
•
A new materials library is underdevelopment by the Goldstein Gallery
•
Continuing Education Program has been discontinued
•
Events staffing in CALA had been minimal, but now discontinued in the new College
•
New desks and a consistent routine of studio cleaning and end of semester clean up has been
implemented
New units in the school offer opportunities for collaboration and old relationships with LA are strengthened –
recent evidence of the quality of this collaboration can be found in the GD3 studio taught in conjunction with a
LA studio which recently won an ASLA student award given to a multidisciplinary student team. In the context
of the new College, we revived the name “School of Architecture”, a title that had been used when the School
was in the context of the Institute of Technology between 1912-1966
Among the research centers named as central to the School in 2003, The Design Institute has been
discontinued, the Design Center for the American Urban Landscape has been renamed the Metropolitan
Design Center and expects new leadership with Professor Ignacio San Martin arriving in January 2009. The
Center for Sustainable Building Research has expanded in personnel and scope of research and the Center for
Rural Design remains stable.
2-4
SCHOOL LEADERSHIP CHANGES
At the time of the 2003 visit, two faculty shared the School leadership as Co-Heads, previous to this there was a
system of shared leadership among four faculty. The current single Head model has been in place since fall of
2004 and has provided continuity, improved communication and better advocacy for the School. Current Head,
Renee Cheng, is well respected by the local practice community and has a strong national network among the
AIA and academic communities and has increased the school’s visibility nationally. In addition to consistency
at the Head level, there has been stability in the most critical administrative role for the graduate program, the
Director of Graduate Studies (DGS). Professor Steve Weeks has been an anchor for students and faculty alike,
particularly during the recent program changes.
FIGURE
2-1: LEADERSHIP CHANGES 1999-PRESENT
SCHOOL FACULTY DEMOGRAPHIC CHANGES
The current faculty demographic profile is vastly different than 2003. The addition of 9 faculty since 2003
makes the community more diverse at a variety of levels and discussions have greatly benefited from new
points of view. Tenure-track faculty have had a considerable positive impact on the program individually and as
a collective. As a prime example, in 2007, four tenure track faculty were asked to propose a new curriculum, the
success of the process reflects the mutual trust and support evident between the senior and junior faculty. The
adjunct FTE shows the adjunct faculty contributions have been effectively aligned with our teaching needs.
2-5
TABLE
2-3 – SCHOOL OF ARCHITECTURE FACULTY DEMOGRAPHIC CHANGES
2002-3
2008-9
Assistant tenure track
0
7
Associate tenured
10
8^
1
0
Professor tenured
4*
5**
Subtotal
15
20
Adjunct FTE
24
19.26
Total FTE
39
38.26
RANK
Associate un-tenured
* does not include Tom Fisher, Dean of College of Design
^ does not include Kate Solomonson, Associate Dean for Academic Affairs, College of Design
** does not include Tom Fisher, Dean of College of Design; Gail Dubrow, Dean of Graduate School;
Ignacio San Martin, Director of Metropolitan Design Center
Changes in the tenured and tenure track faculty since 2003: 9 new faculty arrived, 3 faculty departed
TABLE
2-4 – TENURE AND TENURE TRACK FACULTY CHANGES SINCE 2003
NAME
ARRIVED
CHANGE OF STATUS
Ann Forsyth, Professor
2002
2007 departed for Cornell professorship
Garth Rockcastle, Professor
1978
2006 departed for University of Maryland deanship
Bruno Franck, Associate Prof on the tenure-track
2002
2005 Stepped off tenure track, 2007 private practice
Leslie VanDuzer, Professor
2005
2008 Promoted to full professor
Renee Cheng, Professor
2002
2008 Promoted to full professor
Ritu Bhatt, Assistant Professor
2004
Marc Swackhamer, Assist. Professor
2004
Ozayr Saloojee, Assistant Professor
2005
John Comazzi, Assistant Professor
2006
Blaine Brownell, Assistant Professor
2008
Benjamin Ibarra, Assistant Professor
2008
Greg D’Onofrio, Assistant Professor
2009
Ignacio SanMartin, Professor
2009
Changes have occurred within the School that, while not directly related to the professional program and
outside the purview of the NAAB, have impact to the professional program and contributes to the team’s
understanding of the context of the program. The undergraduate program in 2003 was stressing capacity for
studio space and available instructors. Changes in 2005 have reduced the number of students in residential
2-6
studios to one fifth of previous and increased the number of students in flexible workshop studio settings. New
graduate programs have been added with the Master of Science in Sustainable Design, started in 2004, and the
Master of Science in Heritage Preservation (with a related College Center for World Heritage Preservation)
started in 2008. Among the 6 College Centers, the Design Institute has been placed indefinite suspension of
activities, Design Center for the American Urban Landscape had a name change to Metropolitan Design
Center and just recently appointed a new director, Ignacio SanMartin, who will start in January of 2009.
2.1.1
RESPONSE TO CONDITIONS NOT MET
This section indicates the name and description for each of the four conditions not met, followed by our
response. They include: 12.11 Non-Western Traditions; 12.14 Accessibility, 12.27; Detailed Design Development;
and 12.29 Comprehensive Design.
12.11 Non-Western Traditions Understanding of parallel and divergent canons and traditions of architecture and urban
design in the non-Western world
This criterion is not met, despite opportunities to introduce non-Western traditions within the curriculum. There
is some exposure through special studio projects, and travel abroad, but the mainstream emphasis is minimal,
fragmented, and superficial.
Non-Western Traditions: New admissions review processes require all entering B.S. and B.A students with a
major in Architecture to have had a survey architectural history course that includes non-western material.
Students who did not major in architecture as an undergrad are in the 3+ program (Arch 5101) requiring a
summer architecture history survey that includes non-western course material. The Architecture and
Urbanism of Hindu and Buddhist India, Early Islam East and West, Japan, China, Mughal India is covered in
three and one half weeks of lectures in Arch 3411 and an equivalent lecture material in the 3+ lectures.
Since 2003, three new tenure track faculty have joined who have non-western ethnicity and backgrounds:
Benjamin Ibarra (Mexico), Ritu Bhatt (India), Ozayr Saloojee (South Africa). They bring diverse points of view
to their courses and design critiques. New tenure-track faculty member Blaine Brownell has on-going research
in Japan and Professor Leslie VanDuzer has on-going outreach work in Malawi, Africa.
Study abroad and May term offer several non-western electives and these continue to grow in popularity, in
May 2008, approximately 50 graduate students participated. Graduate students in recent years have had the
opportunity to participate in semester or M-term programs in Mexico, India, Turkey, Greece, and Malawi; a Mterm program is anticipated for Japan in 2009. The College’s relationship with UNESCO offers additional
opportunities with recent research trips to Baku, Azerbaijan and to the Philippines. Two new program
2-7
relationships are under study, one with the Cyprus Institute and the other with the Technical University in
Munich, Germany.
12.14 Accessibility Ability to design both site and building to accommodate individuals with varying physical abilities .
This criterion is not met. While there was evidence of efforts to teach awareness and understanding of
accessibility issues in the foundation design studios, there was a failure in the systematic application in
subsequent design projects, particularly with respect to the site.
The fall of 2003 was the first introduction of a required interactive ADA workshop in GD1 and it had not yet
been made evident in advanced studio work at the time of the visit. Workshops include lectures and experiential
exercises utilizing either wheelchairs or blindfolds. In the GD2 fall studio, a lecture on codes includes ADA
information and evidence of application of principals of site and building accommodations and are monitored
by the studio instructors and Director of Design. The ability to design with ADA accommodations is monitored
by studio faculty and the Director of Design.
12.27 Detailed Design Development Ability to assess, select, configure, and detail as an integral part of the design
appropriate combinations of building materials, components, and assemblies to satisfy the requirements of building
programs.
This criterion is not met and requires additional focus throughout the studio curriculum. The recently launched
Comprehensive Design Studio is positioned to develop design beyond schematic resolution.
In 2002, a new full time faculty member with expertise in teaching construction systems, Renee Cheng, was
added to the faculty. She started teaching required courses in her area in 2003. Since then, she has collaborated
with other experienced full time faculty, Sharon Roe and Steve Weeks, to significantly revise the materials and
methods construction sequence and has introduced a series of exercises specifically focused on detail design. A
set of exercises in GD1 studio and Tech One ask the students to have the ability to resolve 5 critical moments:
how the building meets the ground, meets the sky, how an opening is made, how a corner is turned and the
making of a wall. Other more recent changes in the tech sequence and tech development studio will continue
to strengthen this area. Evidence of integration in subsequent studios is apparent in the work of all later
studios, but connections are particularly strong with the comprehensive design studios in specific detailing
exercises that resonate with GD1 exercises.
2-8
12.29 Comprehensive Design Ability to produce an architecture project informed by a comprehensive program, from
schematic design through the detailed development of programmatic spaces, structural and environmental systems, lifesafety provisions, wail sections, and building assemblies, as may be appropriate; and to assess the completed project with
respect to the program’s design criteria.
Evidence of comprehensive design in some studio projects and thesis projects was evident, but not for all
students in the program. The recently launched comprehensive Design Studio will resolve this deficiency.
The set of studios that meet the School’s comprehensive design requirement all have a strong focus on design
development beyond schematic design. While different faculty may emphasize one area of development over
another, all studios designated as meeting the comprehensive requirement within the school must address
program, structural and environmental systems, life-safety, wall sections and building assemblies as well as
other criteria such as 12.26 building economics. Choice of building program, site and approach will vary by
section, but all sections are reviewed and coordinated by an administrative group comprised of the Director of
Graduate Studies, Director of Design and Head. At this point in time, two of those three administrators have
expertise in teaching building systems, in the future, the group may evolve to specifically include Building
Technology faculty. The comprehensive studios have continued to strengthen since 2003 with senior partner
level practitioners teaching. See appendix N for complete list of partner or senior principal level practitioners
(averaging 3 per semester) who have taught comprehensive studio in 2003-2008 and the 6 who will be teaching
or co-teaching the technical design development modules in Spring 2009 described below. Notable was the
2006 collaboration between Scott Davidson and Bill Blanski that took the software Revit to a higher level than
previously done. This work was featured in an Autodesk success story found in appendix I.
Note that while the semester-long comprehensive studios have been successful, we are testing an innovative
proposal for re-conceiving our comprehensive design as a semester plus one half semester module. This
sequence is underway in Spring 2009 and will be presented to the team alongside the established one
semester comprehensive studio format. The new approach takes as a premise that the students build directly or
indirectly from the work done in the GD2 Fall semester. The GD2 Fall does not in and of itself meet the
comprehensive design criteria, but provides critical preparation in areas such as life safety and egress, program
preparation and accessibility. This base allows the following half semester module to build on skills and start at
a point towards the end of schematic design (either provided by the instructor or using the students work from
the fall semester) and focus on design development.
2-9
2-10
2.1.2
RESPONSE TO CAUSES OF CONCERN
The 2003 visiting noted two causes for concern: Communication; Advising and Curriculum Issues. The
following lists each of these concerns, followed by the visiting team’s comments and our response.
A. Communication
There remains great concern about the level and quality of communication among all members of the college
and department communities. Communication problems are cited repeatedly in the Previous NAAB Visiting
Team Report (dated January 1997), as well as more recent documents including the Term Faculty Compact
(dated December 2001). and Graduate Student Concerns document (dated January 2003). Issues regarding
communication are the primary cause of other weaknesses in the program.
Over the past year, communication appears to have improved, but in general, communication gaps are severely
hampering both the operations and impact of the department. This applies to communication among students,
staff, faculty members, the administration, and alumni/ae. Opportunities are missed, potential linkages are
overlooked, and the sharing of resources is not being maximized.
Despite the presence of four premier research centers, there is insufficient awareness of their work among other
members of the department community. Substantial opportunities exist to integrate the knowledge of the
centers into both the undergraduate and graduate curricula. Relatively few formal connections exist between the
department and other departments in the college and throughout the campus.
Finally, despite the best efforts of the CALA Student Board, barriers persist between undergraduate and graduate
students and even among the years within the two programs. The same is true regarding communication
between the full-time and term faculty.
Progress has been made since 2003, mainly as a result of two factors: simplifying the administrative structure
to a single Head starting in 2004, and improving the College structure that greatly expanded support for School
activities.
COMMUNICATION WITHIN THE SCHOOL:
Since its inception as a unit within the Institute of Technology in 1912 and throughout its time as a Department
in CALA, the School had operated without its own governance document. The first School governance
document outlining roles, responsibilities and specific procedures for operation was adopted in 2004. Written
annual performance reviews are now part of the regular communication between faculty and Head. Published
3 year workplans for all full time faculty has greatly increased transparency. Agreement on a working system of
weighting course load, research and service is applied in this workplan. In 2003 student governance existed as
an appointed advisory group and has grown into a more robust system where open elections are run by students
and student representation is fully integrated into the School governance through committee representation
and regular meetings between the student group and Head (see Appendix Q for list of Graduate Student
2-11
Advisory group, charge and committee participation). Staff had been operating without regular staff meetings
for many years, starting in 2008, regular weekly meetings and extensive organizational mapping facilitated by
College HR Director 2007-8 has improved communication within the staff and clarity on staff roles.
Connections between undergraduate and graduate students are created at several levels: socially, academically
as peers, academically as teacher-student and curricular level connection between programs. Social ties are
most prominent through the student-run AIAS group. AIAS Minnesota is one of the most active chapters in
the country and has traditionally been an undergraduate organization in our school. Increasingly, graduate
students have recognized the benefits of membership and the upcoming Forum to be hosted in 2009 has led to
a recent increase from a limited number of graduate students to almost 30 graduate student members in this
past year. Specific curricular offerings have promoted academic connections between the two student groups.
New courses such as the Solar Decathlon and newly increased May term study abroad options have a mix of
both undergraduate and graduate students. In the past 5 years, we regularly offered graduate courses or
symposia in Oaxaca to complement the regular undergraduate studio there. As in 2003, we have significant
numbers of TA positions each year, over 103 students each year. Changes since 2003 are new foundation level
design courses where TA’s receive intensive support and training, some attending summer sessions with one
of our most experienced drawing instructors, Andrzej Piotrowski. Other large undergraduate courses with 6-8
TA’s have been reworked since 2003, with more emphasis on the goals for each discussion session. We have
seen an increase in TA confidence to lead discussions and make meaningful connections between graduate
and undergraduate. At the program level, we have taken more care to have several joint undergraduate and
graduate curriculum meetings and to have a faculty bridging between the two committees, typically the
Director of Design.
The graduate student Advisory Board is comprised of two students from each graduate cohort elected by their
peers. In 2003 there was another form of this board, CALA Student Board, but not as openly elected or clearly
charged as the current form. The main charge of this advisory group is to establish good communication
between students in different year levels, student and faculty and student and administration. Students serve
on curricular sub-committees and curriculum committee as well as meeting with the Head. The board has
functioned extremely well in the past two years and its continued role will be supported.
2-12
TABLE
2-5
CURRENT STUDENTS , PROFESSIONALS AND ALUMNI PARTICIPATION ON COMMITTEES
TOTAL NUMBER
NUMBER OF ACTIVE ARCH
FREQUENCY OF
OF MEMBERS
STUDENTS PARTICIPATING
MEETINGS
Graduate Student
Advisory
6
6
College Advisory
Board
11
College of Design
Student and Alumni
Board
24
ENTITY
RECORD OF DECISIONS
Monthly with Head,
monthly with curriculum
committees
Notes in meeting with Head,
Minutes for curriculum
committee
0
(students presentations as
requested)
quarterly
Follow up notes by Dean’s
office
5
quarterly
Notes by Alumni Director
COMMUNICATION TO PROFESSIONAL AND ALUMNI:
Alumni and professional communication has improved as a result of deepened connections between AIA
leadership and School faculty, including prominent roles in the community for School and College
administrators. The Dean, Head and Director of Graduate Studies all serve on the Boards of Directors for the
state and local AIA chapters. Head is an elected officer for the state chapter, serving as President-elect in 2008
and President in 2009. College now has a Director of Alumni Relations and positive communication has
resulted such as the recent survey of graduates. Dean, Head and an average of four faculty presentations per
year are given at AIA presentations at the large annual convention and other AIA or professional organization
venues. (see Section 3.7.8 for list of State and National AIA faculty activities)
COMMUNICATION AND CONNECTIONS WITHIN THE COLLEGE AND UNIVERSITY:
Among the College centers, there are two that have more substantive connections to the school – Center for
Sustainable Building Research and the Metropolitan Design Center. Both of these centers have researchers
who teach and research projects on which faculty collaborate. We collaborate on curricular programs (Master of
Science in Sustainable Design with CSBR and Certificate of Metropolitan Design with MDC). Communication
is facilitated between Center researchers and the regular faculty by regular curricular meetings. The Director
of CSBR has shifted his role from part time teaching to be more fully with the Center, but remains involved
with the M.S. program. 2-4 senior and junior research fellows from CSBR participate in teaching as their
schedule allows. Additionally, the College has an Associate Dean for Research and Outreach who provides
opportunities for discussion on initiatives within the College and University. Relations with the Department of
Landscape Architecture have greatly deepened since the 2003 visit when the Port Cities program was the only
2-13
significant shared program. This study abroad program continues to provide excellent opportunities, and now
we have added several joint admissions and recruiting events and a regular fall semester joint studio.
University ties have been made much more accessible since the Universities strategic repositioning and the
creation of a new College of Design which has an emphasis on interdisciplinary work. The two Associate Deans
in the College work together to support, promote and cultivate interdisciplinary research, outreach and
teaching for disciplines within the College and within the larger University. They have created a fertile climate
for a wide variety of work to flourish. New and recent hires have emphasized collaborative practices faculty
whose work crosses boundaries. Several of the recent hires have had a specific charge to make connections
between disciplines. Collaborative opportunities with faculty in the School have been favorably sought and
received by other department in the College and University. Two junior faculty members were recently invited
to present at the prestigious Chemical Engineering and Material Science Department’s Rutherford Aris
Seminar Series on Design – Marc Swackhamer on Biomimicry and Blaine Brownell on Materials in
Architecture. Other ties have come from faculty teaching and outreach, where the school benefits greatly from
interdisciplinary input. Marc Swackhamer has regular guest lecturers and reviewer from the Bell Museum at
the UMN and the Biology Department at St. Thomas, a local University, he is also planning to co-teach an
undergraduate workshop with a junior faculty member in Art on the topic of interactive spaces; Ozayr Saloojee
has consulted with faculty from Islamic studies for the upcoming May term travel in Istanbul and with the Art
Department for planning collaborative teaching on the topic of sketchbooks; John Comazzi has been working
closely with faculty at the College of Education and the Center for Early Childhood education for a seminar on
Playspaces which is planned to lead to a design build project by Architecture students at the pre-school
Laboratory school next year; Leslie VanDuzer is co-teaching an undergrad workshop with visiting
choreographers from the Dance Department. John Comazzi’s interest in brownfield sites have led to awardwinning studios taught in collaboration with Landscape Architecture studios.
Formal ties include two senior faculty in Architecture with multiple tenure homes; Professor Gail Dubrow has
tenure homes in four departments: Architecture, Landscape Architecture, Public Affairs and Planning, and
History; Professor Ignacio San Martin has tenure homes in Architecture and is finalizing his tenure in
Landscape Architecture, a dual home mirroring that of his predecessor Ann Forsyth. Another formal tie can be
seen between Architecture and Computer Science in the Digital Design Consortium (DDC), an endowed
research center jointly housed in Computer Science and Architecture. Research projects are run with three
architecture faculty (Lee Anderson, Renee Cheng and Marc Swackhamer) and two Computer Science Faculty.
Several study abroad options are multi-disciplinary, the longest running is the Port Cities program shared
between Landscape and Architecture, May term options such as Netherlands have had a similar mix of
architecture and LA students. Expanding to include other college programs is under discussion. Also under
discussion is a multidisciplinary PhD program within the College.
2-14
B. Advising and Curriculum Issues
Insufficient and inconsistent academic and career advising by department faculty and staff is apparent and a
concern voiced by students of all levels. A related concern is the perceived inconsistencies among faculty
member teaching styles and standards.
Despite a full 3-year program, opportunities and encouragement 1r students to pursue non-departmental
electives, directed studies, allied interests, minors, and areas of emphasis are limited. The students lack the
support to develop parallel competencies, which could serve them well in their advanced studies and after
graduation. The number of elective offerings is lacking. Courses in History, Art, Theory, and Criticism are
especially underrepresented. Similarly, digital technologies need much stronger infrastructure in relation to
teaching.
The M. Arch. thesis structure is in need of clarity relative to expectations, intent, and objectives. The delayed
execution of the thesis book is of particular concern and represents a major problem facing the department.
These two issues are critical considering that students do not take any other courses during their final thesis
semester.
The team is also concerned about the stagnant course curriculum and materials, which have changed only
marginally in the past 6 years.
Disconnections between full-time and term faculty members are detrimental to the program. Especially with the
high number of term faculty members, there is a distinct need for clarity of communication structures, contract
and hiring protocols and standards, and performance expectations.
Finally, the distinction between the B.A. and B.S. programs in Architecture was not clearly articulated or
presented. This issue is directly related to the ongoing debate within the department regarding the duration of
the M. Arch. program and the potential for distinguishing between the B.A. and B.S. degree holders. The current
B.A. degree sets the standard for great advising and honors programming. The B.S. degree should aspire to
these while maintaining the additional studio requirement that currently defines its popularity. Since the B.S.
program is offered through CALA. the path to the professional degree M. Arch. program should become much
clearer and more efficient. The national standard for a 4-year B.A. or B.S. degree followed by a 2-year M. Arch.
should be seriously considered to attract a broader spectrum of student applications to the graduate program.
The 2003 VTR concern about the stagnant curriculum and lack of electives created a platform for discussion
that eventually led to the current curricular reform. (see timeline Figure 1-1 in section 1.5) Mission and strategic
plan from 2002 remained relevant, but additional goals were set to maintain traditional strengths of
architectural education while making room for the extraordinary shifts that are occuring. We summarize these
goals as “build on tradition while expecting change”. Program changes have been organized around two
different speeds of work: slow each fall semester and quick each spring semester. In the fall semester, courses
are 15 weeks long and concurrent courses are coordinated. Spring semester courses are mostly taught in halfsemester long modules with the exception of the 4 day catalyst workshops occurring directly before spring
break. This contrasting course structure allows us to use the fall semester as a relatively traditional, though
more intricately coordinated, design studio-based education, while spring semester becomes a highly variable
experimental setting for a range of approaches and topics. The School believes that the new curriculum will
provide opportunities for interdisciplinary modules and workshops as well as increasing electives in
2-15
traditionally defined areas such as History, Representation, Theory or Criticism. Appendix A provides an
illustration of the structure described here through selected courses and student work.
In 2003, digital teaching was not integrated into the curriculum to the extent it is today. First year students are
asked to become fluent in SketchUp, Revit and Photoshop. This provides the foundation for students to
continue to use those essential tools or to expand into other software. Specific studios at the GD2 or GD3 level
focus on software such as Maya or Rhino, other studios are open to multiple platforms. Typically, we see about a
quarter to a third of the class continue with Revit and close to 80% continue with SketchUp.
It is assumed that the VTR criticism about inconsistent approaches among faculty did not imply that faculty
needed to teach alike. The new curriculum acknowledges the different strengths of faculty and takes into
account that some prefer to work in a team and others to have a clear space in the curriculum with specified
interactions. Standards in the School have become more consistent since 2003 as a result of a set of documents
which have been in use and updated annually or on alternating years: a studio grading standard, Faculty
Handbook (see appendix P) and Graduate Student Handbook (appendix J). Additionally, the Head meets once
per semester for an orientation meeting for all new adjunct faculty to go over the relevant sections of the faculty
handbook.
On the issue of student advising, in the four years preceding the 2003 visit there had been four different
Directors of Graduate Studies (DGS) in as many years (refer to leadership diagram, Figure 2-1). Since 2003, a
senior faculty with many years of administrative experience, Steve Weeks, has held the role of the DGS. During
this time, student advising was consolidated to assign the DGS the official advising role for all students. Terry
Rafferty, Director of Admissions and Student Affairs provided essential support in program planning. Terry
also supervises a set of graduate student peer advisors that have been very effective in identifying areas of need
of clarification. Individual faculty are consulted by students on an informal one-on-one basis. While this
arrangement has provided consistency of program advising, additional, complementary advising mechanisms
are currently under development. For example, for thesis projects, the DGS had been the signatory for all
students, in 2008, this is shifting to the thesis chairs. (Please see 1.5 Advising) As a side note, we have noticed an
improvement in peer-to-peer advising with the addition of the graduate student orientation, a 3 day event
hosted off campus that establishes a cooperative community among incoming graduate students.
The three-year workplan (noted above in the response to Communications concerns and found in appendix F)
is a key element in improving advising. Students will be able to plan with any faculty advisor on how they might
either balance or cluster courses. The three year plan also is used to plan a transition to pass on the role of the
DGS as a regular rotating two year term among the tenured senior faculty.
During 2003-7, the School made dramatic gains in student completion of the thesis book under the joint
leadership of Steve Weeks as the DGS and Bill Conway as Thesis Coordinator. Advising, schedule adjustments
2-16
and the addition of a thesis preparatory section led a cultural shift and resulted in an increase from
approximately 30% to over 80% of students having the thesis book complete by the end of their thesis semester.
Successful efforts have been made to seek out and support graduates who did not complete their books by
offering continuing education courses and intensive advising. Figure 2-x Thesis is continuing to undergo
discussion and improvement, with some new strategies for approaching thesis preparation and the spring
design semester are underway this year.
FIGURE
TABLE
2-2 GRADUATE STATISTICS ON MATRICULATION AND DEGREES CONFERRED
2-6 LENGTH OF TIME TO DEGREE < HTTP://WWW.GRAD.UMN.EDU/ DATA/ STATS/ PR/1008800.HTML>
2-17
Adjunct and regular faculty communication have improved since 2003. Several mechanisms have contributed
to this improvement: the creation of Professor in Practice role, formation of Professor in Practice advisory
group, 2004 governance document revision to the adjunct promotion document and a new pay scale
transparently linked to course types (see appendix L). Adjuncts have an important positive effect on the program
as individuals and as a group. Individual adjunct faculty have invested enormous amounts of energy in
teaching, several attending conference such as the Beginning Design Studio Conference and others listed in
Section 3.7.8. Healthy relations between regular and adjunct faculty rely on mutual respect and
communication. The documents and policies mentioned above have created a more clear structure and reflect
the high level of respect the adjunct faculty have earned through their excellent contributions.
2.1.3
RESPONSE TO VT OBSERVATIONS NOTED IN CONDITIONS MET OR MINIMALLY MET
The 2003 visiting noted two conditions that were met or minimally met: Verbal and Writing Skills and
Building Economics and Cost Control. The following lists each of these conditions, followed by the visiting
team’s comments and our response.
12.1 Verbal and Writing Skills Ability to speak and write effectively on subject matter contained in the professional
curriculum
The criterion is minimally met. Students exhibit very strong verbal communication skills and were highly
articulate in their interactions with the team. There are major inconsistencies, however, in writing skills among
students. This appears to be due to varying standards among faculty members and the feedback provided by
individual faculty members and teaching assistants.
Writing skills were also cited as a concern by the 1997 NAAB Visiting Team. The need persists to develop and
consistently enforce writing standards throughout all courses within the curriculum.
Verbal skills, as noted by the 2003 report, have traditionally been strong in the student of the program and
these skills continue to be tested and developed with verbal presentations required in all studios and many
seminars.
The School has been conscious of an increasing need for research and well focused trajectories and clearly
expressed questions. There is a natural linkage between writing skills and the research curricula. Beginning
with the research methods component embedded in Arch5401 Theory class taken in the first semester of the
first year (4 lectures), moving to the second year fall semester research component comprised of 4 lectures and
two written exercises and including the thesis document produced parallel with the design thesis in the spring
of the third year. There are additional writing opportunities throughout the program including papers and
2-18
reports not in the research components of the Professional Practice and Theory courses as well as all the
History courses.
12.26 Building Economics and Cost Control Awareness of the fundamentals of development financing, building
economics, and construction cost control within the framework of a design project
This criterion is minimally met and requires increased attention in the design process and related courses.
Building Economics is one of the topic areas for the professional practice class covered as the “flow of money” by
four lectures, one public panel, two exercises and a mini-case study. Cost as part of the design process has
received increased attention in the comprehensive design studio and the related technical development
module. The addition of a new faculty member in 2009, Greg D’Onofrio brings research depth to the financial
flow of money and its effect on past and contemporary city development.
2-19
2-20
Summary of Responses to Changes in the NAAB Conditions
2.2
SUMMARY OF RESPONSES TO CHANGES IN THE NAAB CONDITIONS
If applicable, summarize the school’s response to changes in the NAAB Conditions for Accreditation adopted since the previous visit.
NAAB eliminated “awareness” as a category. All must now be “ability” or “understanding” (some sections
moved up to “understanding” based on this: Human Behavior, Human Diversity, Construction Cost Control,
Architectural Practice, Architect’s Leadership Roles). The School had exceeded the criteria of awareness in all
areas previously required. Additionally, the new curricular structure emphasizes both broad and deep coverage
of areas critical to our program, which meet and often exceed NAAB minimum standards.
Since the prior visit, NAAB added a section on ‘Studio Culture’. Since 2004 we have had in a studio culture
policy; a description of it is found in Section 3.5 and the policy itself is in Section 4.2 of this APR. AIAS studio
culture summit in 2004 was held in Minneapolis, and faculty participant Mary Guzowski reported that
University of Minnesota was cited as a model its healthy studio culture. At that summit, Tom Fisher delivered
what became an influential lecture on “The Past and Future of Studio Culture”, later published in Voices. Our
awareness of these discussions led the then Director of Design, Renee Cheng, to formalize the already strong
practices at the School that reinforced values expressed at the Summit and later AIAS documents.
NAAB also made a major revision in 2.2.6 regarding general studies in their curricula. Condition 3.12 requires
all schools to offer a minimum of 45 credit hours of general studies by Jan. 1, 2015 in their accredited degree. As
a 90 credit program, the School uses undergraduate experience to meet the goal of 45 credits. The School’s
admission policy calls out only 24-26 required credits in the architecture major (see appendix M for admissions
standards), leaving ample time for a typical 90 credit undergraduate degree to accommodate non-architecture
courses. However, our own B.S. degree does not meet the 45 credit minimum, this has been the topic of two
meetings between the Head, College registrar, Student Services advisors and Associate Dean for Student
Affairs. A recommendation will be made for faculty discussion and a decision will be made in order to meet the
requirement long before 2015.
There were further detailed changes in various criteria. Many of these changes are discussed at some length in
the curricular areas of the APR and in various syllabi. In brief, these changes are as follows:
Clarification on expectations for ‘Critical Thinking and Research Skills’ was made by NAAB. This was reflected
in our changes to the handling of both GD1 and GD2 fall semester studios and thesis. NAAB requested that
‘Collaborative Skills’ emphasize interdisciplinary collaboration. A substantial section in the Arch5621
Professional Practice Course is devoted to Collaboration with a series of four lectures, public panel, two
2-21
Summary of Responses to Changes in the NAAB Conditions
exercises and a mini-case study, several of these components address interdisciplinary collaboration. Individual
faculty bring interdisciplinary work into their studios, research and seminars as noted in the section 2.1.2 A.
Collaboration is an essential component in GD1 fall and spring, with a cooperative “urban game” in fall and
teams for the Tech 2 spring module. Later studios in GD2 and GD3 often use collaborative practices.
NAAB enhanced the role of ‘Sustainable Design’ (which previously been “environmental conservation”), 2.2.2
Sustainability. The School has long benefited from a high level of awareness on sustainable design. The
connection between the School and the Center for Sustainable Building Research has encouraged discussion
for many years, the 2005 launch of the M.S. in Sustainable Design greatly raised the level of this discussion.
Work on the Solar Decathlon has made this even more pronounced. In addition to intensive sustainable design
focus found in the Arch5516 Tech 2: Thermal and Luminous Design required of all second year students, there
are numerous elective courses. Four 8000-level MS courses (Theory of Sustainable Design; Site/Water;
Energy/IAQ; Sustainable Materials), Solar Decathlon seminars have been regularly offered in the past few
semesters, there are new electives such as Billy Weber’s project-based module in Spring 2009 on Housing and
Sustainable Infrastructure.
‘Life Safety’ includes a greater emphasis on egress, and 'Technical Documentation’ includes requirement for
outline specifications; this is addressed in both our semester long Comprehensive Studio and the new
sequence of GD2 fall studio Arch 8253 and the Technical Development module.
New categories added include the ‘Client’s Role in Architecture’, ‘Architect’s Administrative Roles’, and ‘The
Context of Architecture’, old categories eliminated include ‘Construction & Documentation’, ‘Legal Context of
Architecture’, ‘Detailed Design Development’, and ‘Building Code Compliance’. The effect of these criteria
changes needed to be considered with other wording changes in pre-existing criteria “trends that affect practice,
such as globalization, outsourcing, project delivery, expanding practice settings, diversity, and others”. “Issues of
growth, development, and aesthetics in their communities” has been added to Leadership.” The School had
already recognized changing needs due to BIM and data managing. These factors triggered major
restructuring of the pro-practice course. These various changes are reflected primarily in Professional Practice
which has course sections: Emerging Issues, Flow of Relationships (collaboration), Flow of Information, Flow
of Responsibilities, Flow of Money and Practice-Research. Also we go beyond minimum requirements for
providing access to NAAB information by discussion in professional practice class on the role of NAAB and
other regulatory systems in the architectural education and profession.
Changes to self assessment process did not substantially affect the School. The School’s 2002 Strategic Plan,
included in Section 1.4, was very complete. With regular updates, it remains relevant to guide the direction of
the School for many more years. The School has taken multiple opportunities for measuring effectiveness as
described in Sections 1.5 and 3.2.
2-22
3.0 THE THIRTEEN CONDITIONS OF ACCREDITATION
Program Response to the NAAB Perspectives
3.1
PROGRAM RESPONSE TO THE NAAB PERSPECTIVES
Schools must respond to the interests of the collateral organizations that make up the NAAB as set forth by this edition of the NAAB Conditions
for Accreditation. Each school is expected to address these interests consistent with its scholastic identity and mission.
3.1.1
ARCHITECTURAL EDUCATION AND THE ACADEMIC CONTEXT
The accredited degree program must demonstrate that it benefits from and contributes to its institution. In the APR, the accredited degree program
may explain its academic and professional standards for faculty and students; its interaction with other programs in the institution; the contribution
of the students, faculty, and administrators to the governance and the intellectual and social lives of the institution; and the contribution of the
institution to the accredited degree program in terms of intellectual resources and personnel.
3.1.1.1
ACADEMIC AND PROFESSIONAL STANDARDS FOR FACULTY AND STUDENTS
Academic and professional standards for both students and faculty are governed by the University standards of
conduct reflected in the School of Architecture Faculty Handbook and the School of Architecture Graduate
Student Handbook. The Graduate Student Handbook works in conjunction with the Graduate School Student
Handbook and is regularly updated by the DGS. When changes are extensive, a faculty committee is convened
to review and make recommendations to the governing faculty. The Faculty Handbook was created in 2004 and
is regularly updated by the Head, DGS and DUS. Major changes are treated similarly to the student handbook
process. Standards for tenured and tenure track faculty are governed by the School’s 7.12 Promotion and Tenure
document that works in conjunction with the University 7.11 and new 9.2 sections of the University Promotion
and Tenure Document. See Appendix O for promotion and tenure documents, Appendix J for Grad Student
Handbook, Appendix P for Faculty Handbook.
3.1.1.2
CONTRIBUTIONS OF STUDENTS, FACULTY AND ADMINISTRATORS TO THE INSTITUTION
School of Architecture faculty are active in the governance in the College. The new College constitution
adopted in 2008 provides for 40 faculty governance positions, of those, School of Architecture faculty fill 15.
Numerous College committees are populated with Architecture faculty. Below is a table of School of
Architecture faculty participation in College committees that highlights leadership positions and membership
to committees with significant time investment and impact.
3-1
TABLE
3-1 – FACULTY LEADERSHIP AND SERVICE TO COLLEGE
LEADERSHIP AND SERVICE IN THE COLLEGE
Blaine Brownell
2008
Member, Exhibitions Committee, College of Design
Ritu Bhatt
2005
Organizer, Public symposium, Feng Shui: Everyday Acts of Space Making, CALA,
Ritu Bhatt
2007
Member, Heritage Preservation Search Committee, 2007-8
Renée Cheng
2006
Chair, Search Committee for Director of Information Technology, 2006
Renée Cheng
2006
Chair, Search Committee for Director of Information Technology, 2006
Renée Cheng
2002-2004
John Comazzi
2006
Organiser, School Buildings-The State of Affairs: A New Architecture for a New
Education symposium and exhibition
John Comazzi
2006present
Chair, Communications, Exhibitions, Lectures + Publications Committee, CDES
William F. Conway
2007
Gunter Dittmar
2003-2005
Gunter Dittmar
2006present
Mary Guzowski
2007-2008
Member, CALA Academic Technology Committee, 2002-2004
Member Search Committee, Director, Metropolitan Design Center College of Design
Chair, CALA (College of Arch. & L.Arch.)Curriculum Committee
Chair, College of Design Curriculum Committee
Member, Interior Design Search Committee, Cdes
Nancy Miller
2008
Member, Faculty Search Committee, Heritage Preservation, College of Design, 2008
Julia Williams Robinson
2007
Chair, College of Design Promotion & Tenure Committee 2007
Julia Williams Robinson
2007-08
Chair College of Design Constitution Committee 2007-08
Developed and taught, Continuing Professional Studies Course: “Pencil to Production: A
Survey of Digital Design and Fabrication Tools”
Marc Swackhamer
2006
Marc Swackhamer
2005-2007
Marc Swackhamer
2008-present
Leslie Van Duzer
2006-07
Member, CDes International Committee
Leslie Van Duzer
2006-07
Member, CDes Diversity Committee
Leslie Van Duzer
2007-08
Member, Search Committee for Director, Metropolitan Design Center
Leslie Van Duzer
2007-2008
Jury member, Metropolitan Center Traveling Fellowship
Leslie Van Duzer
2007-2008
Member, Search Committe for Director, Metropolitan Design Center
J. Stephen Weeks
2007-08
Chair of CALA/CDes Digital Technology Committee Spring 2005 – Fall 2007
Member of CDes CELP Exhibitions Committee
Chair CDES Curriculum and Policy Committee 2007-08
The School of Architecture interacts other programs in the institution with many formal and informal ties to
departments and research centers within the College. Outside the college there are fewer but equally
important formal ties. See 2.1.2.A communications: university ties and the table below for more information
on specific faculty projects and interdisciplinary groups. Additionally, there are many faculty that serve on
University committees, contributing to the intellectual life of the University:
3-2
TABLE
3.1.1.3
3-2 – FACULTY LEADERSHIP AND SERVICE TO THE UNIVERSITY
INTERACTION WITH OTHER PROGRAMS IN THE INSTITUTION
Students are active in the College, participating on a number of College governance and advisory boards, (see
Table 2-5 showing the College alumni board etc). The University recognizes the contributions of our students,
just recently, M.Arch student Sarah Wolbert won a President’s Student Leadership and Service Award. School
of Architecture students are the dominant presence in the Solar Decathlon (21 out of 28 students involved) and
the single largest discipline in the mentor program (in 2007, 98 graduate and undergraduate architecture
students out of 217 total placed) run by the College. A number of University Outstanding Achievement Alumni
Awards have been made, most recently to prominent alums Leonard Parker and Bill Pederson.
Changes since 2003, finds the School now in a far richer College environment and with a University structure
better aligned with its strengths (Sections 2.1 University Changes and 2.1 College Change list examples of
specific areas of opportunity, benefit or support). As the School becomes accustomed to the larger and more
engaged college environs, we expect to better leverage the resources and incorporate College goals and
procedures into those of the School. There is continuity in several important resources provided by CALA such
as excellent personnel in the College academic resources (library, wood shop, imaging lab, visual resources).
Information Technology (including the computer lab) has undergone positive change in the new college with
3-3
additional personnel and policies more consistent than the old CALA. A college faculty consultative committee
is essential to guiding the future IT goals, and continued leadership from several School faculty will be needed.
3.1.1.4
INTELLECTUAL RESOURCES AND PERSONNEL CONTRIBUTIONS OF INSTITUTION TO THE PROGRAM
The College of Design houses an array of 6 centers in the College, 4 within DHA and 6 University Centers with
College affiliation. All these centers provide opportunities for School faculty and students. These opportunities
are supported and promoted by Associate Dean Marilyn Delong who directs the Research and Outreach units.
Some centers have physical resources such as the 3D body scanner in the Human Dimensioning Lab or the VR
cave in the Digital Design Consortium (DDC). DDC, Metropolitan Design Center (MDC) and Center for World
Heritage Studies and Center for Sustainable Building Research have funding faculty work or travel in addition
to student research assistants. The School has benefited on average 2-5 grants per year of $5000-$12,000 for
faculty work and 2-4 semesters of student research assistant positions. There is a significant benefit to the
School to have Centers as partners in major grants that might have been difficult to achieve without the
expertise found in the centers.
3-4
3.1.2
ARCHITECTURAL EDUCATION AND THE STUDENTS
The accredited degree program must demonstrate that it provides support and encouragement for students to assume leadership roles in school and
later in the profession and that it provides an environment that embraces cultural differences. Given the program’s mission, the APR may explain how
students participate in setting their individual and collective learning agendas; how they are encouraged to cooperate with, assist, share decision
making with, and respect students who may be different from themselves; their access to the information needed to shape their future; their exposure
to the national and international context of practice and the work of the allied design disciplines; and how students’ diversity, distinctiveness, selfworth, and dignity are nurtured.
3.1.2.1
ENVIRONMENTS FOR LEARNING; ACADEMIC AND PROFESSIONAL ACHIEVEMENT
The students in the School of Architecture are notably “activist” and set high standards for themselves, their
classmates, their faculty and their program. The faculty and administration understand that our students are
both a valuable resource and essential collaborators. There are numerous opportunities for students to
contribute their energy as individuals and their collective voice to curriculum and programs within the School.
Some self-assessment activities described in 1.5 are generated by student input. Table 3-3 provides examples of
student opportunities for academic and professional Achievemnet.
TABLE
STUDENT
GROUP
3-3
STUDENT OPPORTUNITIES FOR ACADEMIC AND PROFESSIONAL ACHIEVEMENT
GROUP DESCRIPTION
ACTIVITY
OUTCOME
Student initiated volunteer
group, approximately 5 core
participants and faculty advisor
Virajita Singh
2004 to present
Annual charrettes on greening the
College, weekend activity each
spring for the past 3 years.
approximately 10-20 students
participate
New waste material management
system, racks and bins near loading dock
constructed and managed by students.
Prototype for trash, composting,
recycling container, several built for
Rapson Hall
t/here journal
Student initated volunteer group,
led by faculty mentor Tom Fisher
2004 to present
Began with a request by 12 arch
students for opportunity to
transform erratically produced
journals, Works, Viva, and All
Student Exhibition Catalog into
annual peer-reviewed journal
Creation of infrastructure including
course offering and budget for
production. 3 issues produced to date.
Graduate student
advisory group
6 reps elected by students, report
to students and consult with
Head and serve on faculty
governance subcommittees and
graduate curriculum committee
Fall 2007 to present
Feedback on courses and
curriculum changes throughout the
academic year 2007-8. Numerous
forums and types of input.
2007 Student input incorporated into
faculty led white papers, curriculum
developments directly took into account
feedback from students
2008 Student input led to increased CTL
involvement for workload planning and
reading skills
GD1 students
Forum facilitated by Center for
Teaching (approximately 50
students)
Spring 2008
Feedback on Tech 2 spring modules
content and format
3 studio instructors added as support to
course, provided office hours for design
feedback
Greenlight
3-5
STUDENT
GROUP DESCRIPTION
ACTIVITY
OUTCOME
GD2 students
Forum facilitated by Head and
DGS (approximately 30 students
face to face, 16 study abroad
students via email exchange)
Spring 2008
Discussion of possible thesis and
thesis prep changes for the school
and impacts on their particular class
in their thesis year 2008-9
April 2008
Request to keep some formal fall thesis
prep balanced with faculty desire to
contain thesis work to spring only
resulted in a set of exercises
incorporated into the required
professional practice course on research
methods
GD1 and GD2
students
Small subgroup within the class
(approximately 5)
Graduate and
undergraduate
students
20-30 total
GROUP
3.1.2.2
Spring 2006
Requested faculty advice for
planning a trip to Turkey for the
summer
Creation of new M-term led by Ozayr
Saloojee which has since led to
discussion of inter-University exchange.
Over two years, over 28 students
participating.
AIA 150 events including architects
in the schools (k-12), community
charrettes
STUDENTS AND CULTURAL DIVERSITY
The faculty in the School of Architecture provide role models the exemplify diversity (see 3.4 for table of women
and faculty of color) Students learn to value points of view that may be different than their own through contact
with this faculty group. Additionally study abroad opportunities encourage this point of view and the regular
exchange of Mexican students in GD1 courses each spring (note: program on hiatus in 2009 while we adjust to
University policy changes). The ADA workshop referenced in 2.1.1 is another example where students have the
opportunity to appreciate a point of view not previously experienced. Additionally, the Catalyst workshops
(ARCH5510) are intended to bring diverse methodologies and tools not part of our day to day culture in the
school. Symposia and lecture series provide opportunities to see other points of view, in particular two listed
below highlight diverse points of view:
1.
April 2008: Sacred Sites / Sacred Sights: Architecture, Ethics, and Spiritual Geographies
Co-organized by Ozayr Saloojee (Architecture), Virajita Singh (Center for Sustainable Building Research)
and Richard Kroeker (Dalhousie University, Canada) sponsored by the School of architecture and Graham
Foundation.
Track One Sessions will include examinations of architecture and the sacred across world heritage, ethics,
Abrahamic, and eastern religious traditions. Track Two Sessions brings together community elders and
other members of the Native American Dakota community who have worked to preserve sacred spaces.
3-6
2.
October, 2005: Feng Shui: Everyday Acts of Space Making
Organized by Ritu Bhatt, Assistant Professor in Architecture.
Symposium and workshop: Well known Feng Shui specialists, Professor Lin Yun and Alex Stark will talk
about the transcendental and physical aspects of Feng Shui. Anthropologist Ole Bruun will discuss the
myths associated with Feng Shui practice in rural China. Workshop conducted by Alex Stark, Feng Shui
specialist from NY. Themes will include: Flow of Chi, Color Theory, Lighting, Site and Geomantic
Analyses, Ergonomics, Topography, Phenomenology, Co-relations between Qualitative aspects of Spaces
and the Human Body.
3.1.2.3
STUDENTS AND LEADERSHIP
One of the best examples of student leadership opportunities is AIAS Minnesota, one of the most active
chapters in the country. They recently won the bid to host Forum 2009, they also have one of only 38 Freedom
by Design groups nationally as well as participating actively on AIA events such as the AIA 150 last year. The
president of the chapter sits on the AIA Minnesota Board and the chapter elects an AIAS faculty mentor each
year (Cynthia Jara for 2008-9). The organization is predominantly undergraduate, but there has been a recent
increase of graduate student engagement from a typical average of 1-2 to current number of 25-28.
3.1.3
ARCHITECTURAL EDUCATION AND REGISTRATION
The accredited degree program must demonstrate that it provides students with a sound preparation for the transition to internship and licensure.
The school may choose to explain in the APR the accredited degree program’s relationship with the state registration boards, the exposure of students
to internship requirements including knowledge of the national Intern Development Program (IDP) and continuing education beyond graduation, the
students’ understanding of their responsibility for professional conduct, and the proportion of graduates who have sought and achieved licensure since
the previous visit.
3.1.3.1
PREPARING STUDENTS FOR INTERNSHIP AND LICENSURE
The table below indicates that UMN grads do well on the ARE and there is a clear upward trend in the number
of students attempting and passing the test.
3-7
TABLE
3-4
ARCHITECT REGISTRATION EXAMINATION PASS RATES FOR THE UMN
2005
2006
2005-07.
2007
NUMBER OF
PASS
NUMBER OF
PASS
NUMBER OF
PASS
CANDIDATES
RATE
CANDIDATES
RATE
CANDIDATES
RATE
PRE DESIGN
14
100%
4
100%
34
91%
GENERAL STRUCTURES
11
100%
5
80%
32
87%
LATERAL FORCES
10
100%
4
100%
37
86%
MECHANICAL & ELECTRICAL
SYSTEMS
16
94%
5
100%
40
82%
MATERIALS & METHODS
8
87%
6
83%
31
100%
CONSTRUCTION
DOCUMENTS & SERVICES
19
95%
2
100%
33
85%
SITE PLANNING
39
77%
48
62%
41
56%
BUILDING PLANNING
42
69%
44
77%
41
56%
BUILDING TECHNOLOGY
33
64%
47
83%
38
66%
3.1.3.2
INTERN DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM
New in 2008 is a policy that all students enrolled in the required professional practice course will be enrolled in
either AIAS or IDP or both. This has resulted in a increase of membership in IDP among the second and third
year students from approximately 15 to 85. The professional practice course provides context for IDP in a lecture
that lays out the process of IDP and registration in their career. Exercises for several topics in the course use the
Emerging Professional’s Companion (EPC), whose structure is organized along the lines of the IDP
compentancies.
3.1.3.3
PROGRAM’S RELATIONSHIP WITH STATE REGISTRATION BOARDS
The department has a strong relationship with the professional community of 1,758 registered architects
practicing within the Minneapolis/St. Paul metropolitan area. This is demonstrated by the ongoing
involvement with AlA Minnesota as well as the presence of the CDes Mentor Program.
The AlA State Intern Development Program (IDP) Coordinator works with the department faculty and
students to explain the state registration requirements and the intricacies of NCARB’s IDP. The School IDP
3-8
coordinator, Steve Weeks, also serves as the Director of Graduate Studies and on the AIA Minneapolis and
St.Paul Boards of Directors. A permanent exhibition about NCARB’s IDP is on display in the library. The
NCARB presentation at the AIA Minnesota convention is repeated at a well attended AIAS annual event at the
school. State IDP Representative (currently Meg Parsons, AIA, Cuningham Group) attends lecture in the
Professional Practice class on IDP and registration exam. She also holds information sessions with students to
follow up on the class and for general information.
3-9
3.1.4
ARCHITECTURAL EDUCATION AND THE PROFESSION
The accredited degree program must demonstrate how it prepares students to practice and assume new roles and responsibilities in a context of
increasing cultural diversity, changing client and regulatory demands, and an expanding knowledge base. Given the program’s particular mission, the
APR may include an explanation of how the accredited degree program is engaged with the professional community in the life of the school; how
students gain an awareness of the need to advance their knowledge of architecture through a lifetime of practice and research; how they develop an
appreciation of the diverse and collaborative roles assumed by architects in practice; how they develop an understanding of and respect for the roles
and responsibilities of the associated disciplines; how they learn to reconcile the conflicts between architects’ obligations to their clients and the public
and the demands of the creative enterprise; and how students acquire the ethics for upholding the integrity of the profession.
The mechanisms needed to prepare students to engage in the current state of practice are different than those
needed to prepare them for a changing professional context. To address current practice, the School of
Architecture engages the local professional community on a wide range of levels; to anticipate future
professional roles and responsibilities, the School innovates in the academic content of the professional
practice and research streams.
3.1.4.1
ENGAGING LOCAL PROFESSIONALS
The School of Architecture has a long-standing relationship with the local professional community that is
mutually beneficial to our students and to the profession. There are six ways that local practitioners and firms
consistently engage with our academic community:
•
Attend AIA/MASLA Fall reception for graduate students (approximately 200 students,
10-30 practitioners, 10 faculty)
•
Attend lecture series or symposia (AIA continuing education provided), (varies from 10100 professionals)
•
Attend design reviews or thesis reviews as critic (3-12 professionals per midterm and final
jury – well over 150 per semester)
•
Participate as mentor in mentor program (80-90 per year)
•
Firm participation in career fair (typically 25-35 firms)
•
Teaching (design studio, design workshop or drawing class – approximately 30 people)
•
Professional practice course participation in students’ firm interview and case study (45
firms in 2008)
Under development are additional engagement opportunities:
•
Advisory Board
•
Spring module, participation for Continuing Education
•
Catalyst, participation for Continuing Education
3-10
The majority of our students have professional office experience for at least a summer. Recent poll taken of the
GD2 and GD3 student group showed:
1/5 more than 2 years of professional experience
2/5 between 10weeks and 2 years experience
1/5 summer professional experience
1/5 no professional experience (some of these had experience in construction or engineering)
Approximately 40% of the students work 10 hours per week or more in offices during the school year. This is
balanced by approximately 50% working at Teaching or Research Assistants. Students in the required
Professional Practice course have two exercises that bring them to firms for interviews and case study
documentation on the financial, management and philosophy of the offices.
Participation in the AIA Minnesota annual convention among students is high as a result of the $25 reduced
registration rate and numerous free keynote events with high-profile speakers. AIA Minnesota’s AIA150
events in 2007-8, as well as annual events such as Search for Shelter, offered many opportunities for students
to participate in community based charrettes, working side by side with professionals. The School is fortunate
that many of the principals of local and regional firms and leaders of the professional community are alumni of
the school. They have an allegiance and provide strong support to the School with their time and scholarship
donations. Additionally some of the most prominent individuals and firms teach in the comprehensive design
studio (see list in Appendix N).
3.1.4.2
ENGAGING PROFESSIONAL BEYOND REGION
Beyond these local and regional connections, the School has developed strong ties with several Gulf-coast
reconstruction efforts. One year after Hurricane Katrina, Cameron Sinclair came to the School to teach a large
undergraduate lecture course and a graduate seminar. From this relationship came one of the first posthurricane buildings– a wash-house designed by two graduate students who also supervised the permitting and
construction. Perhaps more importantly, lasting ties have been made where two of our recent graduates are
now working full time for the Gulf Coast Design Studio in Biloxi and over 60 students have participated in the
annual spring break reconstruction efforts in New Orleans and Biloxi. We have had as many as 8 students
participate in semester long “study-away” programs in Biloxi. Residential graduate studios and seminars often
use New Orleans or Biloxi as sites and a handful of thesis projects are sited there. The presence of School of
Architecture students in the Gulf has been favorably noted by community activists and feedback has indicated
that UMN students are leaders and capable of leading teams of students.
3-11
3.1.4.3
PREPARING STUDENTS TO ASSUME NEW ROLES
Preparation for changing context of practice requires projection to possible futures and awareness of
discussions occurring in practice and industry today. When the opportunity arises, both the Dean and the Head
attend events such as the Large Firm Roundtable (Fisher annually, Cheng in 2007), AIA Board meetings
(Cheng 2007, Fisher and Cheng 2009). Professor Cheng served on the AIA Board Knowledge Committee in
2007. When Wiley revised Architectural Graphic Standards, only two new chapters were added: Fisher was
asked to write chapter on research and Cheng on digital practice. Through these and related AIA MN activities,
both Dean and Head stay abreast of emerging issues and concerns in practice (see Section 3.7.8 for faculty
professional activities). This awareness informs their vision for the School and in particular has contributed to
the research and practice-education curricula in the program. For two of the most relevant courses, see course
descriptions for Arch5401 Theory taught by Fisher and Arch5621 Professional Practice taught by Cheng.
By looking at a sample of our junior faculty research, it is apparent that emerging professional issues are
directly addressed in Marc Swackhamer’s teaching and research on biomimicry and Blaine Brownell’s work on
new materials. Professor Swackhamer’s work has been part of the curriculum for several years and yielded
impressive results from student studios and seminars. Projects from the seminar garnered two of the four
national student awards given by AIA COTE in 2007. Professor Brownell’s work has resulted in two books
commonly used as reference in the profession: Transmaterials and Transmaterials 2. Both promising young
faculty are already leading discussions in practice through their highly visible and cutting edge work
3.1.5
ARCHITECTURAL EDUCATION AND SOCIETY
The program must demonstrate that it equips students with an informed understanding of social and environmental problems and develops their
capacity to address these problems with sound architecture and urban design decisions. In the APR, the accredited degree program may cover such
issues as how students gain an understanding of architecture as a social art, including the complex processes carried out by the multiple stakeholders
who shape built environments; the emphasis given to generating the knowledge that can mitigate social and environmental problems; how students
gain an understanding of the ethical implications of decisions involving the built environment; and how a climate of civic engagement is nurtured,
including a commitment to professional and public services.
3.1.5.1
STUDIO CURRICULUM AND SOCIETY
The Twin Cities metropolitan area with its historic, industrial, and high-tech context, its social and ethnic mix
of population, and its natural and cultural amenities, provides a living laboratory for relevant issues and
projects. Studio projects commonly locate themselves in the local or regional context. In many cases, siting is
not simply the choice of a physical location, but a complex social and environmental situation. To highlight
examples of the four fall 2008 ARCH8255 studio projects, topics include: examination of brownfield sites along
the Mississippi River (Comazzi/Neckar 2007 and 2008), effects of sub-prime mortgage lending on
3-12
neighborhoods in North Minneapolis (Conway, 2008) and numerous explorations in dense urban sites in
downtown Minneapolis (Mic Johnson, 2004-8). Outside the region, the fall 2008 studio on New Orleans Ninth
Ward housing has been co-sponsored by the School of Architecture and the Metropolitan Design Center
(Robinson, 2008). Several of the design studios mentioned above have community members as “clients” who
attend reviews and use the material produced by the students to advance discussion in their communities.
3.1.5.2
COURSES AND SOCIETY
Many of the courses the program offers emphasize the social and ethical dimensions involved in shaping the
built environment. These include Principles of Urban Design, Suburbia, the majority of the history courses,
and Professional Practice, not to mention numerous studios, including those indicated above. Squarely
addressing the social art of collaboration is the Professional Practice course’s set of lectures, panel and exercises
on the topic of Collaboration. The new technology sequence, particularly Tech 2, is a national leader in carbon
neutral design work, unique that it is required of all students in GD1, working collaboratively and with both
digital and analog tools. While not under the purview of NAAB review, the team should be aware of the positive
impact on the M.Arch program by M.S. program, particularly the sustainable design track. Of the current 23
students, 16 are dual degree students and bring their expertise and interests to the M.Arch courses. The recent
seminars and charrettes on the Solar Decathlon has engaged M.Arch and dual degree students actively.
3.1.5.3
FACULTY RESEARCH AND TEACHING AND SOCIETY
Noteworthy work highlighting social issues is being done by four of the School’s faculty, Julia Robinson, Leslie
VanDuzer, Ritu Bhatt and Ozayr Saloojee. Each has research expertise in social issues and allow this to inform
large lecture courses that they teach. Both Professor Van Duzer and Assistant Professor Saloojee teach large
freshman courses, required for admission to the major (Arch1281 Design Fundamentals 1, Van Duzer; Arch1701
The Designed Environment, Saloojee). They have each incorporated service learning exercises which bring the
students to the community. Over 15 graduate students each year participate as teaching assistants for one or
both of the courses and facilitate these activities. Feedback from students recently nominating Ozayr Saloojee
for the AIAS/ACSA New Faculty Teaching Award spoke eloquently to the lasting effects of this teaching
opportunity on the careers of those TA’s. Julia Robinson and Ritu Bhatt alternate responsibilities for a 200
person sophomore writing intensive class (Arch3711: Environmental Design and the Sociocultural Context)
with 7-8 graduate teaching assistants per semester. A recent Bush Grant supported many supplemental course
development activities and teaching assistants have benefited from these new resources to teach the social
aspect of architectural design. Since these faculty all engage with research in the area of social issues, their
research assistant positions provide an excellent base for graduate students and thesis students.
3-13
The School has greatly benefitted from two faculty that the Tide Foundation lists as “champions of sustainable
design”. One of these champions is Mary Guzowski who has spearheaded efforts to develop sustainable design
since her arrival in 1992. The other, Rebecca Foss, has been greatly missed since her death in 2006. Her work
at the Center for Sustainable Building Research (CSBR) has continued and the Center remains a leader in
sustainable design research and teaching.
3.1.5.4
RESEARCH CENTERS AND SOCIETY
The Metropolitan Design Center (MDC) is in a period of transition, under Ann Forysth, the Center was
engaged with the Academic Health Center studying walkable communities. While she was here, students were
exposed to this work through Professor Forsyth’s teaching of a required Arch5711 Urban Design course and
electives, as well as student fellowships and research opportunities. We anticipate that the incoming director,
Ignacio SanMartin will continue with his own community-based studios and highly interactive practice and
academic work. As mentioned above, CSBR is major positive force in our community, contributing their
teaching, research and service.
3.1.5.5
PUBLIC EVENTS AND OUTREACH AND SOCIETY
To highlight a few of the programs and activities that have benefited the public:
Library lecture series “Working Through Architecture” co-sponsored by the School and the Friends of the
Public Library, 9 lectures by faculty, each on a different architect. This program was developed and curated by
Leslie Van Duzer, Ozayr Saloojee and John Comazzi, average attendance was over 200 and overflow space was
commonly used. Audience included members of the professional and academic community but mostly from
the general public.
Many students are also active in Habitat for Humanity and the student run Greenlight group. Notably, the
three issues of T/here student journal have all chosen society and/or environment as theme: Design + Identity;
Refuse; Importing Spectacle. Gulf-Coast Design Studio and AIA’s Search for Shelter mentioned in the
previous section also provide opportunities for the students.
3-14
Program Self-Assessment Procedures
3.2
PROGRAM SELF-ASSESSMENT PROCEDURES
The accredited degree program must show how it is making progress in achieving the NAAB Perspectives and how it assesses the extent to which it is
fulfilling its mission. The assessment procedures must include solicitation of the faculty’s, students’, and graduates’ views on the program’s
curriculum and learning. Individual course evaluations are not sufficient to provide insight into the program’s focus and pedagogy.
The APR must include the following:
• A description of the school’s self-assessment process, specifically with regard to ongoing evaluation of the program’s mission statement and how it
relates to the NAAB Perspectives
• Faculty, students’, and graduates’ assessments of the accredited degree program’s curriculum and learning context as outlined in the NAAB
Perspectives
• A description, if applicable, of institutional requirements for self-assessment
• Any other pertinent information.
3.2.1
THE SCHOOL’S SELF-ASSESSMENT PROCESS
Our typical self-assessment processes are similar to many programs and serve two goals: feedback to the School,
setting goals or values upon which success will be measured.
Curriculum-Excellence in graduate professional education and student performance are measured by:
Design Studios mid-reviews and final reviews with invited local and national guests
Design Reviews at end of semester, invited visitors and CTL
Student evaluations written by studio faculty
Exit interviews by studio faculty
External Professional Portfolio Reviews (for employment and scholarships)
Awards (such as Design Excellence), Publications and Competitive Scholarship
Graduate Student Advisory Group
Success of students in gaining internships and employment
Success of students in gaining faculty appointments or research fellowships
Success of students in completing IDP and ARE
Alumni and Employer Satisfaction
Faculty Effectiveness- Excellence in graduate professional education and faculty performance are measured by:
College Advisory Group feedback
Annual Process Reports
Annual Reviews with Head
3-15
Awards, Publications and Peer-reviewed Scholarship
External Peer review for probationary faculty
Faculty Course Evaluations by Students
Professional Practice
Research Funding
Student Surveysa
Review, Reappointment, Promotion, Tenure-Full-time tenure and tenure-track are measured by excellence in:
Teaching, Research (scholarly and creative practice), Service and Outreach (as described in the 7.12
document in appendix O)
Tables 2-5 and 3-3 show several examples of student involvement and the School’s response to their input.
While the School has a robust process for student grievances (see both Student and Faculty Handbooks for
resolution processes), emphasis is placed on communication to proactively address issues before they reach the
point of crisis. The success of this approach has been apparent in the past two years while the new curriculum
and its transition has affected all the students currently in the School. In spite of the numerous, radical and
sometimes confusing changes to their study programs, students have been extremely supportive. The School’s
efforts to solicit student feedback across a variety of forums and topics created a situation where students are
collaboratively contributing to the curriculum development.
3.2.2
ONGOING EVALUATION OF THE STRATEGIC PLAN AND HOW IT RELATES TO NAAB PERSPECTIVES
The Strategic Plan in 1.4 was extremely complete and thoroughly discussed at the time of its formation. The
values outlined in the plan have remained relevant to the program and directly relate to the NAAB perspectives
3.2.3
FACULTY, STUDENT, AND PROGRAM GRADUATE VIEWS RELATIVE TO NAAB PERSPECTIVES
The School has a long tradition of education that is grounded in design excellence. Commitment to the
profession and public good are established values in the School and demonstrated in multiple ways described
in other sections of the report.
3.2.4
COURSE EVALUATIONS
Following is an example of the standard online course evaluation form. The hardcopy evaluation form is
similar and is favored by most instructors since the rate of response is generally higher. The University has
recently undergone a major review of the course evaluation process and content of the evaluations. School of
Architecture faculty participated in focus group discussions on this change in 2007-8.
3-16
3-17
3-18
Public Information
3.3
PUBLIC INFORMATION
To ensure an understanding of the accredited professional degree by the public, all schools offering an accredited degree program or any candidacy
program must include in their catalogs and promotional media the exact language found in the NAAB Conditions for Accreditation, Appendix A. To
ensure an understanding of the body of knowledge and skills that constitute a professional education in architecture, the school must inform faculty
and incoming students of how to access the NAAB Conditions for Accreditation.
The APR must include both of the following:
• A description of the degree program as it appears in university catalogs and other institutionally authorized material.
• Evidence that faculty members and incoming students have been informed of how to access the NAAB Conditions for Accreditation (including the
Student Performance Criteria) on the NAAB Web site.
3.3.1
FACULTY AND STUDENT ACCESS TO NAAB DOCUMENTS
Information is posted and discussed in professional practice course in two lectures on the context of
professional education. Text below is on School of Architecture website
<http://arch.cdes.umn.edu/overview.html>. Grad School Catalog has slightly shorter version
<http://www.catalogs.umn.edu/grad/programs/g010.html>. Screen shots from both websites below:
ACCREDITATION & LICENSING
Accreditation:
In the United States, most state registration boards require a degree from an accredited
professional degree program as a prerequisite for licensure. The National Architectural
Accrediting Board (NAAB - http://www.naab.org), which is the sole agency authorized to accredit
U.S. professional degree programs in architecture, recognizes three types of degrees: the
Bachelor of Architecture, the Master of Architecture, and the Doctor of Architecture. A program
may be granted a 6-year, 3-year, or 2-year term of accreditation, depending on the extent of its
conformance with established educational standards. Master's degree programs may consist of a
pre-professional undergraduate degree and a professional graduate degree that, when earned
sequentially, constitute an accredited professional education. However, the pre-professional
degree is not, by itself, recognized as an accredited degree.
Licensing for Architects:
In the state of Minnesota and in most other states an applicant for examination for registration as
an architect must have a professional degree from an architectural program accredited by the
NAAB and also a National Council of Architectural Registration Boards (NCARB) certificate
showing compliance with the Intern Development Program (IDP) training requirements.
3-19
Public Information
3-20
Public Information
3-21
Social Equity
3-22
Social Equity
3.4
SOCIAL EQUITY
The accredited degree program must provide faculty, students, and staff—irrespective of race, ethnicity, creed, national origin, gender, age, physical
ability, or sexual orientation—with an educational environment in which each person is equitably able to learn, teach, and work. The school must
have a clear policy on diversity that is communicated to current and prospective faculty, students, and staff and that is reflected in the distribution of
the program’s human, physical, and financial resources. Faculty, staff, and students must also have equitable opportunities to participate in
program governance.
• The criteria and procedures used to achieve equity and diversity in faculty appointments, reappointments, compensation, and promotions
• The criteria and procedures used to achieve equity and diversity in student admissions, advancement, retention, and graduation
• A description of the means by which faculty, students, and staff are given access to the formulation of policies and procedures, including curriculum
review and program development
• Identification of any significant problem, with recommendations for improvement.
As one of the top 20 public research universities in the nation, with a large urban campus, the University of
Minnesota is committed to fostering a diverse student body and faculty. Students at the University of Minnesota
come from all 50 states, and over 100 countries. The largest of the four campuses of the University of Minnesota
system, the Twin Cities campus comprises 19 colleges and 132 graduate degree programs and 10,370 graduate
students, 1,903 degrees were awarded in 2006. Among those, Architecture is one of 9 professional degree
programs, including School of Dentistry, Law School, Carlson School of Management, Medical School, College
of Pharmacy, School of Public Health, College of Veterinary Medicine, College of Education and Human
Development.
Architecture students in the College of Design are part of a culturally diverse and academically rigorous
educational environment. For students from all backgrounds, the College of Design offers a premium
education at an affordable price. Students from Wisconsin, North Dakota, South Dakota, Manitoba, Kansas,
Michigan, Missouri, and Nebraska may qualify for discounted tuition through one of our reciprocity tuition
agreements. For non-residents tuition is still affordable in comparison to other universities ranked as highly as
the University of Minnesota.
3.4.1
INSTITUTIONAL POLICIES REGARDING EQUITY AND DIVERSITY
University Statement on Non-Discrimination:
3-23
Social Equity
The University of Minnesota is committed to the policy that all persons shall have equal access to its programs,
facilities, and employment without regard to race, color, creed, religion, national origin, sex, age, marital status,
disability, public assistance status, veteran status, or sexual orientation.
The College of Design, and the School of Architecture are bound by these University policies and practices, and
fully support their objectives.
Each college at the University of Minnesota has an equal opportunity officer responsible for coordinating the
equal opportunity efforts at that level. The equal opportunity officer receives training to properly prepare for the
duties. College of Design’s equal opportunity director is Jan Batt, Director of Human Resources, 89 Church St
S.E., Minneapolis, MN 55455
3.4.2
CRITERIA AND PROCEDURES USED TO ACHIEVE AND MAINTAIN EQUITY AND DIVERSITY
FACULTY
Position descriptions and selection criteria are screened by the University of Minnesota’s Office of Equal
Opportunity and Affirmative Action to ensure compliance with the University’s affirmative action goals and
regulations. The chart below illustrates the Department of Architecture’s full-time faculty profiles in the
academic years 2008 and 2003.
TABLE
3-5 GENDER AND ETHNICITY OF FULL TIME FACULTY
FULL - TIME FACULTY
2008
2002-03
Black or African-American
0
1
American-Indian or Alaska Native
0
0
Asian
4
2
Hispanic or Latino
1
0
Women Faculty
tenured
rank of Professor
rank of Associate Professor
rank of Assistant
full-time Adjunct
9
5
3
2
1
3
8
6
2
4
0
2
Total women or faculty of color
23
22
3-24
Social Equity
The ranks of full-time faculty include tenured and tenure-track faculty, and 100%-time P&A (Professional and
Administrative) academic appointments.
Since the last accreditation visit, the School of Architecture has promoted two women faculty members, and
hired three faculty of color.
Part-time, term faculty ranks and numbers are more fluid. For the 2002-03 academic year there are 49 adjunct
faculty. Of them, 2 are of Hispanic origin; and 18 are women.
TABLE
3-6 STUDENT EQUITY
2002-03
2003-04
2004-05
2005-06
2006-07
2007-08
AfricanAmerican
0
0
0
1
2
2
Native
American
0
0
0
0
0
0
Asian-Pacific
10
9
10
9
12
10
Hispanic
5
3
5
5
4
4
Women
79
83
87
75
76
71
STUDENTS
Minnesota is less diverse than the United States average, for example, the 2006 US Census shows Minnesota
with 4.6% African American population compared with 12.8% national average, Asian 3.5% compared to 4.4%,
Hispanic 3.8% compared to 14.8%. The table above, while showing low numbers, is reflective of this context. We
continue to expand the base of design awareness at the high school and middle school level by working with
program and groups such as the Assembly for Architects (a network of minority architects) and Architecture
Youth Program (high school outreach) and AIA MN Architects in Schools program (middle school outreach)
and programs such as Design Camp (formerly run through the Design Institute - DI) and Design Camp for
Teachers recently expanded by John Comazzi with a DI staff person (providing middle school teachers with
resources to teach design thinking).
Our recruiting efforts seek to create diversity in all its dimensions. We track student according to their
educational backgrounds and geographic distribution of their undergraduate experience. We have made
progress towards our recruiting goal to create more geographic diversity; changes in the demographics of
students show this progress. Since 2003, we have shifted away from predominantly University of Minnesota
B.S. students (approximately 80% of total class) to a range of 50-70% . This has been accomplished through our
successful 3+ program which draws nationally, and by adding resources to recruiting.
3-25
Social Equity
TABLE
3-7 DEMOGRAPHICS OF STUDENTS BY EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND 2002-2007
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
UMN
38
32
30
25
27
39
Other MN
Colleges
4
1
5
10
9
5
Other U.S.
Institutions
2
11
8
8
14
9
International
4
2
0
4
3
1
MATRICULATIONS
3-26
Studio Culture
3.5
STUDIO CULTURE
The school is expected to demonstrate a positive and respectful learning environment through the encouragement of the fundamental values of
optimism, respect, sharing, engagement, and innovation between and among the members of its faculty, student body, administration, and staff.
The school should encourage students and faculty to appreciate these values as guiding principles of professional conduct throughout their careers.
The APR must demonstrate that the school has adopted a written studio culture policy with a plan for its implementation and maintenance and
provide evidence of abiding by that policy. The plan should specifically address issues of time management on the part of both the faculty and
students. The document on studio culture policy should be incorporated in the APR as Section 4.2.
3.5.1
STUDIO CULTURE POLICY
The School enjoys a healthy studio culture and operates with studio policies governing studio culture, studio
ethics, green studio policies, outlines of student and faculty workload expectations and clear guidelines for
achieving respectful and equitable studio environment workable for all. These can be found in the “Academic
Policies for Design and Drawing Studios” in the Faculty Handbook in Appendix P. Additional information is
found in Section 4.2 Studio Culture Policy. These policies were developed in 2002-2003 by the then Director of
Design, Renee Cheng. It was adopted by the studio faculty and governing faculty. Annually since 2004, it has
been distributed to and reviewed with all incoming and returning adjunct studio and drawing faculty at an
orientation meeting with the Head.
The GD1 studio sets up expectations and establishes community values ranging from level of engagement to
work management. GD1 syllabus clearly states the honor agreement for “pencils down” on the night before
reviews. Establishing the tenor of strong studio culture from the first semester is critical to ensuring
inculcation into the values of the program.
3.5.2
AWARENESS AND CONTINUOUS IMPROVEMENT OF STUDIO CULTURE
Several formal and informal mechanisms are in place to reinforce the written documents described above.
Faculty routinely provide guidance on time management and expectations, several strategies and mechanisms
for this are suggested in the Academic Policies document. Studio interim and final deadlines are tracked, these
are communicated so that non-studio courses can work around deadlines and resources are aligned to provide
services to support the reviews. In concordance with the Academic Policies, instructors with students in the
same year level meet regularly to coordinate workload – this is especially important in the fall when the studio
and non-studio courses are consistent by student cohort. Head routinely gathers feedback on student perceived
workload (through casual contact with students in her class and Grad Student Advisory) and provides feedback
to faculty, calling additional coordination meetings as needed. Recently, students expressed interest in
3-27
Studio Culture
resources from CTL to help with time management and reading skills. Head and Director of Design is working
with CTL to develop workshops for students.
Time management for both faculty and students mapped during curriculum development and meets standards
set forth in the Academic Policies. Clearly the new curriculum has aspects that are more intense than the
previous curriculum, offering more opportunity while demanding a higher level of attention to workload and
general expectations on the part of both students and faculty.
Social events are crucial to maintaining a strong community. The School places significant resources to
introduce new members to the community through recruiting events which connect current students with
prospective students. Through the process of reflecting on their experiences in written profiles on the web or in
panels during open house, students become more aware of their roles and expectations for the program. Some
of the annual community building events are listed below (also referred to in 2.1.2 advising):
•
Orientation Weekend for new grad students hosted on the Marcel Breuer-design campus of St.John’s
University in Collegeville, MN
•
GD1 Chicago trip
•
Architecture and Landscape Graduate Student Reception (cosponsored by AIA and MASLA) occurs at
the end of the first day of Fall semester studio, hosted at theWeisman Art Museum
•
Open house and recruiting events with current students as hosts: panel discussion, reception at home
of the Head, post-reception student social event
3-28
Human Resources
3.6
HUMAN RESOURCES
The accredited degree program must demonstrate that it provides adequate human resources for a professional degree program in architecture,
including a sufficient faculty complement, an administrative head with enough time for effective administration, and adequate administrative,
technical, and faculty support staff. Student enrollment in and scheduling of design studios must ensure adequate time for an effective tutorial
exchange between the teacher and the student. The total teaching load should allow faculty members adequate time to pursue research, scholarship,
and practice to enhance their professional development.
The APR must include these major elements:
• Description of the students’ educational backgrounds and the degree program’s selectivity, retention, and time-to-graduation rates since the last
accreditation sequence
• Description of the distribution of effort between teaching and other responsibilities of each faculty member and evidence that students evaluate
individual courses for both teaching effectiveness and course content
• Faculty-student teacher ratios for studios for all design levels
• For each administrative position, a description of the distribution of effort between administrative and other responsibilities
• For each staff position, a description of the distribution of effort between administration and other responsibilities
• Identification of any significant problem, with recommendations for improvement
3.6.1
STUDENTS’ EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUNDS
Students come from two types of educational background: non-architecture (3+ stream), and architecture (BS,
BA or our new BDA) The 3+ stream is our most competitive pool and tends to draw from a diverse range of
geographic distribution and has inherent diversity in the range of majors and experiences. BS current has a
majority (approximately 50%) from University of Minnesota undergraduate program. BDA is a new and
promising stream, with just six graduates and two applicants last year, we cannot project what the pattern
might be when the future cohorts of 100 student each graduate starting in 2009.
3-29
Human Resources
3.6.2
PROGRAM’S SELECTIVITY, RETENTION, AND TIME-TO-GRADUATION RATES SINCE THE PREVIOUS
SITE VISIT.
TABLE
3-8 ADMISSION SELECTIVITY AND RETENTION
20032004
20042005
20052006
20062007
20072008
20082009
Applications
180
194
187
188
189
225
Admissions
89
102
94
112
94
98
Matriculations
51
49
52
57
59
45
Degrees
Conferred
29
60
58
65
61
*
Since 2004, we have had extremely high retention and on-time graduation rates. Previous to that time, issues
in completing the thesis book prevented many students from graduating on time (discussed in 2.1 Advising
Progress). Students entering before 2004 had taken extra time to graduate, this has resulted in the increased
numbers of degrees conferred in recent years as they move through. Any student entering after 2004 has a 9598% chance of graduating on time (defined as 3 yrs from matriculation), with only one or two students from
each cohort needing additional time. See Figure 2-2 and Table 2-6 for more information on matriculation and
time to degree.
The dramatic increase in on time graduation is largely the result of reorganizing the thesis schedule and
different structure of faculty support (see 2.1.A Advising for more information). DGS and Graduate Advisor
provide support for students who need additional time to complete their program. The majority of these cases
have been personal – triggered by family, health or military service.
3.6.3
DISTRIBUTION OF EFFORT BETWEEN TEACHING AND OTHER RESPONSIBILITIES OF EACH FACULTY
MEMBER
2008-9 was the first year where the School utilized a three-year workplan outlining teaching, research and
service expectations for each faculty member. The workplan relies on a point system based on a simple formula
for teaching: credits + number of TA’s. Credits are an accurate reflection of contact hours and class preparation.
The number of TA’s for a course is an accurate reflection of the course’s level of complexity for course
management. TA numbers are determined based on 1:40 ratio with exceptions for writing intensive or studio
intensive courses. Non-teaching activities are assigned a point load that reflects the time commitment for
university, college and school service, taking into account that some committees meet only rarely and that
3-30
Human Resources
workload may vary. Research is assigned a weight in the point system as a baseline. Under development are
mechanisms for adjusting the values for individual faculty members. The workplan and point system are both
included in Appendix F.
Increased credit load from 6 to 9 credits for the GD1 and GD2 fall studios reflect increased time commitment on
the part of students and faculty. Actual increase in contact hours used in GD1, GD2 assumes additional time for
students’ independent work outside of class and increased class prep time for faculty.
3-31
Human Resources
3.6.4
CLASS SIZE AND SUPPORT
Required lecture courses average about 48 students – the size of our first year graduate design class. In 2008,
the Professional Practice course has double group, GD2 and GD3 combined for this year only. Graduate Design
studios have a maximum of 13 students. Studio meeting times vary as noted below:
TABLE
3-9 COURSE FORMATS , TYPES, AND RATIOS
STUDIO OR PROJECT MODULE
HOURS PER WEEK
COURSE
AND FORMAT
DURATION
CREDITS
2008
RATIO
FTE FAC : STUDENT
ACTUAL FACULTY
TEACHING , FT AND PT
GD1 fall studio
12 studio + 2 lab
Semester
9
1:11
4 full time
GD2 fall studio
12 studio
Semester
9
1:13
4 full time
GD3 fall studio (inc. comp)
10 studio
Semester
6
1:10
4 full time
Tech 2
studio + lecture
Half-sem
6
1:11
10: 2 full time, 8 part time
Project based module (inc. tech
development mod)
12 studio
Half-sem
4
1:12
1 per module typical
Seminar based module
5 lecture
Half-sem
3
1:20
1 per module typical
Lectures classes with more than 40 students are assigned a 25% graduate teaching assistant. Additional
teaching assistants are assigned for each increment of 40 students; some larger classes may have less than one
teaching assistant per 40 students, depending on the nature of the class.
3.6.5
ADJUNCT FACULTY AS RESOURCES
The School has a long-standing tradition of inviting local architects in practice to teach in both the
undergraduate and graduate programs. The term/adjunct faculty is a mix of established and emerging
professionals who often teach design studios and drawing classes. Lecturers may receive courtesy titles
corresponding to their qualifications such as Professor in Practice, this is a relatively new title created in 2005
as a working title appropriate for a principal or senior partner with an established regional or national
reputation. First created in 2004 and annually updated is a document establishing pay rates according to
course type and instructor background. (see Appendix L for adjunct policies) We also typically have one or two
“Cass Gilbert” visiting faculty members each semester, often serving as studio instructors.
3-32
Human Resources
3.6.6
DISTRIBUTION OF EFFORT BETWEEN EACH ADMINISTRATIVE POSITION AND OTHER
RESPONSIBILITIES
All administrative positions continue with their full research load and are relieved of some teaching and some
service
•
Head teaching varies. Fall 2008 load was heavier than normal with development of new
Professional Practice course and contributions of 5 lectures to Tech 1 and 2 lectures in other
courses.
•
The Director of Graduate Studies is a tenured faculty member who receives a course release
and additional graduate student support in recognition of the effort toward the
administrative management of the graduate program. However, in 2008 the DGS is
beginning phased retirement and has been focusing on administration and research, and
does not have a teaching load, but contributes guest lectures and attends design reviews.
•
The Director of Design is a tenured faculty member who receives one course release for the
year in recognition of the effort toward the administrative management of studios, the
graduate curriculum committee, administrative groups, etc. This position is expected to
attend many design reviews for graduate and undergraduate studios.
The School of Architecture has the following staff positions: Administrator, Office Manager, Graduate Student
Support, DGS/DUGS Support, Receptionist, student workers. These positions work together to to provide
support for the administrative functions of the school. In addition, staff provides the faculty with adequate
support for their teaching, research and outreach efforts. Types of duties include clerical work such as copying,
collating; basic graphic design to create posters; organization of special events – including food, travel for guests;
payroll and benefits information; ordering special equipment. The staff also interfaces between the College
support personnel and the faculty, helping faculty use the College resources effectively and alerting College
directors of issues arising. In 2009, there will be a new position of Department Administrator, who will oversee
workload of the School for staff and adminstration and become the primary interface between the School and
College.
3-33
3-34
Human Resource Development
3.7
HUMAN RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT
Schools must have a clear policy outlining both individual and collective opportunities for faculty and student growth inside and outside the
program.
The APR must include the following major points:
• The school’s policy regarding human resource development opportunities
• A list of visiting lecturers and critics brought to the school since the previous site visit • A list of public exhibitions brought to the school since the
previous site visit
• A description of student support services, including academic and personal advising, career guidance, and internship placement where applicable
• Evidence of the school’s facilitation of student opportunities to participate in field trips and other off-campus activities
• Evidence of opportunities for students to participate in professional societies and organizations, honor societies, and other campus-wide activities.
• A description of the policies, procedures, and criteria for faculty appointment, promotion, and tenure and access to faculty development
opportunities
• Evidence of the school’s facilitation of faculty research, scholarship, and creative activities since the previous site visit, including the granting of
sabbatical leaves and unpaid leaves of absence, opportunities for the acquisition of new skills and knowledge, and support of attendance at
professional meetings
• Evidence of how faculty members remain current in their knowledge of the changing demands of practice and licensure.
3.7.1
THE SCHOOL’S POLICY REGARDING HUMAN RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT OPPORTUNITIES
The School provides each faculty member with $2,000 per year in development funds to be used for any activity
supporting their research, teaching or service. There are some limitations on the use of the funds governed by
University policies on travel and reimbursable expenses – for example funds cannot be used for cellular or PDA
phones and there are per diem limits for any travel destination. Funds cannot be used to buy out faculty
teaching but may be used as a match for grant funded work. If a faculty has $4,000 accrued in their
development funds at the end of the fiscal year, the faculty is not eligible for additional annual funds. If a
faculty has expenses beyond the available funds, the Head works with the faculty member to identify possible
University funds or alternative School funds. For School funds, priority is given to probationary faculty
members.
3-35
3.7.2
LIST OF VISITING LECTURERS AND CRITICS BROUGHT TO THE SCHOOL SINCE THE PREVIOUS SITE
VISIT
TABLE
3-10 LIST OF VISITING LECTURERS AND EXHIBITIONS SINCE 2003
TITLE
SPEAKER
SEMESTER
YEAR
DATE
Cities as Historical Actors: Ecological, Linguistic and Economic
Aspects of Urban Life
Manuel DeLanda
Fall
2007
17-Sep
From Concepts to the Real Landscapes of the Future: The Role
of Landscape Ecology
Rob Jongman
Fall
2007
8-Oct
Sustaining Architecture
James Timberlake
Fall
2007
15-Oct
The Diversity of Design
Eric Jolly
Fall
2007
22-Oct
Performance Practices
Chris Reed
Fall
2007
29-Oct
Architecture of Linkage
Bill Pedersen
Fall
2007
5-Nov
New Structural Membrane Developments
Robert Off
Fall
2007
12-Nov
The Design of Business
Roger Martin
Fall
2007
26-Nov
Defiant Gardens
Kenneth Helphand
Spring
2007
5-Feb
Design Redux: Eames as Paper
Eames Demetrios
Spring
2007
8-Feb
Making Waves Along the Big Muddy: Pursuing Equity Planning
in New Orleans
Ken Reardon
Spring
2007
19-Feb
The Bones Studio
Vincent James
Spring
2007
5-Mar
Shared Space-Reconciling People, Places, and Traffic
Ben Hamilton-Baillie
Spring
2007
19-Mar
The Conservation Biologist's Toolbox for Landscape and Landuse Planning
Craig Groves
Spring
2007
26-Mar
The Architecture 2030 Challenge: Toward Zero Emission-Zero
Energy Design
Ed Mazria
Spring
2007
23-Apr
The State of Minnesota's Affordable Housing
Sherry Ahrentzen
Spring
2007
19-Jun
Design & Meaning: Community Design Practice
Kathy Dorgan
Fall
2006
25-Sep
Landscape Architecture, American Civilization, and the West
Lance Neckar, Dan Nadenicek, Bill
Tishler, Nancy Volkman
Fall
2006
6-Oct
Urban Projects
Ken Smith
Fall
2006
9-Oct
The Missing Dimension: The Social Component of
Sustainability
David Pijawka
Fall
2006
6-Nov
Beyond Desire: Fashion, Art, and Life
Valerie Steele
Fall
2006
16-Nov
Ecology of Construction
John Fernandez
Fall
2006
17-Nov
Inhabiting Urban Landscapes
Diogo Burnay
Fall
2006
27-Nov
Woodland Landscape: History and Perspective Russel Wright's
home
Carol Franklin
Spring
2008
11-Feb
Sustainable Design: Moving from Buildings to Communities
Peter Busby
Spring
2008
18-Feb
3-36
TITLE
SPEAKER
SEMESTER
YEAR
DATE
Traverse: Shifted Waterways and Urban Life
Liska Clemence Chan
Spring
2008
25-Feb
Human Settlement: Lessons Learned
Bob Close
Spring
2008
3-Mar
New Light on New Canaan: Philip Johnson's Glass House/Guest
House
Alice Friedman
Spring
2008
10-Mar
Consuming Heritage and the End of Tradition
Nezar Al Sayyad
Spring
2008
24-Mar
Floating Cities
Ria Van Dijk
Spring
2008
31-Mar
The Fifth Sector: Philanthropy's Role in Community Change
Rip Rapson
Spring
2008
7-Apr
Visualizing Urban Data Streams
Eric Rodenbeck
Spring
2008
14-Apr
Interiors Parlance: Inside Out
Shashi Caan
Spring
2008
28-Apr
Promoting Town/Gown Partnerships that Work: Lessons from
the Field
Ken Reardon
Spring
2006
23-Jan
From Gardens to Urban Parks
Steven Tupu
Spring
2006
30-Jan
Eladio Dieste: Innovation in Structural Art
Stanford Anderson
Spring
2006
6-Feb
20th Century Cities
Alex Krieger
Spring
2006
20-Feb
The Architect as Artisan and World Citizen
Steve Badanes
Spring
2006
6-Mar
Urbanisms
Margaret Crawford
Spring
2006
20-Mar
Architecture for Humanity
Cameron Sinclair
Spring
2006
27-Mar
The Future of Affordable Housing
Nicolas P. Retsinas, Ann Forsyth
Spring
2006
28-Mar
Urban Form, Walking, Eating
Anne Vernez Moudon
Spring
2006
3-Apr
Plain Modern: The Architecture of Brian MacKay-Lyons
Brian MacKay-Lyons
Spring
2006
7-Apr
Rethinking our Urban Environment
Congressman Earl Blumenauer,
Judith Martin
Spring
2006
1-May
We Make the City and the City Makes Us: From Massive Change
to the Future of Urban Space
Jennifer Leonard
Fall
2005
19-Sep
Ralph Rapson: A Modernist Vision
Bruce Wright, Susan Murphy, Ralph
Rapson
Fall
2005
26-Sep
The Rural Studio
Chuck Schultz, Samuel Mockbee
Fall
2005
5-Oct
Recent Work
Merrill Elam
Fall
2005
7-Oct
refabricating ARCHITECTURE
Stephen Kieran
Fall
2005
17-Oct
Standing with the Land
Grant Jones
Fall
2005
24-Oct
Landscapes Between the Virtual and the Real
Char Davies
Fall
2005
14-Nov
Making and Traveling
Richard Hansen
Spring
2005
31-Jan
A Modern Vernacular: Finding and Designing an Everyday
Architecture
Charlie Lazor
Spring
2005
21-Feb
Modernism from Cultural Roots
David D. Salmela
Spring
2005
21-Mar
Confronting Sustainablity at the Neighborhood Level:
Perceptions, Footprints and Design
David Pijawka
Spring
2005
4-Apr
Breaking Ground
Daniel Libeskind
Spring
2005
13-Apr
Work in Transition
Nick Winton
Spring
2005
18-Apr
3-37
TITLE
SPEAKER
SEMESTER
YEAR
DATE
Integrated Design and The Triple Bottom Line…WHEN PIGS
FLY!
Bob Berkebile
Spring
2005
25-Apr
Housing and Justice
Mike Pyatok
Spring
2005
2-Jun
Environmental Justice and Community Design and
Development: The West Philadelphia Landscape Project
Anne Whiston Spirn
Spring
2005
3-Jun
Megascale, Complexity, memory
Moshe Safdie
Fall
2004
1-Oct
Site Seeing
Jane Amidon
Fall
2004
4-Oct
Public Space, Public Good
Lodewijk Baljon, Dianne Harris,
Walter Hood, Kristine Miller, Frank X.
Moya, Laurie Olin, Lynda
Schneekloth, Robert Shibley, Marc
Treib
Fall
2004
15-Oct
SITE-in Process
James Wines, Joshua Weinstein
Fall
2004
1-Nov
Pulp Architecture: A Movement in Progress!
Roger Connah
Spring
2004
26-Jan
In Situ: Barkow Leibinger
Frank Barkow
Spring
2004
6-Feb
The Bold Landscape: Urban and Rural Gestures
Shane Coen
Spring
2004
8-Mar
Consuming Monsters: Big, Perfect, Infectious
Anthony Dunne, Fiona Raby, Jeffrey
kahn, Lynn Lukkas, Janet Abrams
Spring
2004
15-Apr
Recent Projects
Mark Hansen, Ben Rubin
Spring
2004
22-Apr
APRT: Recent Work
Hannu Tikka
Fall
2003
17-Sep
Visualizing the Future of Mass Transit
Michael J. Shiffer
Fall
2003
22-Sep
Restoring Ecological Spaces and Consciousness
Robert France
Fall
2003
29-Sep
CALA Beaux Arts Ball Lecture
Joan M Sorrano
Fall
2003
25-Oct
Le Corbusier in the Land of Ford
Mardges Bacon
Fall
2003
10-Nov
Continuity and Invention
Richard Kroeker
Fall
2003
3-Dec
Community Parkways in the Twin Cities
Fall
2003
Sep
Helsinki Contemporary Urban Architecture Photographs by
Jussi Tiainen, Finland
Fall
2003
Oct
Minnesota’s Own: AIA Young Architects Awards
Fall
2003
Nov
Matters of Fact: The Architecture of Barkow Leibinger
Spring
2004
Feb
Key Words/Key Images: The Design Center Image Bank
Spring
2004
Jan
The Bold Landscape: Urban and Rural Gestures: Shane Coen,
landscape architect, coen + partners
Spring
2004
Mar
Accommodating Density: Housing in the Twin Cities
Fall
2005
Sept
Soft Space: work by dECOi, Jakob + MacFarlane, Ocean North,
Open Source Architecture, Sean Lally, and Serve
Fall
2004
Oct
Richard Hansen: Stone and Water, Space and Time
Spring
2005
Feb
Lazor Office: Modern Vernacular
Spring
2005
Mar
Salmela Architect
Spring
2005
Apr
Exhibitions
3-38
TITLE
SPEAKER
SEMESTER
YEAR
DATE
Mark Scogin Merrill Elam Architects
Fall
2005
Oct
MASSIVE CHANGE: urban economies
Fall
2005
Sept
KieranTimberlake Associates
Fall
2005
Sept
Jones & Jones Architects and Landscape Architects
Fall
2005
Eladio Dieste: A Principled Builder
Spring
2006
Jan
Fall 2005 Design Excellence Awards
Spring
2006
Feb
2006 Thesis and Capstone Award Winners
Spring
2006
May
Plain Modern: The Architecture of Brian MacKay-Lyons
Spring
2006
May
On Wright: Frank Lloyd Wright’s Darwin D. Martin House
Visitors’ Center Competition Projects by ARO, Brian Healey,
Office dA, Schwartz/Silver, and Toshiko Mori
Fall
2006
Oct
Design Redux: Eames as Paper
Spring
2007
Mar
Leading from Policy to Practice: Affordable Housing in
Minnesota and Affordable Housing: Designing an American
Asset
Spring
2007
Apr
2006 Schl of Arch Design Excellence Awards
Spring
2007
Feb
Watercolor Paintings by Julia Williams Robinson
Spring
2007
Mar
Textilien
Spring
2007
Mar
School Buildings – The State of Affairs: A New Architecture for a
New Education
Fall
2007
Oct
Precedents and Influences
Spring
2008
Jan
Fall 2007 Schl of Arch Design Excellence Awards
Spring
2008
Mar
Sacred Sites / Sacred Sights: Architecture, Ethics, and Spiritual
Geography
Spring
2008
Mar
Richard Knight: Photography Saarinen
Fall
2008
Sep
ACADIA: Anxious Climates
Fall
2008
Oct
ACADIA: Silicone and Skin
Fall
2008
Oct
Squares of Europe
Fall
2008
Oct
Visiting critics since 2003 are too numerous to list, but include guest critics for interim and final reviews as
well as faculty for special events such as catalyst workshops. In a typical year, there are 12-15 visitors from
outside the region. Since 2003, visitors have included:
•
Shigeru Ban, Shigeru Ban Architects, Japan
•
Tim Eliasson, Tripyramid Designs, Boston
•
Billie Faircloth, University of Texas at Austin
•
Daniel Friedman, University of Washington
•
Mary Hardin, University of Arizona
3-39
•
Laura Lee, Carnegie Mellon
•
Steve Luoni, Arkansas University
•
Kiel Moe, Northeastern University
•
Paul Tesar, North Carolina State University
•
Cathrine Veikos, PennDesign
3.7.4
STUDENT SUPPORT SERVICES
Student support services is coordinated by the Director of Admissions and Graduate Student Services. Most of
the resources are provided within the School with the notable exception of the Career Fair and Mentorship
programs organized by College Student Services. Additionally, career place support is provided by St. Paul
Career Services. They provide information on resume writing, interviews and collect work opportunities to post
on their “Gold Pass” jobs website.
3.7.5
STUDENT FIELD TRIPS AND OTHER OFF-CAMPUS ACTIVITIES
Evidence of the School’s Facilitation of Student Opportunities to Participate in Field Trips and other Offcampus Activities
Field trips are generally funded through course fees, but often are supplemented by departmental funds to
offset the costs. Staff provides support for reserving hotel, vans and other arrangements as needed. Students are
encouraged to attend off-campus activities sponsored by AIA such as the AIA Minnesota Convention and
community events. Promotional material is provided and class time is given for brief announcements.
TABLE
DESTINATION
YEAR
3-11 STUDIO -BASED FIELD TRIP ACTIVITIES
NUMBER
STUDENTS
FACULTY LEADER
FUNDING
Chicago
Spring 20022007
45
per year
GD I studio
instructors
$1,000 departmental support, course fee
Vancouver
Spring 2004
12
Rockcastle
$1,200 departmental support, student out of pocket
Chicago
Spring 2004
12
Lazor
Los Angeles
Spring 2005
12
Lazor/Anderson
$2,000 departmental support, student out of
pocket
Chicago
Fall 2007
11
Comazzi
$500 departmental support, student out of pocket
Oaxaca, Mexico
Spring 2007
9
LaVine
$4,500 ($500 block grant to each student)
Kansas City
Summer
2007, 2008
12
per year
Lavine
$1,200 departmental support
3-40
Chicago
Spring 2008
12
Comazzi
New York
Spring 2008
12
Saloojee
Chicago
Fall 2008
70
Iannacone,
Tambornino
$1,000 departmental support, course fee
New York
Fall 2008
12
Swackhamer
New Orleans
Fall 2008
12
Robinson
$2,500 from Metropolitan Design Center, $1,200
departmental support
Chicago
Fall 2008
11
Comazzi
St.Cloud
Annual
48
annually
Rafferty/Weeks
Orientation fee
New
Orleans/Biloxi
Annual
20-30
AIAS with Head
Administrative support, $3,000 departmental
support, student out of pocket
3.7.6
EVIDENCE OF OPPORTUNITIES FOR STUDENTS TO PARTICIPATE IN PROFESSIONAL SOCIETIES AND
ORGANIZATIONS, HONOR SOCIETIES, AND OTHER CAMPUS-WIDE ACTIVITIES
Students have many opportunities for participation outlined in Table 3-3. Recent opportunities include:
Solar Decathlon, AIAS, Greenlight, CDes student and alumni Board, T/here journal, AIA MN Homes by
Architects Tour, AIA MN Architects in Schools Program, AIAS Freedom by Design
3.7.7
FACULTY APPOINTMENT, PROMOTION, AND TENURE
See appendix O with documents 7.12 describing school policies procedures and criteria, this document works in
conjunction with the University document 7.11 and 9.2. Additionally, the Adjunct 7.12 governs promotion for
adjunct faculty.
3.7.8
FACILITATION OF FACULTY RESEARCH, SCHOLARSHIP, AND CREATIVE ACTIVITIES
Evidence of the school’s facilitation of faculty research, scholarship, and creative activities since the previous site
visit, including the granting of sabbatical leaves and unpaid leaves of absence, opportunities for the acquisition
of new skills and knowledge, and support of attendance at professional meetings.
3.7.8.1
EVIDENCE OF GRANTING SABBATICAL LEAVES AND UNPAID LEAVES OF ABSENCE
3-41
TABLE
FACULTY NAME
3-12 FACULTY SABBATICALS AND LEAVES
DESCRIPTION OF LEAVE
SEMESTER OR YEAR
( ALL
LEAVES PAID EXCEPT WHERE NOTED )
Arthur Hui-Min Chen
2003-2004
Sabbatical Furlough-Year Long
Ritu Bhatt
2003-2004
1 Course release for incoming probationary
Ritu Bhatt
2006-2007
Leave
Ritu Bhatt
Spring 2007
67% load
Ritu Bhatt
2008-2009
67% load
Blaine Brownell
2008-2009
John Comazzi
2006-2007
Bill Conway
2008-2009
1 Course release
Greg Donfrio
2008-2009
Mary Guzowski
2008-2009
Sabbatical Furlough-Year Long
Cynthia Jara
Spring 2003
Leave
Cynthia Jara
2003-2004
Leave
Cynthia Jara
2004-2005
3 Course release
Cynthia Jara
2005-2006
1 Course release
Cythnia Jara
2007-2008
1 Course release
Andrzej Piotrowski
2004-2005
1 Course release
Julia Robinson
2002-2003
1 Course release
Julia Robinson
2005-2006
1 Course release
Ozayr Saloojee
2006-2007
Ozayr Saloojee
Fall 2008
Single Semester Leave
Kate Solomonson
Fall 2004
Single Semester Leave
Kate Solomonson
Spring 2005
Unpaid leave
Marc Swackhamer
2006-2007
Leslie VanDuzer
Fall 2008
Teaching leave buy out from IAS grant
J. Stephen Weeks
Fall 2008
Begin Phased Retirement
3.7.8.2
EVIDENCE OF OPPORTUNITIES FOR THE ACQUISITION OF NEW SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE
Faculty have multiple opportunities to gain new skills and knowledge, but most commonly these are presented
in academic meetings or skills workshops. Below is a table showing a list of conferences where faculty attended
to develop their knowledge and expand their skills.
3-42
TABLE
3-13 DEVELOPMENT OPPORTUNTIES FOR NEW SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE SINCE 2003
FACULTY ATTENDANCE AT CONFERENCES SUPPORTED BY SCHOOL DEVELOPMENT FUNDS
TYPICALLY TRAVEL , PER DIEM & REGISTRATION
Lee Anderson
2007
Creativity and Cognition 2007
Lee Anderson
2007
IEEE Virtual Reality 2007
Jonee Brigham
2007
USGBC National GreenBuild Conference 2007 and several prior years
John Comazzi
2005
Encounters/Encuentros/Rencontres, ACSA International Conference in Mexico City, May, 2005
John Comazzi
2006
PUSH 2006: A New Life, Conference, Walker Art Center, Minneapolis, MN, June 11-13
John Comazzi
2007
Reggio-Emilia-Architecture and Pedagogy in Dialogue: An international symposium on School Design and
Education, hosted by the Loris Malaguzzi International Center, Reggio-Emilia, Italy, October, 2007
John Comazzi
2007
Design and Its Publics: Curators, Critics, and Historians: An international conference on the state of
contemporary design discourse, hosted by the Design Institute, Minneapolis, MN
John Comazzi
2007
Mapping New Knowledge Ecologies, workshop, Design Institute, Minneapolis, MN-invited by Jan Abrams,
Director, Design Institute, February, 2007, 2007
John Comazzi
2008
ACADIA Conference: Silicon and Skin, Minneapolis, MN, October, 2008
Benjamin Ibarra
Sevilla
2006
CIB Symposium on Integrated Design Solutions (IDS) Workshop II, September 2006
Benjamin Ibarra
Sevilla
2007
Seminar in Modern Heritage in Mexico City. Center for World Heritage Studies. CDes UMN. Fall 2007.
Benjamin Ibarra
Sevilla
2007
ACSA National Conference. Philadelphia 2007
Benjamin Ibarra
Sevilla
2008
"Sacred Sites | Sacred Sights: Past/Present/Future," Symposium, CDes UMN April 2008
Miller,Nancy A
2007
National Trust for Historic Preservation, Annual Conference, 2007
Julia Robinson
2003
AIA Minnesota Conference (3 days) 2003
Julia Robinson
2003
ACSA Conference, (2 days) 2003
Julia Robinson
2003
Environmental Design Research Association (EDRA) (4 days) 2003
Julia Robinson
2003
Educators’ Conference, UMN, (one-day) 2003
Julia Robinson
2004
Environmental Design Research Association (EDRA) 2004
Julia Robinson
2005
5th International Space Syntax Symposium, Delft (3 days) 2005
Julia Robinson
2006
International Association for Person-environment Studies (IAPS) (5-day conference - Alexandria, Egypt
2006
Julia Robinson
2006
Society for Teaching and Learning, London (2 days) 2006
Julia Robinson
2007
AIA Minnesota Annual Conference 2007
3-43
FACULTY ATTENDANCE AT CONFERENCES SUPPORTED BY SCHOOL DEVELOPMENT FUNDS
TYPICALLY TRAVEL , PER DIEM & REGISTRATION
Julia Robinson
2008
International Association for Person-environment Studies (IAPS) (5-day conference)- Rome 2008
Julia Robinson
2008
Society for Teaching and Learning, London (2-day conference) 2008
Julia Robinson
2008
Working through Architecture Lecture Series, Minneapolis Central Library (6 lectures) 2008
Julia Robinson
2003- 04
Teaching & Learning Center- Mid Career Development Seminar 2003-04
Sharon Roe
2005
ACSA Regional Conference in Judson, IL, 2005
Sharon Roe
2006
22nd National Conference on “The Beginning Design Student,” Ames, Iowa, 2006
Sharon Roe
2008
ACADIA Conference 2008
Sharon Roe
2008
International “Fabric-formed Concrete” Conference, University of Manitoba, 2008-
Ozayr Saloojee
2005
North Forks Design Charrette and Panel Discussion on Mixed Use Neighborhoods, November 2005
Ozayr Saloojee
2006
Reading Spiritualities International Conference, Lancaster, England, January 2006
Ozayr Saloojee
2007
The Past in the Present International Conference, Glasgow, Scotland, October 2007
Ozayr Saloojee
2007
ACSA National Conference, Salt Lake City, Utah, March 2007
Ozayr Saloojee
2008
ACSA National Conference, Houston, Texas, March 2008
Marc Swackhamer
2004
ACSA Regional Conference at Judson College, Illinois September 2004
Marc Swackhamer
2005
“Envisioning Information” seminar by Edward Tufte, Minneapolis April 2005
Marc Swackhamer
2006
“Push” Conference – Walker Art Center June 2006
Marc Swackhamer
2007
95th ACSA Annual Meeting, Philadelphia, PA March 2007
Leslia Van Duzer
2003
2003, 2000, 1994, Alvar Aalto Symposia, Finland
Leslia Van Duzer
2007
Spatial Recall: The Place of Memory in Architecture and Landscape Architecture Symposium, University of
California, Berkeley
Leslia Van Duzer
2008
Chinati Foundation Symposium, Marfa
Stephen Weeks
2005
ARCC Annual research conference, Mississippi State U 2005
Stephen Weeks
2007
ARCC Annual International Conference, Philadelphia, PA 2007
Stephen Weeks
2008
IDP Educator’s Conference, New Mexico spring 2008
3-44
FACULTY TRAINING FOR SKILLS DEVELOPMENT
Lee Anderson
2003
Workshop on Virtual Environments/7th International Workshop on Immersive Projection Technology
2003
Julia Robinson
2004
Individual Consulting & 5 Workshops with Teaching and Learning Center 2002-04
Sharon Roe
2007
REVIT training 2007
Sharon Roe
2006
American Steel Institute workshop on new teaching tools for steel systems, 2006
Marc Swackhamer
2005
“Maya” software 4-day instructional seminar at Alias headquarters in Toronto June 2005
Marc Swackhamer
2007
“Smart Geometry” Conference, sponsored by Bentley, Microsoft, and Adobe –NY
3.7.8.3
EVIDENCE OF AND SUPPORT OF ATTENDANCE AT PROFESSIONAL MEETINGS
School faculty attend many professional meetings, usually with a specific role or contribution. Meetings are too
numerous to list, but Table 3-14 in the follow section lists the most substantial engagement opportunities for
faculty, most of which involve attendance at professional meetings. Support for professional meeting is treated
the same as support for academic meetings or skills workshops. Faculty use their development funds first and if
additional funds are needed, the Head helps to find alterative funding sources.
3.7.9
EVIDENCE OF HOW FACULTY MEMBERS REMAIN CURRENT IN THEIR KNOWLEDGE OF THE
CHANGING DEMANDS OF PRACTICE AND LICENSURE
TABLE
3-14 FACULTY ROLES AND CONTRIBUTIONS TO PROFESSIONAL MEETINGS AND ORGANISATIONS
NATIONAL AIA COMMITTEES AND JURIES
FACULTY
DATE
PROFESSIONAL ACTIVITY
Loren E.
Abraham
1991-p
AIA Committee on the Environment (COTE), 1991-present
Renée Cheng
2007
Facilitator, Architectural Education in the 21st Century, ACSA/AIA Cranbrook Teachers
Seminar. Bloomfield Hills, MI., 2007
Renée Cheng
2007
Invited contributor, White Paper on The Future of Architectural Education, AIA Technology
in Architectural Practice Conference., 2007
3-45
Renée Cheng
2007
Invited participant, AIA Research Summit, Seattle, WA., 2007
Renée Cheng
2007
Juror, AIA National BIM TAP awards., 2007
Renée Cheng
2007
Juror, Firm of the Year and Sustainable Firm of the Year. AIA Arizona., 2007
Renée Cheng
2007
Juror, Honor Awards, AIA Ohio., 2007
Renée Cheng
2007
Member, AIA National Board Knowledge Committee. Sub-committees: Research.
Knowledge Community Liason:4 knowledge communities
Renée Cheng
2006
Invited participant and team writer, AIA discussion on BIM, IP and Education, Oak Park,
IL., 2006
Renée Cheng
2004
Presentor & Participant, Case Study Initiative. ACSA/AIA Cranbrook Teachers Seminar.
Bloomfield Hills, MI., 2004
Renée Cheng
2003
Juror, AIA Minnesota, 25 Year Award., 2003
Renée Cheng
2005
Juror, AIA Minnesota, Homes of the Year., 2005
Renée Cheng
2004-07
William F.
Conway
2004
Advisory Board, Architectural Graphic Standards, AIA National. One of a 7 member board.,
2004-2007
Project reviewer AIA Case Study Project program, 2004
2003-04
Advisory Board, American Institute of Architects (AIA) Minnesota Affordable Housing
Committee, 2003-2004.
Ann Forsyth
2008
R/UDAT Team Member, AIA Center for Communities by Design, Staten Island, 2008
Thomas Meyer
2008
Juror, AIA Philadelphia Honor Awards, Philadelphia, PA, 2008
Thomas Meyer
2005
Juror, AIA Minnesota/MplsSt.Paul Magazine RAVE Awards, Minneapolis, MN, 2005
Thomas Meyer
2005
Juror, AIA Northeast Illinois Honor Awards, Naperville, IL, 2005
Thomas Meyer
2006
Juror, AIA Columbus Honor Awards, Columbus, OH, 2006
Thomas Meyer
2006
Juror, AIA Minnesota 25 Year Award, Minneapolis, MN, 2006
Thomas Meyer
2007
Juror, AIA (National) Interior Architecture Honor Awards, Washington, DC, 2007
Leslie Van
Duzer
2004
Peer reviewer for AIA Case Study Program
Jennifer Yoos
2006
Juror and Chair, AIA Columbus Honor Awards, 2006
Mary Guzowski
3-46
Jennifer Yoos
2006
Juror, AIA Kansas City Honor Awards (Missouri), 2006
Jennifer Yoos
2005
Juror, AIA Wisconsin Honor Awards, 2005
Jennifer Yoos
2008
Juror, AIA Philadelphia Design Awards Jury, 2008
Jennifer Yoos
2008
Juror, AIA New England Design Awards, 2008
STATE AIA MN OFFICERS
FACULTY
DATE
William F.
Conway
2003
Board Member, AIA Minneapolis Board of Directors
Thomas Fisher
1996-p.
Board Member, AIA Minnesota Board of Directors
Steve Weeks
2002present
Board Member, AIA Minneapolis Board of Directors
Steve Weeks
2002present
Board Member, AIA St.Paul Board of Directors
Renée Cheng
2006present
Board Member, AIA Minnesota Board of Directors
Renée Cheng
2008
President Elect, AIA Minnesota
Renée Cheng
2009
President, AIA Minnesota
Renée Cheng
2006present
Executive Committee, AIA Minnesota
Thomas Meyer
2007
President, AIA Minnesota
Thomas Meyer
2006
President Elect, AIA Minnesota
Thomas Meyer
2006present
Executive Committee, AIA Minnesota
Loren E.
Abraham
2004-p
AIA Minnesota Chapter, Committee Chairperson present, 2004-present
Doug Pierce
2005-7
Chair, AIA MN Committee on the Environment (COTE)
J. Stephen
Weeks
2008
Chair, AIA MN Disaster Assistance 2008-
3-47
STATE AIA MN DOMMITTEES AND JURIES
FACULTY
DATE
Renée Cheng
2003
Juror, AIA Minnesota, 25 Year Award., 2003
Renée Cheng
2006 and
2007
John Comazzi
2007
AIA-150: AIA Minnesota and Mayor Rybak Five Great City Design Charette, Steering cmte
Julia Robinson
2006
AIA Minneapolis Merit Awards Jury Member 2006
Julia Robinson
2007
MSAIA Jury member for the 5th Annual Midwest Home Awards 2007
Ozayr Saloojee
2006
Jury Member, AIA Minneapolis Honor Awards (2006)
Marc
Swackhamer
2005
invited juror for 2005 AIA Minneapolis Design Awards
Marc
Swackhamer
2006
invited juror for 2006 AIA Minnesota 25 Year Award August 2006
Marc
Swackhamer
2007
invited juror for 2007 AIA Minnesota 25 Year Award August 2007
Jury moderator and Presentor, AIA Minnesota Honor Awards., 2006-2007
3-48
Physical Resources
3.8
PHYSICAL RESOURCES
The accredited degree program must provide the physical resources appropriate for a professional degree program in architecture, including design studio
space for the exclusive use of each student in a studio class; lecture and seminar space to accommodate both didactic and interactive learning; office space
for the exclusive use of each full-time faculty member; and related instructional support space. The facilities must also be in compliance with the Americans
with Disabilities Act (ADA) and applicable building codes.
The APR must include the following information:
• A general description, together with labeled 8-1/2" x 11" plans of the physical plant, including seminar rooms, lecture halls, studios, offices, project review
and exhibition areas, libraries, computer facilities, workshops, and research areas, with accessibility clearly indicated.
• A description of any changes to the physical facilities either under construction or proposed.
• A description of the hardware, software, networks, and other computer resources available to students and faculty.
• Identification of any significant problem that impacts the operation or services, with a recommendation for improvements. The accredited degree program
must provide the physical resources appropriate for a professional degree program in architecture
NOTE: PLANS OF RAPSON HALL INCLUDED AT THE END OF THIS SECTION.
3.8.1
DESIGN STUDIO SPACE
Graduate student design studios are all located in Rapson Hall on the renovated second floor of the former
Architecture Building and the third floor of the addition. The large, open studios are each divided into four or five
smaller studio clusters. Each graduate student is assigned a desk for his/her exclusive use. All of the studio desks
have been replaced with "CDesK: The design, engineering, manufacture, and marketing of a unique furnishing
solution" by Kevin Groenke (W. L. Hall Workshop), The CDesK© CD provides Design and Manufacturing
Specifications for a durable, mobile, versatile and adaptable workstation in educational and professional design
environments. The unique “ladder-back” mounted shelves and accessories design allow the user to configure the
workstation to suit the way they work and encourages interaction with the work environment. Students share side
tables for large-scale work and storage. All studios in Rapson Hall are now technology enhanced and networked to
the CDES computer server. All graduate students are required to purchase their own laptop computers.
3.8.2
LECTURE AND SEMINAR SPACE
The university of provides centrally scheduled classrooms for our instructional use. The classrooms in the Rapson
Building are used by others on campus, sometimes making it necessary for our faculty to use classrooms outside of
the building. This makes it difficult at times because our faculty need to be close to the other facilities in the
building.
3-49
Physical Resources
3.8.3
OFFICE SPACE
Department of Architecture faculty offices are located in two wings of the Ralph Rapson Building and part of
the second floor above the west side of the building. The two wings and second floor area are linked by the
department’s lobby and reception space, a conference room, and supply and service area. Each member of the
regular faculty and our full-time adjuncts have an individual office (140 sq. ft.). All offices are connected by
ethernet to the studios, digital media labs, and the visual resource collection, as well as the internet. Recently
renovations were completed to enclose office spaces in the North side of the building. We were given an
additional four office spaces that house our new faculty.
Within the Department of Architecture, individual offices are assigned to the Senior Administrative Assistant,
the office manager and the Graduate Student Advisor. There is an office receptionist and student workers
that sit in a open area to great visitors and students. There are two conference rooms located off the reception
area. One is large enough for most committee and other small department meetings, the other, mostly used
by Landscape Architecture can be used by smaller groups; a larger CDES conference room on the second
floor of Rapson Hall is used for faculty meetings.
3.8.4
INSTRUCTIONAL SUPPORT SPACE
The university of provides centrally scheduled classrooms for our instructional use. The centrally scheduled
classrooms in the Rapson Building are used by others on campus, sometimes making it necessary for our faculty to
use classrooms outside of the building. This makes it difficult at times because our faculty need to be close to the
other facilities in the building.
W.L. HALL WORKSHOP – 3500 SQ.FT.
http://design.umn.edu/current_students/leo/hall/index.html
General Description: The W. L. Hall Workshop provides equipment, facilities, staff support and user instruction to
eligible College of Design students for the execution and enrichment of their educational experience. The
Workshop provides a full complement of power and hand tools for the manipulation of wood and similar media; a
limited selection of equipment for the working of metals and related materials is also available. Workshop staff
provide user assistance, training and supervision while offering users an extensive knowledge of materials, tools,
processes and safety. Orientations available to all users include an introduction to the facility and staff while
outlining equipment usage and safe shop practices. Extensive online resources provide additional information for
Workshop users. The Workshop is open 75-80 hours per week during academic periods: professional shop staff are
present during all scheduled hours.
3-50
Physical Resources
FACILITIES & EQUIPMENT:
Workshop: 2300 sq.ft. - The Workshop provides a full complement of traditional woodworking and model-building
equipment. Commonly used consumables (adhesives, abrasives, fasteners, etc) are provided.
(2) 10” SawStop tablesaw
(2) 12” miter saw
6” belt/12” disc sander
(17” bandsaw
22” scroll saw
(2) 1” belt/5” disc sander
(2) 14” bandsaw
16” x 42” lathe
6” edge sander
(2) 9” bandsaw
10” x 14” lathe
spindle sander
12” jointer
17” drill press
(10) workbenches
20” planer
square chisel mortiser
13” planer
37” dual drum sander
requisite hand and portable
power tools
Metal Shop: 500 sq.ft.
36” sheet metal shear
horizontal bandsaw
GMAW welder
49” sheet metal brake
dry cut circular saw
GTAW welder
vertical bandsaw
6” belt/12” disc sander
3)workbenches
DigiFabLab: 100 sq. ft. - Although the Workshop provides state-of-the-art digital fabrication equipment, it has fallen
behind some peer institutions in this regard; the College must continue to invest in such equipment and support
personnel.
Universal X-660, 18”x32”, 60 watt laser
ZCorp Z-510 3D printer
Materials Store: 100 sq. ft. – The Workshop sells ~ $15,000 worth of commonly used materials annually to shop
users for their convenience.
MDF
acrylic & PETG sheet
dowels
particle board
chipboard
fasteners
plywood
basswood
adhesives
3-51
Physical Resources
Annex: 500 sq.ft. – the Annex is a dedicated workspace adjacent to the workshop which is accessible to eligible
students 24 hours/day. Students can check out portable and hand-held tools and equipment to utilize in the Annex
outside of the Workshop’s operating hours. The Annex also provides instructors and students a quiet area for
informal gatherings.
(10) workbenches
spray booth
utility sink
matt board/glass cutter
(2) 9” bandsaw
storeroom
(2) 1” belt/5” disc sander
Personnel: During academic periods the Workshop employs 3 professional staff and 4-6 student staff; the Workshop
Director position is 100% for 52 weeks.
The current Director has been in the position since 1994 and is a member of the Furniture Society and the
Minnesota Woodworkers Guild and a founding member of the Society of Architecture Workshop Supervisors
(SAWS) http://groups.yahoo.com/group/archmanagers/. SAWS is an ad-hoc community of architecture and
design shop personnel worldwide which provides a virtual meeting place for shop professionals to discuss technical,
administrative and pedagogical issues faced by all. Numerous SAWS members gather annually concurrent with
the annual conference of the Furniture Society: http://www.furnituresociety.org.
Two professional Workshop Technicians with a combined 12 years on the job are employed 75% for 30 weeks during
academic periods; opportunities for additional hours are periodically available throughout the year. Workshop
Technicians are encouraged to participate in professional organizations and to advance their technical expertise.
Four to six Student Technicians typically work ~40 hrs/wk collectively during academic sessions; most Student
Technicians are undergraduate or graduate students in architecture programs.
In addition to providing direct supervision and assistance to shop users, Workshop personnel provide technical,
design and production services to all units of the College of Design. One such project was the design and
manufacture of 320 new studio workstations: the resulting design, the CDesk, is being licensed for sale by the
University’s Office of Technology Commercialization: http://www.research.umn.edu/techcomm/CDesK.html.
Budget: The Workshop’s personnel and operations are funded entirely by the College of Design through central
allocations and collegiate fees. The college has generally approved budget proposals developed by shop staff
intended to continue the high historical standard of professional staff, equipment, supplies and operating schedule.
Budget reductions mandated by the University’s central administration in recent years have limited capital
investment in digital fabrication and related equipment and have reduced staffing levels and operating hours
outside of academic periods.
3-52
Physical Resources
TABLE
3-15 BUDGET FOR WORKSHOP
08-09
ITEM
07-08
06-07
Professional staff (salary + fringe)
128,000
131,624
114,700
Student staff
14,400
14,400
14,000
Supplies and Maintenance
10,000
6,000
5,225
3d printing consumables and service
9,000
5,000
0
Capital Equipment
4,000
4,000
65,000
Professional Development/Travel
2,000
1,500
775
Administrative fees
1,400
1,420
1,116
Total
$168,800
$163,944
$200,816
3-53
Physical Resources
State of Affairs: With the recent formation of the College of Design, the Workshop is available to nearly twice
the number of students that it was prior to 2006. To date, geographic barriers and curricular issues have
limited the number of students other than those in architecture programs using the shop, but this will likely
change over time. Despite the increased user base, the College has made no significant improvements to the
Workshop’s facilities, personnel or operations budget nor does it have any concrete plans to do so in the
immediate future. The proposed addition of a product design program will place even greater demands on
fabrication resources. Workshop personnel have conducted an extensive peer study and have prepared a
comprehensive proposal outlining the improvements required to maintain parity with or surpass peer
institutions. The College must enact/fund significant aspects of this proposal if the Workshop is to continue to
serve all College of Design students to the standard that it has historically served students in architecture and
landscape architecture programs.
IMAGING LAB
OVERVIEW
Located in Ralph Rapson Hall, the Imaging Lab provides image production facilities to students, faculty and
staff in the College of Design. The facilities include a photographic studio with specialized lighting and
backgrounds, large format artwork scanners, film scanners and a desktop 3d scanner. Additional equipment is
available for checkout to registered students. The lab staff also provides technical support for college sponsored
lectures and events. Tapes of lectures recorded by the lab are available for viewing in the lab. Key lectures are
also compressed and placed on the college web server. Videotape editing and duplicating are also done in the
lab.
FACILITIES & EQUIPMENT
The Imaging Lab studio occupies 1200 sq. ft. and is strategically located on the first floor next to the main
college computer lab. This arrangement allows students to produce images of projects in the studio then move
to the computer lab for post-production work.
A high quality ink jet photography printer is available for output of portfolios and competition entries.
Items for checkout include:
Digital Cameras, Video Cameras, Tripods, Lighting & Stands
LCD Data Projectors, Screens & Laptops
Audio Recorders, Speakers & Audio Mixers
3-54
Physical Resources
STAFFING
The Imaging Lab is staffed by 2 full time professional employees, the lab manager and a principal
photographer. While the role of the principal photographer is to produce images for the college on both
campuses, the lab manager also performs functions as a photographer along with the role of coordinator of
Academic Resources. The lab staff also provides technical assistance to the college for lectures and special
events through preplanning and documentation by video and audio recording.
During the academic year, specially trained student lab attendants help with lab operations. Generally, 4 to 5
students work in the lab 8 to 10 hours per week.
FINANCING
Like many other areas in the college, the Imaging Lab staff and operations are funded through the college by
collegiate fees.
The budget allocation for 2008/09 is: $182,373
3.8.5
COMPLIANCE WITH AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT (ADA) AND APPLICABLE BUILDING DODES.
The Ralph Rapson Building is in compliance with the ADA. We have an elevator in the building and a wheel
chair ramp coming from the courtyard into the building. We have three entrances/exits that are handicap
accessible.
3.8.5.1
PHYSICAL PLANT—DESCRIPTION AND PLANS
8-1/2-inch by 11-inch plans for Ralph Rapson Hall and the Mann (YMCA) Building at the end of this section.
Square footages are listed on the plans.
3.8.5.2
CHANGES TO THE PHYSICAL FACILITIES—PROPOSED OR UNDER CONSTRUCTION
We currently have no plans or changes to our physical facilities. In summer 2008, new faculty offices were
completed in the North wing of the first floor and the School of Architecture was allocated four faculty offices
spaces.
3-55
Physical Resources
3.8.6
COMPUTER RESOURCES
COLLEGE OF DESIGN COMPUTER LABS
The College of Design provides architecture students with state-of-the-art computer lab facilities on both
campuses in Rapson Hall (Minneapolis) and McNeal Hall (St. Paul). The computer labs are managed by a fulltime employee who supervises undergraduate and graduate level student staff (lab attendants); providing
assistance during regular lab hours:
TABLE
3-16 COMPUTER LAB HOURS
DAY ( S )
HOURS
Monday – Thursday
8:00 a.m. – 12:00 a.m.
Friday
8:00 a.m. – 6:00 p.m.
Saturday
10:00 a.m. – 6:00 p.m.
Sunday
12:00 p.m. – 12:00 a.m.
CDes graduate-level students have 24-hour access to the computer lab in Rapson Hall room 127 with their
university ID card.
COMPUTING CAPABILITIES
Rapson Hall, which primarily serves architecture students, has three computer labs: Room 127, a working lab,
and Rooms 33 and 35, teaching labs. Specifics on the computers available in each lab are shown below.
TABLE
3-17 COMPUTER LAB SPECIFICATIONS
ROOM
NUMBER AND TYPE OF COMPUTERS
Rapson 127
19 Dell Precision T3400 PC workstations
Rapson 33
25 Dell Precision 390 PC workstations
Rapson 35
12 Dell Dimension 9150 PC workstations
All of the Rapson Hall computers have 1 Gbps network connections and DVD-RW capabilities as well as USB
connections for external storage. All computers are running Microsoft’s Windows XP Pro. The university
provides ďNetFiles,Ē a browser-accessible storage service (based on technology licensed from Xythos) with 5 GB
3-56
Physical Resources
of capacity for each student. The College of Design provides network storage for specific classes based on faculty
requests which is accessible on each computer. Authentication and authorization for access to lab computers is
done via the university’s central Active Directory service.
APPLICATION SOFTWARE
The computer labs in Rapson Hall have an extensive selection of application software customized for the needs
of architecture students
Adobe Creative Suite 3 Design
Premium
Adobe Premiere Elements 4
ArcGIS 9.2
AutoCAD 2009
Revit 2009
3DS Max Design 2009
ECOTECT 5.6
Kerkythea 2008
Flamingo 2.0
Notepad++
Rhino 4.0
Google SketchUp 6
Fragstats
Windows Movie Maker
FSP Viewer
Microsoft Office 2003
Google Earth 4
HydroCAD 8.5
PRINTING AND PLOTTING
Professional quality laser printing, plotting, and scanning equipment rounds out the Rapson Hall computer lab
facilities and includes the following equipment located in room 127:
•
Two HP DesignJet 5500ps color plotters
•
One HP T610 plotter
•
Two Epson Expression 10000 XL 11x17Ē color flatbed scanners
•
One GraphTec CS1000EV 8-bit continuous feed 36-inch scanner
•
Two Canon C5180 color laser printers
Printing and plotting on this equipment is available for a nominal fee. Scanners are available for use free-ofcharge.
3.8.7
PROBLEMS OR CONCERNS REGARDING PHYSICAL RESOURCES
Frederick Mann Building (1425 University Avenue)—6,584 sq ft
3-57
Physical Resources
The University has upgraded the lighting and mechanical systems and repaired spaces and materials that have
produced mold. However, there are still some complaints about this building. The Mann Building now
provides office space for CDES’s landscape research fellows on the first floor and CDES’s Center for
Sustainable Building Research on the second floor. The University has upgraded the basement, first and
second floors to include improved air conditioning and interior finishes. This building is still considered a part
of the college, providing space for landscape research, the Center for Sustainable Building Research, and
undergraduate architecture studios.
3-58
Information Resources
3.9
INFORMATION RESOURCES
Readily accessible library and visual resource collections are essential for architectural study, teaching, and research. Library collections must include at
least 5,000 different cataloged titles, with an appropriate mix of Library of Congress NA, Dewey 720–29, and other related call numbers to serve the
needs of individual programs. There must be adequate visual resources as well. Access to other architectural collections may supplement, but not
substitute for, adequate resources at the home institution. In addition to developing and managing collections, architectural librarians and visual
resources professionals should provide information services that promote the research skills and critical thinking necessary for professional practice and
lifelong learning.
The architectural librarian and, if appropriate, the professional in charge of visual resources collections, must include in the APR the following:
• A description of the institutional context and administrative structure of the library and visual resources
• An assessment of the library and visual resource collections, services, staff, facilities, and equipment that does the following:
–Evaluates the degree to which information resources support the program’s mission, planning, curriculum, and research specialties
–Assesses the quality, currency, suitability, range, and quantity of resources in all formats, (traditional and electronic)
–Demonstrates sufficient funding to enable continuous collection growth –Identifies any significant problem that affects the operation or services and
recommends improvement
• An assessment of the budget and administration of the library and visual resource operations (see Appendix B)
• A statistics report (see Appendix C).
3.9.1
LIBRARY COLLECTIONS
ARCHITECTURE AND LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE LIBRARY
GENERAL DESCRIPTION
The Architecture and Landscape Architecture Library is one of the branch libraries within the University
Libraries system. With a collection total of 6,867,777 printed volumes and 29,486 electronic and 20,752 print
serial subscriptions, the University Libraries is the 17th largest research library in North America. There are
five major libraries and over twenty smaller units located across the Twin Cities campus, including branches,
archives, special collections, and rare books. The University Libraries is a member of the Research Library
Group.
The Architecture and Landscape Architecture collection, housing 42,724 volumes, is concentrated in the areas
of Architecture, Landscape Architecture, Urban Planning, and Building and Site Technology. The library
supports the graduate and undergraduate curricula for the Architecture and Landscape Architecture
departments in the College of Design, which are the only accredited professional programs in those two subject
areas in the state of Minnesota. The library provides services to faculty, students, and staff from the University of
3-59
Minnesota, professionals in architecture and landscape architecture, and the general public in the Twin Cities
community and in Minnesota.
COLLECTION
The collection consists of 42,724 volumes of books and bound journals, 167 active journal subscriptions, a small
number of DVD and videotapes, and other printed and electronic resources. It primarily supports the needs of
the curriculum and research areas in each department and in the research centers of College of Design. The
collection includes some supplemental resources in the areas of professional practice and regional interests.
Interdisciplinary collections and resources are housed at the Wilson Library on the West Bank of the
Minneapolis campus, and in the Magrath Library on the St. Paul campus. Through the university's Document
Delivery Service, users have access to books from any university location. Books can be borrowed and articles
obtained from other institutions through the Interlibrary Loan service.
The University of Minnesota Libraries currently offers over 300 online databases and indexes. Some of these
indexes include full-text online articles. The users of the Architecture and Landscape Architecture library
primarily research The Avery Index to Architectural Periodicals, Art Full Text, JSTOR, ARTStor, Geobase, and LexisNexis Academic Universe. The Avery Index is most widely used.
University Libraries provides the Architecture and Landscape Architecture Library with an annual acquisition
budget. Selection of materials is done by the librarian, and the librarian is open to receiving recommendations
from faculty and students. The subscriptions to the electronic databases that support architecture and landscape
architecture are mostly covered under the central budget.
During the 2001 academic year, the Director of the Design Institute, working with the librarian and the
Libraries’ administration, established a two-year term supplemental fund to support expansion of the designrelated collection in the Architecture and Landscape Architecture Library. Currently, most of DHA-related
materials are housed in Magrath Library in St. Paul.
During the academic years 1998-2000, nearly 10,000 Dewey Decimal volumes were reclassified into the
Library of Congress system. In addition to this project, the collection of books in quarto and octavo sizes,
excluding folio and flat sizes, was inter-filed in the stacks. These projects brought the entire collection into one
classification system, without size-specific filing in the stacks, providing users with enhanced subject browsing.
3-60
TABLE
3-18 LIBRARY COLLECTION EXPENDITURES
EXPENDITURES
TYPES OF COLLECTIONS
NUMBER OF VOLUMES
BUDGET YEAR
(07/08)
BEFORE LAST
(06/07)
Books
BUDGET
BUDGET
LAST YEAR
THIS YEAR
(07/08)
(08/09)
42,724
$50,852.10
$51,048.81
$57,072.15
Periodical Subscriptions
167
$21,082.62
$24,848.66
$24,759.90
Other Serial Subscriptions
24
Microfilm Reels
244
$71,934.72
$75,897.47
$81,832.05
Microfiche
0
Slides
0
Videos*
54
Drawings
0
Photographs
0
Other (specify)
Total
43,213
SERVICES
The library provides circulation, class reserve, reference service, and library instruction with two full-time staff
and six to eight part-time student assistants. The library is open 65 hours a week including weekends and
evenings. Two full-time staff are available for reference during weekday business hours. Besides person-toperson reference transactions, the library staff answers reference questions from remote locations, via e-mail
or telephone.
The architecture faculty and students actively use the library as an essential part of their research and study.
Working with faculty members each semester, the librarian conducts numerous library instruction sessions
emphasizing electronic resources and specifically aimed at the needs of students. Library instruction and
exercises are designed to integrate course content into the learning of basic and advanced research techniques.
The librarian is in the process of establishing library instruction as a part of the future curriculum. In addition
to structured library instruction, the librarian leads several library orientation sessions for new and transferred
students. Individual assistance in the use of library resources is available from the library staff during the
library’s open hours.
3-61
The circulation activity in the Architecture and Landscape Architecture Library is one of the highest among the
branch libraries in the University Libraries system and is consistently remains high, as detailed below:
TABLE
3-19 LIBRARY USAGE 2005-2008
YEAR
ITEMS CHARGED BY THE UNIT
2005/06
14,884
2006/07
15,954
2007/08
14,596
PERSONNEL
There is two full-time staff––librarian and library assistant––and six to eight part-time student staff in the
library. During the summer months, the library hours are reduced, and the student staff is also reduced to one
full-time assistant. All funding for the library staff, including student staff, comes from the University Libraries
system. The job descriptions for both full-time staff are on file in the librarian’s office and in the University
Libraries' Human Resources office. The librarian has a B.S. degree in Library Science and Art, and a Masters
degree in Art, combined with junior college teaching experience and over twenty five years of architecture
library experience. The librarian is an active member of the Association of Architecture School Librarians
(AASL) and served as the Vice President, then President of the AASL, between 1998 and 2000. The librarian
regularly attends the AASL annual conference, as well as regional symposia and workshops. The library
assistant has a B.A. degree and has eighteen years of library experience. The University of Minnesota Human
Resources Office offers staff training programs, and the University Libraries' Staff Development and Training
Team has ongoing training sessions for library staff.
The student staff’s commitment and contributions to the library’s daily operations have been an asset, and the
adequate funding to support student employment has helped reduce, to some degree, the demands on full-time
staff.
BUDGET AND OPERATION
The administration of the University Libraries system funds all staff salaries, operational expenses, and
resource development for the library, including computer upgrades and technical assistance, supplies, and
activities for staff development. Most funds are adequate to maintain the current level of library activities.
Within the University Libraries administrative structure, the Architecture and Landscape Architecture Library
is a part of the Arts and Humanities department in the Academic Programs Division. Academic Programs
approves operational funding for the Architecture and Landscape Architecture Library.
3-62
TABLE
3-20 LIBRARY STAFF EXPENDITURES
EXPENDITURES
BUDGET YEAR
TYPES OF POSITIONS
BEFORE LAST
(05)
BUDGET
LAST YEAR
(06)
BUDGET
THIS YEAR
(07)
Librarians
$58,277.60
$59,176.00
$61,027.20
Paraprofessionals
$36,158.00
$38,102.00
$36,970.00
0
0
0
$14,000
$14,000
$14,000
0
0
0
$108,435.60
$111,278.00
$111,997.20
Clerks
Student Assistants
Volunteers
Total
The Libraries administration and the College occasionally collaborate in funding new initiatives by the
librarian, such as establishing Faculty/Alumni Art Exhibition Program, purchasing additional furniture
for the reading areas, and creating a new meeting room for both College and Libraries staff and students.
There are some areas in the library that were previously designed and yet to be completed in the future.
The Special Collections and Rare Books area will need to have proper cabinets and display shelves. These
unfinished areas will be completed as the College carries on its future plans.
FACILITIES
The Architecture and Landscape Architecture Library is located on the second level of the Ralph Rapson
Building, designed by Steven Holl. The 6-year old facility has 8,256 square feet and provides more space than
the previous location for the library’s collections, public spaces, offices, and staff work areas. The Rapson
Building and the library has attracted many more visitors and users to the collections, requiring an increased
amount of service.
In the fall of 2002, the library was moved from a floor area of 3,400 square-feet to a new space with 8,256
square-feet. The faculties from both departments have provided strong support for the library and the library
staff, as demonstrated by the attention paid to the new library space, especially in the context of the entire
remodeled and newly constructed building. The library, surrounded by design studios, is conveniently located in
an attractive environment.
3-63
PARTICIPATION OF FACULTY AND STUDENTS:
The librarian works closely with faculty from both departments within the College of Design and maintains
communication with the College administration. The Library Advisory Board, comprised of faculty
representing both departments, was formed in 2001 to promote communication link between the college,
departments, and the library, to work together on short-term and long-term goals, and to give support to the
library’s community building activities and various other needs.
The working relationship between the library and the departments is supportive, and the library’s relationship
to students and general users is positive. Faculty and students value the library’s collection and services, and
the library’s resources are well used as shown in the annual circulation statistics.
3-64
Financial Resources
3.10 FINANCIAL RESOURCES
An accredited degree program must have access to sufficient institutional support and financial resources to meet its needs and be comparable in
scope to those available to meet the needs of other professional programs within the institution.
The APR must provide the following:
• Comparative annual budgets and expenditures for each year since the last accreditation visit, including endowments, scholarships, one-time capital
expenditures, and development activities.
• Data on annual expenditures and total capital investment per student, both undergraduate and graduate correlated to the expenditures and
investments by other professional degree programs in the institution.
3.10.1
COMPARATIVE ANNUAL BUDGETS AND EXPENDITURES
TABLE
3-21 COMPARATIVE REVENUE AND EXPENSES BY UMN PROFESSIONAL SCHOOLS, FY08
FY 08 REVENUE
FY 08 EXPENDITURES
$4,120,295
$4,185,139
$1,513,861
$1,509,698
Design, Housing, & Apparel
$3,208,404
$2,718,371
School of Dentistry
$28,757,889
$28,851,101
Law School
$28,008,693
$27,208,506
Humphrey Inst on Public Affairs
$11,890,221
$11,545,545
College of Pharmacy
$22,218,784
$21,372,956
School of Architecture
Dept of Landscape Architecture
Source: College of Design, Budget & Finance
3-65
Financial Resources
TABLE
3-22 – COMPARATIVE TUITION BY UMN PROFESSIONAL SCHOOLS, FY08
TUITION AND FEES
NON - RESIDENT
RESIDENT
Per credit
705.92
1,090.84
12-17 credits
8,471.00
13,090.00
Each credit over 17
705.92
1,090.84
Per credit
1,004.00
1,594.17
6-15 credits
6,024.00
9,565.00
Each credit over 15
1,044.00
1,594.17
11,114.00
19,799.00
Per credit
416.34
698.34
12-18 credit plateau
4,996.00
8,380.00
Per credit
912.50
1,345.96
Term (12 or more credits)
10,950.00
16,151.50
Per credit
715.67
1,190.17
8,588.00
14,282.00
Per credit
858.92
1,636.34
10,307.00
19,636.50
Humphrey Institute
School of Dentistry
College of Agriculture
Law School
College of Pharmacy
College of Veterinary Med
3-66
Financial Resources
TABLE
3-23 SNAPSHOT OF FY 08 SCHOOL OF ARCHITECTURE BUDGET
SCHOOL OF ARCHITECTURE BUDGET : FISCAL YEAR
2008
REVENUE
Student Fees
12,705.00
Gifts and Bequests (Cass Gilbert yield, match and interest)
181,163.81
Sales and Services of Educational Acts
310,477.17
Base Allocation
4,212,311.10
Grants/Contracts
64,395.78
Total Revenue
4,781,052.86
EXPENSES
SALARIES
/
BENEFITS
Tenure / Tenure Track
2,289,287.18
Term Faculty
904,361.59
Staff
161,376.58
Teaching Assitants
701,650.77
Student Employees
21,043.05
Consulting Services
4,000.00
Travel - Domestic
55,458.40
Travel - Foreign
87,870.86
FACULTY AND STUDENT SUPPORT
Student Assistance
186,736.22
Bus Rental for Field Trips
4,919.29
Computing: Hardware and Software
23,401.58
OPERATING
Supplies and Services
218,082.14
Printing/Duplicating/Binding
13,443.74
Mailing/Postage
1,632.09
Telecommunications
2,021.65
Miscellaneous Exp.
4,597.54
Equipment
16,010.20
PROGRAMS
/
SPECIAL PROJECTS AND NEEDS
Travel: Non-Employee (Faculty Searches/Reviewers)
33,925.57
Publication/Design/Print
14,937.57
OTHER COLLEGE / UNIVERSITY FEES OR TRANSFERS
Bad Debt Expense
401.76
TIP Interest Charge
789.88
Administrative Fees (University fee on Salaries)
35,105.20
Total Expenses
4,781,052.86
3-67
Financial Resources
3.10.2
ANNUAL EXPENDITURES AND TOTAL CAPITAL INVESTMENT PER STUDENT
TABLE
3-24 COMPARATIVE REVENUE , EXPENSES AND O & M BY UNITS IN THE COLLEGE OF DESIGN
3-68
Administrative Structure
3.11
ADMINISTRATIVE STRUCTURE
The accredited degree program must be, or be part of, an institution accredited by one of the following regional institutional accrediting agencies for
higher education: the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools (SACS); the Middle States Association of Colleges and Schools (MSACS); the
New England Association of Schools and Colleges (NEASC); the North Central Association of Colleges and Schools (NCACS); the Northwest
Commission on Colleges and Universities (NWCCU); and the Western Association of Schools and Colleges (WASC). The accredited degree program
must have a measure of autonomy that is both comparable to that afforded other professional degree programs in the institution and sufficient to
ensure conformance with the conditions for accreditation.
• A statement verifying the institution’s accreditation from the regional institutional accrediting agency for higher education
• A description of the school’s administrative structure and a comparison of this structure with those of the other professional programs in the
institution
• A list of other degree programs, if any, offered in the same administrative unit as the accredited architecture degree program.
3.11.1
VERIFICATION OF ACCREDITATION
3-69
3.11.3
ADMINISTRATIVE STRUCTURE OF THE SCHOOL
The administrative structure of the School is described in the org chart on the following page. The Head is an
appointed position based on a search. 2004 search was internal, 1999 search was national. The Director of
Graduate Studies (DGS) is voted by the graduate faculty and has a role defined by the graduate school. While
the School has greatly benefited by having the consistency of the same DGS for the past 6 years, the faculty have
agreed that the role is more appropriately rotated in two year terms among the tenured faculty. The role of the
Director of Undergraduate Studies (DUS) will also rotate among the faculty, ideally this is from among the
regular faculty ranks, but faculty felt it was possible for this role to be effectively filled by a full time adjunct
familiar with our programs. The Director of Design role was created in 2003 and became absorbed into the role
of the Head. Recently, it has been revived to oversee connections between studios. The structure of Head, DGS
and DUS is similar to many across the University and identical to Landscape Architecture in the College. These
roles and that of staff are described in Section 3.6.
Staff structure is shown in its current configuration, a new position is being created and will restructure the
staff by adding a department administrator reporting to the Head. Faculty and student governance structure
shown is an evolution of our previous curriculum and student governance structure.
3-70
FIGURE
3-1 ORGANIZATIONAL CHART OF THE SCHOOL OF ARCHITECTURE
Organization Chart
Updated October 2008
CDes Dean
T. Fisher
Assoc. Dean
Academic
Affairs
K. Solomonson
Head
R. Cheng
Graduate
Advisory
Group
All Grad Students
Recruiting/
Admissions/
Advising
T. Rafferty, Dir.
Director of
Grad Studies
S. Weeks
Director of
Design
G. Dittmar
Director of
Ugrad Studies
N. Miller
Graduate
Curriculum
Committee
Undergraduate
Curriculum
Committee
Faculty
Advisory
Hist./Theory/
Culture
Faculty
Advisory
Sustainable
Building Tech
Faculty
Advisory
Suburban/
Urban/Rural
3.11.4
OTHER DEGREE PROGRAMS IN THE SAME ADMINISTRATIVE UNIT
Master of Science in Architecture – Sustainable Design Track
Master of Science in Architecture – Heritage Preservation Concentration
3-71
Governing
Faculty
A rchitecture Faculty
Adm. Dir.
C. Severson
DUGS/DGS
Support
P. Doble
Office
Supervisor
C. Schroeder
Office Support
D. Ingraham
Student
Workers
3-72
Professional Degrees and Curriculum
3.12
PROFESSIONAL DEGREES AND CURRICULUM
The number of credit hours for a Master of Architecture (M. Arch.) degree is specified below:
Master of Architecture: Accredited degree programs awarding the M. Arch. degree must require a minimum of 168 semester credit hours, or the
quarter-hour equivalent, of which 30 semester credit hours, or the quarter-hour equivalent, must be at the graduate level, in academic coursework in
professional studies and electives.
Curricular requirements are defined as follows:
General Studies: A professional degree program must include general studies in the arts, humanities, and sciences, either as an admission
requirement or as part of the curriculum. It must ensure that students have the prerequisite general studies to undertake professional studies. The
curriculum leading to the architecture degree must include at least 45 credit hours, or the quarter-hour equivalent, that must be outside architectural
studies either as general studies or as electives with other than architectural content. For the M. Arch. and D. Arch., this calculation may include
coursework taken at the undergraduate level.
Professional Studies: The core of a professional degree program consists of the required courses that satisfy the NAAB Student Performance Criteria.
The accredited degree program has the liberty to require additional courses including electives to address its mission or institutional context.
Electives: A professional degree program must allow students to pursue their special interests. The curriculum must be flexible enough to allow
students to complete minors or develop areas of concentration, inside or outside the program.
• Title(s) of the degree(s) offered.
• An outline, for each accredited degree program offered, of the curriculum showing the distribution of general studies, required professional courses
(including prerequisites), required courses, professional electives, and other electives .
• Examples, for each accredited degree offered, of the minors or concentrations students may elect to pursue.
• A list of the minimum number of semester credit hours or the equivalent number of quarter credit hours required for each semester or quarter,
respectively.
• A list identifying the courses and their credit hours required for professional content and the courses and their credit hours required for general
education for each accredited degree program offered.
• A list of off-campus programs, description of facilities and resources, course requirements, and length of stay.
3.12.1
COMPLIANCE WITH NAAB DISTRIBUTION OF CREDIT HOUR REQUIREMENTS FOR M ARCH DEGREE
PROGRAM
As a 90 credit M.Arch program, the School uses undergraduate generalist credits to fulfill the NAAB 45 credit
general studies requirement. Admission requirements state no more than 26 credits in architecture for an
entering B.S. student. This leaves ample time for general studies.
3-73
3.12.2
CONCENTRATIONS STUDENTS MAY ELECT TO PURSUE IN THE UMN M ARCH PROGRAM
With the recent curricular change, it is anticipated that students can choose to either specialize or remain
generalists. Among the choices of specialization are the MS degree are the most clearly defined paths.
3.12.3
REQUIRED GENERAL AND PROFESSIONAL STUDIES COURSES AND CREDIT HOURS
FIGURE
3-2 – PROGRAM PLAN
3-74
3.12.4
OFF-CAMPUS PROGRAMS
Off-campus program vary in duration. “M-term” is May term, lasting 3 weeks. “J-term” is January term lasting 3
weeks. University prefers to keep to official start dates for these intermediate terms, but end date can be flexible.
New in 2009 will be a graduate student only study abroad option for Arch5110; Architecture as Catalyst. Most Mterm are open to undergraduate and graduate, * indicates graduate only.
TABLE
3-25 – OFF CAMPUS PROGRAMS
#
FREQUENCY
YEARS
OF OFFERING
OFFERED
7-12*
semi-annual, as
possible
Since 2002
residence
3*
annual
Since 2005
Arthur Chen
mixed
12-15*
annual
Since 2002
15
Gulf Coast Studio
residence
3*
annual
Since 2006
Spring
break
0
Tom Westbrook/
John Dwyer
residence
12-15
annual
Since 2006
India
J-term
3
Srivastiva, Singh,
Christenson
travel
8
as possible
2004
Baku,
Azerbaijan
M-term
3
Arthur Chen,
Bruno Franck, Bob
Mack
residence
7-10
as possible
2006
Istanbul, Turkey
M-term
3
Ozayr Saloojee
travel
10-15*
as possible
2007, 2008
Orkney,
Scotland
M-term
3
Bob Mack
residence
9-12
as possible
2005, 2008
Athens, Greece
M-term
3
Rachel Iannacone
travel
10-12
as possible
2007
Malawi, Africa
M-term
3
Leslie VanDuzer
residence
5
pilot
2007
Biloxi
M-term
3
Tom Westbrook
residence
12-15
as possible
2007
Oaxaca, Mexico
semester
15
Lance LaVine
residence
3*
as possible
2008
New Orleans
4 day
1
Julia Robinson
residence
6-12*
as possible
2009
Oaxaca, Mexico
4 day
1
Lance LaVine
residence
6-12*
as possible
2009
Tokyo, Japan
M-term
3
Blaine Brownell
mixed
10-12*
as possible
2009
Cyprus/
Athens
M-term
3
Rachel Iannacone,
Nikos Bakritis
mixed
10-12
as possible
2009
Malawi, Africa
M-term
3
Leslie VanDuzer
residence
10-12
as possible
2009
Yemen
M-term
3
Arthur Chen
mixed
10-12
as possible
2009
DESTINATION
RESIDENCE
AVER
OR TRAVEL
STUDENTS
DURATION
CREDITS
FACULTY LEADER
Netherlands
semester
or M-term
15
Julia Robinson
residence
Chur,
Switzerland
semester
15
Gunnar Hartman
Port cities
semester
15
Biloxi
semester
Biloxi/New
Orleans
3-75
OF
3-76
Student Performance Criteria
3.13
STUDENT PERFORMANCE CRITERIA
The accredited degree program must ensure that each graduate possesses the knowledge and skills defined by the criteria set out below. The knowledge
and skills are the minimum for meeting the demands of an internship leading to registration for practice.
The school must provide evidence that its graduates have satisfied each criterion through required coursework. If credits are granted for courses taken at
other institutions, evidence must be provided that the courses are comparable to those offered in the accredited degree program.
The criteria encompass two levels of accomplishment:
• Understanding—means the assimilation and comprehension of information without necessarily being able to see its full implication.
• Ability—means the skill in using specific information to accomplish a task, in correctly selecting the appropriate information, and in applying it to
the solution of a specific problem.
The NAAB establishes performance criteria to help accredited degree programs prepare students for the profession while encouraging educational
practices suited to the individual degree program. In addition to assessing whether student performance meets the professional criteria, the visiting
team will assess performance in relation to the school’s stated curricular goals and content. While the NAAB stipulates the student performance
criteria that must be met, it specifies neither the educational format nor the form of student work that may serve as evidence of having met these
criteria. Programs are encouraged to develop unique learning and teaching strategies, methods, and materials to satisfy these criteria. The NAAB will
consider innovative methods for satisfying the criteria, provided the school has a formal evaluation process for assessing student achievement of these
criteria and documents the results.
• An overview of the school’s curricular goals and content.
• A matrix cross-referencing each required course with the performance criteria it fulfills. For each criterion, the school must highlight the cell on the
matrix that points to the greatest evidence of achievement.
For the purpose of accreditation, graduating students must demonstrate understanding or ability in the following areas [Sections 3.13.1 through
3.13.34].
For an overview of school’s curricular goals and content, refer to appendix A (New Curriculum). The appendix
booklet illustrates courses and student work according to the themes: Build on Tradition, Embrace Challenge
and Expect Change. Grouping courses under these headings was a helpful way to understand the courses, but
other ways that the courses have been arrayed for analysis include NAAB Student Performance criteria more
explicitly.
Over the course of the last two years, a matrix such as the one on the next page was used to develop and test the
curriculum. Studying the match between NAAB minimum criteria and the School’s aspirations for individual
and groups of courses was a valuable exercise. It became clear that the matrix was more powerful tool if criteria
were not sorted in numerical order but rather groups according to priorities in each course. To further
increase the usefulness of the matrix in curricular testing, courses were designated as “Primary Course” for
3-77
Student Performance Criteria
particular criteria and indicated with a yellow line. Those courses that fall on the yellow line form a
streamlined demonstration of how the curriculum meets minimum NAAB Student Performance Criteria.
Courses not on the yellow line make enormous contributions to the curriculum and should not be discounted.
However, the yellow line might serve as the Visiting Team’s “road map” during the visit. The following page is
a foldout with both criteria arranged in two ways: numerically and grouped by primary course. Only required
courses are shown on matrices. A matrix of elective courses is under development and will be completed long
before the spring team visit.
3-78
4.0 SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION
Student Progress Evaluation Procedures
4.1 STUDENT PROGRESS EVALUATION PROCEDURES
Supplemental information to the APR must include the following:
• A description of the procedures for evaluating student transfer credits and advanced placement.
• A description of the procedures for evaluating student progress, including the institutional and program policies and standards for evaluation,
advancement, graduation, and remediation.
4.1.1 TRANSFER AND ADVANCED PLACEMENT
Transfer credits are discussed in advising session with the student and the DGS and/or Graduate Student
Advisor. Syllabi from previous course work must demonstrate significant overlap with required courses in our
program. Pre-professional courses with some overlap may be counted towards Architecture elective courses,
freeing time for non-architecture electives or lowering the number of credits required for graduation.
From the FAQ on admissions website:
http://arch.design.umn.edu/graduate_admissions_faq.html
What is advanced placement and do I qualify?
Although our standard program is 3 years in length, each fall we accept a few students with
advanced standing into the second year of the program. To apply for advanced standing,
applicants must possess a pre-professional B.S. degree with a major in Architecture and must
have completed at least one course in structures, environmental science and building systems,
with at least four semesters of architecture design studios.
Please note that applicants with a professional, 5-year B. Arch. degree are automatically
considered for advanced standing.
4.1.2 STUDENT PROGRESS, ACADEMIC POLICIES
The following is an excerpt from page 9-11, graduate student handbook
http://arch.design.umn.edu/documents/a-ARCHGradStudHNDBKver2007-08.pdf
ACADEMIC POLICIES FOR THE MASTER OF ARCHITECTURE/ MASTER OF SCIENCE DEGREES
The School of Architecture expects all students to succeed. The policies listed below are put in
place to safeguard the integrity of the program for the students and faculty consistent with the
desires of the School of Architecture and the Graduate School.
GRADING POLICIES
The School of Architecture uses the two grading systems of the Graduate School: A-B-C-D-F (with
pluses and minuses) and S-N. All A-F registrations in the Graduate School, regardless of course
4-1
level, will be calculated in the cumulative GPA. Changes in grading option are not allowed after
the second week of the term. 5xxx and 8xxx courses with grades of A, B, C and S may be applied to a
Graduate School degree program. The Director of Graduate Studies may allow 4xxx, 6xxx, and 7xxx
courses as graduate credit only if they are taught by members of the Graduate faculty and have
prior written approval.
All required courses listed on the Master of Architecture and the Master of Science degree
program form must be taken A-F, except as noted. Students may petition to deviate from this
policy.
School of Architecture guidelines/conditions for awarding/completing an "I"
The symbol "I" may be assigned by an instructor to indicate "incomplete" in accordance with
University guidelines and the provisions announced in class (syllabus) at the beginning of the
semester. In general, an "I" is issued ONLY when at least 80% of the coursework is complete,
there are compelling personal, health or other emergency conditions, and there is an expectation
that the student will successfully complete the course work in a reasonable amount of time. An
instructor will issue an "I" with a thoroughly worked out contract stating the goals and deadline
to meet those goals. Both parties must then sign this contract with copies to the Director of the
Graduate Studies, the instructor of record and the student.
The School of Architecture strongly discourages students from having incompletes on their
transcripts. A maximum of two “I”s are allowed on a transcript. Incompletes should be removed
from the transcript prior to the commencement of the next semester. An incomplete in a course
does not constitute satisfaction of a pre-requisite requirement or to continue to the next course in
a sequence.
The Graduate School issues bi-annual reports to the DGS regarding students who have
incompletes on their record. Students who do not respond to the DGS or who resist completing
course work risk having a "registration hold" placed on their records. The presence of
incompletes will affect offers of financial aid, including TA and RA positions. Reasonable
exceptions to this policy may only be approved by the Director of the Graduate Studies in
consultation with the student, adviser and the instructor.
GRADE CHANGES
Reasons for a grade change
Grade disputes involving an instructor's judgment in assigning a grade based on academic
performance may be resolved informally between the instructor and the student. A student may
ask an instructor to review the original grade submission. Grounds for a grade change might
include an error in calculation, a dispute over a final exam or paper grade that changed the
expected grade. Acceptable reasons include but are not limited to errors and omissions on the
part of the instructor or re-evaluation of the work; unacceptable reasons are submission of late
work or additional work submission.
Procedure for a grade change
The instructor of record submits all grades electronically. If an instructor has reason to believe
the grade of record was incorrect, they will submit a supplemental electronic grade change and
select a reason for the change. The DGS must electronically approve the grade change for it to
become official. When the instructor of record is off duty, the DGS may approve the request
directly. This is done in order to preserve the integrity of the graduate transcript as an accurate
record of a student's academic progress.
4-2
RETAKING COURSES
The Graduate School discourages the retaking of courses to improve grades. If a course is
retaken, appropriate tuition and fees will be assessed. All registrations and grades for the
repeated course remain on the student's transcript and are calculated into the cumulative GPA.
The additional credits incurred may not be used to satisfy any degree program credit
requirement. Professional degree students (M.ARCH) not meeting the GPA requirements for
the required Design Studios will be asked to retake a specific required design studio.
COURSES TAKEN FOR GRADUATE CREDIT OUTSIDE THE UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA
The School of Architecture has specific limitations on transfer credits. For the M.ARCH
professional degree, undergraduate courses taken at NAAB accredited programs, are evaluated
for the equivalent Minnesota appropriate course. Any Minnesota course that is exempted from
the candidate’s Graduate Degree Program form at the time of admission reduces the total credits
to complete the Master’s degree.
These courses entered on the Degree Program form must be on an official transcript from an
accredited NAAB architecture program.
Policies defining Satisfactory Progress toward the Degree
The student’s Adviser will review student transcripts at least once per year to ensure satisfactory
progress toward the professional Masters of Architecture or the Master’s of Science. The DGS will
request a meeting with students who appear to be unable to graduate in a timely manner.
SATISFACTORY GRADE POINT AVERAGE
A graduate student must maintain a Grade Point Average of 2.80 or better to be in good standing.
Grade Point Averages that fall below 2.80, either as a cumulative or semester GPA, will trigger a
progress review between the student and the adviser and the Director of Graduate Studies.
SATISFACTORY DESIGN STUDIO PROGRESS IN THE M.ARCH DEGREE
In addition to fulfilling the Graduate School requirements, students must meet the following
program-specific criteria for satisfactory progress toward their degree. The award of grades in the
required Architectural Design Studio sequence follows a different set of guidelines. The Design
Studio is the core of the professionally accredited M. ARCH degree and as such is held to higher
performance standards.
M.ARCH Students must achieve a grade of “B-” (2.67) or better in a Design Studio in order to
move to the next studio in the sequence without special approval of the Director of Graduate
Studies. After the first semester of design, cumulative Grade Point Averages for the required
Design Studios that fall below 2.67 will trigger a progress review. Any semester grade below a “B” in any core Design Studio after the first Design Studio, ARCH 8251, will automatically initiate a
probationary status and review as described below. Two studios below “B-” constitute grounds for
dismissal (termination of graduate status). In a case where a student is not meeting academic
standards, the DGS has the discretion to ask the Academic Standards Committee to review the
case and make a recommendation for action or dismissal.
PROBATION, HOLDS AND TERMINATION OF GRADUATE STUDENT STATUS
Progress Review for Unsatisfactory Grade Performance or Progress in the Program
The Progress Review is a meeting between the student and the Director of Graduate Studies and
may result in a probationary status being placed on the student’s file. The conditions of this
probationary status will include specific goals for the removal of that status. The student's
4-3
graduate adviser, the DGS and the Graduate Program Manager participate in the review with the
student. A Design Review committee will be assigned to conduct the review when necessary for
personnel absences, changes in progress, or other unforeseen circumstances. The DGS may ask
for a separate review or initiate a sequence of post-semester reviews when there is evidence that
the student is having difficulty meeting the satisfactory progress criteria.
Holds
Holds are a measure of last resort. A hold may be imposed for unpaid tuition or fees (e.g., library
fines) or for disciplinary or scholastic reasons. For example, a hold can be placed on a student's
record due to low GPA (below 2.8), excessive incompletes or failure to file required Graduate
School forms in a timely manner. A hold is placed on a record at the discretion of the DGS and is
removed by the DGS once the situation is resolved. If you have a hold on your record, you may not
register for classes or thesis credits or obtain official transcripts.
Termination of Graduate Student Status
When performance is unsatisfactory in terms of grades or normal progress toward the degree
objective and the student has failed to complete the goals to remove the probationary status, an
Academic Standards Committee will consider a termination of status in the School of
Architecture and the Graduate School. The ASC will include one or more members of the
architecture faculty, the Director of Graduate Studies, and the Chair of the student’s Master’s
Committee, if appropriate.
The Dean of the Graduate School may terminate the student’s graduate status because of the
student’s failure to maintain the minimum standards of achievement or progress as stipulated in
print by the Graduate School and the Architecture faculty. The degree program is obligated to
publish its standards and criteria either in the form of a Handbook for students or on its website
(or both). The Dean shall act after reviewing the student’s academic record and the
recommendation of the graduate adviser and the faculty of the graduate program, or of any
committee charged by that faculty with the evaluation of student progress.
The following is an excerpt pp 11-12 Graduate Student Handbook: Annual Graduate Student Progress Report–
see Appendix J.
ANNUAL GRADUATE STUDENT PROGRESS REPORT
The Annual Progress Report
Each architecture graduate student (MS in Architecture or M.ARCH) will fill out the School's
Annual Progress Report (see Appendix A) prior to the annual adviser-student meeting. The
adviser will confirm the progress, comment as appropriate on the student's experience in the
program and then forward the outcome to the Director of Graduate Studies. The DGS will meet
with the student if necessary, make recommendations for actions and add the report to the
student's record held by the Graduate Program Manager. A copy of this annual report is given to
the student.
Annual Progress Report Information
The information that serves as the basis for the report includes, but is not restricted to the
following:
•
Cumulative GPA (must be 2.8 or greater to graduate)
•
Recommendations for and Record of Awards, Scholarships, and Assistantships
•
Evaluations of TA or RA performance by students or faculty
4-4
•
Other academic, professional or service efforts, recognition in studio or classes.
•
Filing of Milestones: paperwork (e.g., degree program form)
•
The following apply to the M.ARCH professional graduate student:
•
Cumulative Design Studio GPA (must be 2.67 or greater to graduate)
•
Individual Design Studio Grades (@ B- or better to continue without permission)
•
Satisfactory evaluation the Comprehensive Project.
•
Faculty Studio Reports: At the end of each semester, the studio instructor will submit a
report evaluating the student’s development, design knowledge, communication skill.
EVALUATION DECISIONS AND CONDITIONS
The DGS is responsible for communicating in writing the review outcome to the student with
copies to the student Adviser and the Graduate Program Manager. The student should receive
their written evaluation no more than two weeks following the progress review.
Students who do not meet either the general Graduate School degree requirements and/or the
School's established goals/expectations of the Master's program, will be provided with clear,
written instructions on the conditions that must be met to remain in good standing as a graduate
student in the program. These conditions may include ways to meet a minimum GPA,
eliminating incomplete grades, a timeframe for meeting those conditions, and the outcomes if
the requirements/conditions are not met.
RECORD-KEEPING
The Annual Progress Reports will be collected in spring semester, around early April for
Graduate students enrolled in ARCH 8251 and 8253, including those enrolled in any Study Abroad
program. The Graduate Program Manager will maintain the Graduate student's annual
evaluations, with a copy placed in each student's file. Any post-graduation correspondence will be
included in the file; this may assist with future professional applications (IDP, AIA issues,
NCARB inquiries, state registration examining board.
4-5
4-6
Studio Culture Policy
4.2 STUDIO CULTURE POLICY
Supplemental information to the APR must include the school’s current studio culture policy.
Following is an excerpt from the faculty handbook given to all faculty and discussed in a meeting with Head on
the faculty person’s first semester teaching or returning semester if coming back to teaching after time away.
Sections below are relevant to studio culture, workload and studio ethics, full document is in Appendix B:
ACADEMIC POLICIES FOR DESIGN AND DRAWING STUDIOS – EXCERPTED FROM FACULTY HANDBOOK
Written by R. Cheng, director of design 10/31/02, adopted by studio faculty in 2002-3, modified by Ad-hoc
Academic Policies committee (chaired by S.Roe) 2004-5, updated 2008-9.
INTRODUCTION
Studio education is a unique model that offers great opportunity for teaching and learning but
also great responsibility on the part of both student and teacher. This handbook will outline
certain suggested studio procedures that should be adapted for each individual instructor and
some policies that have been adopted by the full faculty of the School of Architecture and
University of Minnesota and must be followed by all those teaching in studio. It was primarily
written for the design studio faculty, but much of the material is relevant for the drawing studio
and other studio-based teaching.
The University provides excellent materials on-line regarding code of conduct, grading standards
and syllabi guidelines noted in the general academic policies section of the Architecture Faculty
Handbook. This section of the handbook is intended as a supplement to those resources and you
should familiarize yourself with them.
Some of the contents of this handbook may seem common sense, or others overly dictated. Keep
in mind this handbook was written to try to maintain the integrity of the studio education, to
provide a basis for professional behavior in the studios and to provide clear and defensible
standards for studio teaching.
FACULTY WORKLOAD EXPECTATIONS
It is expected that all faculty will spend time outside of class contact hours. It is required that all
faculty coordinate with others teaching in their year level and with the studio coordinators. Time
for this and other activities should be budgeted when judging the time required to teach. Only
very rarely can class time be used for any of these activities:
•
preparation time
•
grading
•
advising
•
studio coordination meetings
Office hours: faculty are required to be available one hour per week outside of class times, this can
be fixed or by appointment and must be published in the syllabus.
4-7
STUDENT EXPECTATIONS
Student Attendance
Faculty may not schedule any required class activity outside of regular class hours. This means that
a student cannot be penalized for missing an event outside of studio hours. Events outside of class
hours can be arranged with your group but attendance cannot be graded and there must be some
way for a student who cannot attend to make up for required work resulting from this outside
event. Studio instructors can collaborate or trade with non-studio instructors to combine required
class time into one larger time block.
Exceptions to this are made for site visits or field trips that have been advertised as part of the
studio before the students elect to enroll in the studio.
Students are not allowed to have a regularly scheduled event during studio hours. Students may
not have other classes, physical therapy sessions, paid work time, work-study time in the building
during studio hours.
Student Workload
University mandates for grad and undergrad students respectively:
“It is expected that the academic work required of graduate and professional students will exceed
three hours per credit per week (over a full semester) necessary for an average student to achieve
an average grade in the course. Studio courses are six credits, therefore eighteen hours of
learning effort per week are expected for an average student taking this course to achieve an
average grade.
For undergraduate courses, one credit is defined as equivalent to an average of three hours of
learning effort per week (over a full semester) necessary for an average student to achieve an
average grade in the course. Design studio is a six credit studio, therefore eighteen hours of
learning effort per week are expected for an average student taking this course to achieve an
average grade.”
The above describes TOTAL time spent on studio including the 12 contact hours per week for the
typical design studio.
The "average student to achieve the average grade" is obviously not the ideal situation. Referring
to the grading standards we clearly hope that most of our students put in above average effort to
achieve a higher level of work.
As we all know, studio education is a unique and highly charged experience, unlike any other
model on campus. The expectation over the years has been that studio is all-consuming and
hours cannot be counted.
We are fully in support of creating an intense experience where the students are completely
committed to their work. However there are two recent reports to consider:
1) Tom Fisher reports from the AIA that the single most common complaint that practitioners
have of our graduates is that they have no time management skills (the second most common
is that they cannot keep their workspaces orderly!)
2)
The AIAS national group of students has published a widely circulated report on the state of
the design studio. In the report, there is a call to allow students to have a life outside of studio
to enrich their education as architects. The balance that they seek is not just for social time,
it is also for other classes that a significant part of their education.
With these two factors in mind, we should support the spirit behind the workload guidelines
mandated by the University and not try to create a special exception for studio. I think that we can
4-8
operate within the University rules AND maintain the studio standards and culture that we all
value so highly.
We need to use studio time effectively and to encourage the students to find ways to quickly drop
into that "zone" of concentration in their outside time. Much of the time spent at studio is social
and cannot really be considered "hours of learning effort". We would do our students a great
service if we can teach them to achieve productive hours at times other than 2am!
Deadlines
Students’ final work must be collected no later than the night before the review. This ensures a
more sane and productive review for all involved. Collection times may vary, but whatever the
time is, it should be enforced by the instructor going to studio, reviewing all work that is
completed by that time and encouraging all students to leave the building. In some cases, the
instructor may feel justified in allowing a student to complete a finite part of the whole project
but it should be clear that all students will be graded only on what is completed at the deadline
time. In reality, it is difficult to separate specific work that is completed after the deadline but a
late penalty can be factored into the overall grade. An alternative to the collection by instructor is
an honor agreement, but it is recommended that it be a signed agreement and required that it is
part of the studio syllabus and discussed with all students.
All deadlines - intermediate and final - must be coordinated with your studio coordinator. Studio
coordinators will be responsible for staggering deadlines between studios to relieve pressure on
the lab and shop as well as coordinating with instructors in non-studio courses with the same
students. You may be asked to move deadlines to help with the overall coordination of students’
workload or facilities capacity.
STUDIO CULTURE
Studio Ethic
It is essential that the instructor establish a strong studio ethic at the beginning of the semester.
This includes responsible attitudes towards:
•
Maintaining a physical studio environment workable for all (clean, free from unwanted
noise, sharing space/light/data and power access equitably)
•
Maintaining a professional environment workable for all (respectful, inclusive, nondiscriminatory). This means: no cell phones on during class hours for instructors or students,
clean studios that the janitors can access and reasonably clean
Time Management
It is highly suggested that a studio meeting is held at least once per week or daily as needed. In
this meeting, the overall goals for the week or day are laid out, the schedule for mini-deadlines,
expectation for each mini-deadline and clarification of any changes to the issued problem
statement.
One of the most common complaints from the AIA is that our graduates have poor time
management skills. Studio instructors can help with this by structuring exercises with clear and
realistic time line, estimated interim goals and in-studio exercises that help the students make
“leaps” in process.
It is imperative that every studio hour is potentially productive. There are always reflective and
social times in studio, however, instructors should have a clear lesson plan for each day and week.
It is highly suggested that instructors incorporate a well-balanced and well-timed mix of the
following:
4-9
• in-class exercises,
• studio lectures by you or drawing from the resources of the School and larger community,
• exercises/discussion structured around lectures or readings
• group critiques of various sizes and groupings
• individual desk crits
• pin-up reviews
• formal reviews
• team exercises
• individual exercises
• shop-based exercises
• lab-based exercises
• library-based exercises
• field trips
Student Process
At all stages of the curriculum, students need help developing a process of working that can be
sustained after leaving your studio. It is highly suggested that you find ways to incorporate the
following into your exercises:
•
Design process is not linear and not rational, leaps of scale, change of media, shift of focus are
necessary
•
Design is unending, but closure can be reached at various points in the process
•
Analysis and editing are equally important and far more difficult to teach than ideation and
creation
•
As Anni Albers says, we seek to establish “boundaries for the task of free imagination”
4-10
Course Descriptions
4.3 COURSE DESCRIPTIONS
Supplemental information to the APR must include for each required and elective course in the accredited degree program a one-page description with
an overview, learning objectives, course requirements, prerequisites, date(s) offered, and faculty member teaching it.
REQUIRED COURSES FOR THE PROFESSIONAL DEGREE: MASTER OF ARCHITECTURE
All courses from this list are required:
ARCH 5110: Architecture as Catalyst
ARCH 8251: Graduate Architectural Design One
ARCH 8253: Graduate Architectural Design Two
ARCH 8255: Graduate Architectural Design Three
ARCH 5411: Principles of Design Theory
ARCH 54xx: Elective Approved History
ARCH 5515: Technology I: Building Materials & Construction Systems
ARCH 5516: Technology II: Luminous & Thermal Design
ARCH 5517: Technology III: Structural Systems
ARCH 8254: Technical Applications in Design
ARCH 5621: Professional Practice in Architecture
ARCH 8777: Master’s Thesis
One elective* is required from this list:
*ARCH 5421: Architectural Interpretation Cave & Light
*ARCH 5423: Gothic Architecture
*ARCH 5424: Renaissance Architecture
*ARCH 5425: Baroque Architecture
*ARCH 5431: 18C Arch & Enlightenment
*ARCH 5432: Modern Architecture
*ARCH 5434: Contemporary Architecture
*ARCH 5445: Suburbia
*ARCH 5446: Arch Since WWII Post-War Experimentation; Aesthetics & Politics
*ARCH 5461: North American Indian Architecture
REQUIRED COURSES FOR ACCELERATED OR 3+ TRACK
ARCH 5101: Architectural Design Studies
ARCH 5291 Accelerated UG Arch Studio
Course Descriptions
This page intentionally left blank
Course Descriptions
ELECTIVE COURSES (note additional electives will be in next draft of report)
Representation
ARCH 5301: Conceptual Drawing
ARCH 5311: Theory of Architectural Representation
ARCH 5313: Visual Communication Techniques in Architecture
ARCH 5321: Architecture in Watercolor
ARCH 5350: Topics in Architectural Representation
ARCH 5361: 3-D Computer Arch Modeling
ARCH 5381: Introduction to CAAD
ARCH 5382: Computer Aided Architectural Design
History and Theory
ARCH 5410: Topics in Architectural History
ARCH 5450: Topics in Architectural Theory
ARCH 5451: Arch: Defining the Discipline
ARCH 5452: Architecture: Design, Form, Order and Meaning
Building Technology
ARCH 5539: Daylighting and Architecture Design
ARCH 5550: Topics in Technology
ARCH 8561: Sustainable Design Theory/Practice
ARCH 8563: Energy and Indoor Environmental Quality Issues in Sustainable Design
ARCH 8565: Materials Performance in Sustainable Building
ARCH 8567: Site and Water Issues in Sustainable Design
Prof Practice &
ARCH 5241 Principles of Design Program
Preservation
ARCH 5611: Design in the Digital Age
ARCH 5670: Topics in Historic Preservation
ARCH 5671: Historic Preservation
ARCH 5672: Historic Building Conservation
Urban Planning
ARCH 5711: Design Principles of Urban Landscape
ARCH 5721: Proseminar in Metropolitan Design
ARCH 5750: Topics in Urban Design
COURSES DISCONTINUED AFTER CURRICULAR REVISION 2008
ARCH 5511: Construction Materials in Architecture
ARCH 5512: Building Methods in Architecture
ARCH 5513: Thermal Design in Architecture
ARCH 5514: Lighting and Acoustical Design
ARCH 5292: Accelerated UG Arch Studio
ARCH 5571: Architectural Structures I
ARCH 5572: Architectural Structures II
ARCH 5371, 5372, 5373, 5374: Computer Methods
ARCH 8252 (also ARCH 5292)(replaced by 4 cr. Project-based modules) Graduate
Architectural Design II
Course Descriptions
Course Descriptions
Required
Course Title
Architecture as Catalyst
Course Number
ARCH 5110
Credits
1
Type of Course
Studio
Faculty
Instructors are drawn from regular faculty within College, University or notable visitors.
Cathrine Veikos, (Penn Design) “Surface Effects”
Yr 08
Jeremy Ficca (Carnegie Mellon) and Renee Cheng,
“Closing the Loop”
Yr 08
Marc Swackhamer and Billie Faircloth (UT Austin),
“Bio-inspired exhibition system”
Yr 08
Prerequisites
All graduate students
Offered
Every spring, 4 days, 8 hours per day
Overview
This course creates an intense experience where students take high risks with topics and/or
methodologies not typically explored in our curriculum. Topical workshops explore design
methods, theories or emerging practices. Varying topics and objectives include: provocative
collaborations, innovative hybrids of architecture, interrelated collaborations or
experimental design approaches. Team-taught architecture with professionals, faculty and
visiting scholars.
Objectives
Projects must have at least one of the following characteristics: interdisciplinary,
experimental or collaborative.
Course Requirements
Outcomes must have some public component of performance, presentation, exhibition or
other work appropriate for students’ design portfolio.
Course Descriptions
Required
Course Title
Principles of Design Theory
Course Number
ARCH 5411
Credits
3
Type of Course
Lecture
Faculty
Thomas Fisher
Prerequisites
M Arch major or #
Offered
Fall every yr
Overview
Principles of design and their instrumentation. How and why architecture theory is
Yr 03-04, 04-05, 05-06, 06-07, 07-08, 08-09
generated. Types and significance of formal analysis. Theoretical positions and modes of
criticism. Theory lectures and student writings are grouped under four main areas Context,
Power, Buildings and People, each with three topics:
I.
II.
Objectives
Theories about Context
III.
Theories about Buildings
Environmental theory
Tectonic theory
Urban theory
Formal theory
Historical theory
Typological theory
Theories about Power
IV.
Theories about People
Political / ethical theory
Social theory
Semiotic theory
Behavioral theory
Post-Structuralist theory
Phenomenological theory
The goals of the course are to help: develop ideas about the elements of architecture: site,
program, structure, materials; see how architects use ideas to make form and space, and
how great architecture derives from ideas; critique current architectural theory from
readings of recent theorists; understand theory as part of the larger history of ideas, of
which architecture is a part and to which it has much to contribute; and formulate your own
theoretical position toward architecture and toward your own work. To complement your
efforts in defining a position, four lectures will be given on research methods.
Course Requirements
Each student is expected to attend class and participate in discussions. Class attendance
will be taken and participation in discussions will affect approximately 20% of your grade.
80% of your grade will be based on the four papers you will write. The papers should
represent your engagement with the material you are reading and demonstrate your ability
to relate the ideas under discussion to your own actions as a designer.
Primary Course Used to Demonstrate these NAAB Student Performance Criteria
Level
#
NAAB Requirement
Ability
Understanding
1
34
Speaking and Writing Skills
Ethics and Profess. Judgement
Course Descriptions
Changes to the Required Graduate Technology Sequence
This three-semester sequence replaces the existing required graduate technology sequence.
Arch 5511 (3 cr) and Arch 5512 (3 cr) are replaced by Arch 5515 (3 cr)
Architectural Structures were once taught by teachers from engineering departments. While this established a physics-based
understanding of the technological issues in architecture, it did little to incorporate these issues into design thought. We are
committed to teaching building technologies as organic to design thought—not simply as a technical skill necessary to
completion of construction documents.
Technology I:
Building Materials & Construction Systems, ARCH 5515 (new course)
Construction Materials in Architecture, ARCH 5511 (phased out)
Building Methods in Architecture, ARCH 5512 (phased out)
Students are able to focus on the integration their architectural design with the exploration of material technologies and
selection methods. The fundamentals of all major building materials and systems are introduced including circulation,
envelope and HVAC systems (as well as the basics of moisture, heat, sound and air movement). This class explores, through
the integration with the design studio, issues such as the linkage between the quality of the environment, design procedures,
material qualities and building production methods.
Technology II: Luminous & Thermal Design, ARCH 5516 (new course)
Thermal Design in Architecture, ARCH 5513 (phased out)
Lighting and Acoustical Design, ARCH 5514 (phased out)
Students develop their capacity to address design problems with environmentally responsive architecture. This class covers
issues such as the complex interactions of built and natural environments; the importance of generating knowledge that can
mitigate social and environmental problems; the ethical implications of decisions involving the built environment; and the
necessity of nurturing a climate of global awareness, including a commitment to meeting the goals of the Architecture 2030
Challenge.
Technology III:
Structural Systems, ARCH 5517 (new course)
Construction Materials in Architecture, ARCH 5571 (phased out)
Building Methods in Architecture, ARCH 5572 (phased out)
GDII Architectural Structures represents a different condition in terms of collaboration between design and technology. Here
four studio instructors follow very different paths toward a common goal. Unlike the common problem model of the GDI
studio, four different design and pedagogical models emerge this studio. Common connections with technology classes are
made difficult by this model. Instead, design studio will interface with Structures by creating a “need to know.” Design
instructors may individually dip into the technology curriculum as they see fit in terms of the role of structures in their
particular projects and pedagogy.
Course Descriptions
Course Descriptions
Course Title
Technology I: Building Materials & Construction Systems
Course Number
ARCH 5515 (new course)
Credits
3
Type of Course
Lecture
Faculty
Sharon Roe
Prerequisites
Admitted to MArch Program, concurrently registered with Arch 8251 or #
Offered
Fall semester
Required
Yr 08-09
(replaces Arch 5511 and 5512)
Overview
Characteristics of primary building materials (concrete, masonry, steel, timber and glass);
characteristics building systems (structure, envelope, circulation, HVAC and plumbing);
principles related to integration of systems; building construction processes and
terminology.
Objectives
Students consider five conditions of the building: how the wall is constructed, how an
opening is made in the wall. How the wall turns a corner, how the building meets the
grounds, and how the building meets the sky.
These conditions are posed as question very early the design process and continue through
sketches, physical and digital models to the final detain of one of these conditions as a
hand-drawn axon.
Course Requirements
There are two short design problems, two exams and a final report. The journalistic report
must show the development of design conditions in your studio project. This will include a
written and illustrated discussion of your design drawings, conceptual models, digital
models, and a hand-drafted axon of a significant detail and a model of that detail.
Course Descriptions
Required
Course Title
Technology II: Luminous & Thermal Design
Course Number
Credits
6
Type of Course
Project-based Module
Faculty
Mary Guzowski, Billy Weber, Richard Strong, Loren Abraham
Prerequisites
Arch 8251 and Arch 5515 or #
Offered
First half of spring semester
Yr 07-08
(replaces Arch 5513 and 5514)
Overview
Concepts/principles of daylighting, thermal, energy, and systems integration.
Architectural/technological implications of lighting and thermal design. Ecological thinking
in support of sustainable design decision making.
Objectives
~Ecological and Holistic Systems Thinking: To provide students with daylighting and
thermal design processes and integrated tools that enable them to evaluate, assess, and
apply an holistic approaches to zero energy carbon neutral design.
~Formal, Aesthetic and Experiential Design Opportunities: To introduce students to the
formal, aesthetic, and experiential opportunities of an ecological approach to daylighting,
thermal, and systems integration in design.
~Ecological and Technological Design Opportunities: To introduce students to the
ecological and technical concepts, principles, and strategies of daylighting, thermal, energy,
and systems integration for zero energy carbon neutral design.
~Appropriate Technology and Multi-functionality: To learn to employ technology
appropriately to achieve optimal results and long term cost and ecological effectiveness.
~Performance Assessment Methods and Testing: To introduce and apply qualitative and
quantitative methods and design tools for assessment, testing, and performance analysis
for an ecological approach to zero energy carbon neutral approaches to luminous and
thermal design.
Course Requirements
The course will include three design projects, which enable students to assess and apply
concepts, strategies, and assessment methods through direct application to design.
Students work on a collaborative project which includes individual and group graded
exercises.
Level
#
NAAB Requirement
Understanding
15
Sustainable Design
Understanding
19
Environment
Course Descriptions
Required
Course Title
Technology III: Structural Systems
Course Number
Credits
3
Type of Course
Lecture
Faculty
Benjamin Ibarra Sevilla
Prerequisites
Arch 5516, concurrently registered with Arch 8253, or #
Offered
Every Fall
Yr 08-09
Replaces ARCH 5571 and 5572
Overview
Structural behavior in withstanding gravity and lateral forces. Evolution, range, and
applications of structural systems.
Objectives
Students will learn some basic tools needed to understand structures as a whole and the
main component that make up a structure. They will gain insight into structural analysis
and design. The course is intended to prepare graduate students for a simple
understanding of structures in architecture. At the end of the course students will be able to
analyze and design simple building structures through the broad treatment of statics and
structural design.
Course Requirements
Learning in the course is accomplished by readings and assigned structural design
problems: structural analysis, graphical methods, site visits, analog/digital modeling, and
case studies.
Level
#
NAAB Requirement
Understanding
17
Structural
Course Descriptions
Required
Course Title
Professional Practice in Architecture
Course Number
ARCH 5621 (Revised as of Yr 08-09)
Credits
3
Type of Course
Lecture
Faculty
Renee Cheng
Yr 08-09
Vince James
Yr 08-09
Peter Hilger
Yr 07-08
Jay Isenberg
Yr 03-04, 04-05, 05-06, 06-07
Robert Olsen
Yr 07-08
Prerequisites
M Arch major or #
Offered
Fall
Overview
Legal, ethical, business, and practical requirements of architectural practice. Contemporary
and historical models of contract formation, business principles, accounting, project
management, design services, and marketing.
Objectives
The objective of this course is to make clear the connection between design and the
building production industry now and in the future. Climate change and data-driven
technology are transforming practice – creating a new relationship between architectural
design and research and new roles for architects in multidisciplinary teams. Case examples
will show how design choices are made in the context of economic, ethical and contractual
forces now and how these might project forward to the future. Course material will cover
issues related to construction sequence, tolerances, coordination, communication,
financial, and legal responsibilities and how such concerns shape the design. Exercises are
intended to encourage students to develop understanding of current practices and question
where they can be transformed.
Course Requirements Case Studies: Teams of 4-5 students will make a semester-long series of site visits to
buildings under construction in the area. Weekly or bi-monthly photo-documentation and
report forms will be gathered into a report to be submitted at the end of the term. Analysis
must demonstrate an understanding of the construction sequence, scheduling,
coordination of trades, field conditions, etc.
Level
#
NAAB Requirement
Ability
Understanding
Understanding
Understanding
Understanding
Understanding
Understanding
4
27
29
30
31
32
33
Research
Client Role
Arch Admin Roles
Arch Practice
Professional Development
Leadership
Legal Responsibilities
Course Descriptions
Changes to the Required Graduate Design Sequence
This three-semester sequence replaces the existing required graduate studio sequence.
Arch 8251 (6 cr), 8252 (6 cr), 8253 (6 cr) and 8255 (6 cr) is replaced by
Arch 8251 (9 cr), 8253 (9 cr) and 8255 (6 cr)
THE CORE STUDIO
The project-based, active learning model developed for architecture education relies on a reflective exchange between students
and instructors, students-to-students and the self-reflective individual. The design studio projects are explicit attempts by
instructors to stage and demonstrate strategies for negotiating the indeterminacy of the design process. The objective is to
use projects to sponsor debates and exchanges among professionals, students and academics.
In addition to teaching design thinking, the questions framed in the studio create the “need to know”—the basis for synthetic
learning. The energy invested in creating this active state of inquiry is essential. Studio projects are the means by which
students will be guided to integrate various areas of knowledge into a well-resolved design solution. When this attitude of
inquiry and critical thought finds a strong base in the design studio, it naturally expands to include other topics such as
building technologies, professional practices, history or theory.
Consequently, we have established three CORE design studios in the respective Fall semesters of our three-year curriculum.
Each of the CORE studios will hold students responsible for understanding basic conditions of site, materials, program,
precedents, architectural theory and architectural form manipulation. However, each of the CORE studios brings a different
level of coordination, integration and synthesis—incrementally building students’ independence as structured assignments
decrease.
Graduate Design ONE
Studies that focus on fundamental issues of space/
form/ light/ materiality in relation to human habitation;
design as a process of exploration and creative inquiry;
modes and media of representation.
Graduate Design TWO
Investigations at a conceptually comprehensive level
rigorously addressing issues of the design process,
representation, programming, technology, and urban
relations.
Graduate Design THREE
Projects that promote multiple forms of research and
analysis infused into the design process as necessary for
the negotiation of complex sites, programs, and
environmental and/or cultural circumstances.
Course Descriptions
This page intentionally left blan
Course Descriptions
Course Title
Graduate Architectural Design I
Course Number
ARCH 8251
Credits
9
Type of Course
Studio, Lecture
Faculty
Prerequisites
Blaine Brownell
Yr 08-09
Sharon Roe
Yr 03-09
John Comazzi
Yr 06-07
Ozayr Saloojee
Yr 06-07
Gunter Dittmar
Yr 07-08
Marc Swackhamer
Yr 06-07
Nina Ebbighausen
Yr 07-08, 08-09
Mark Tambornino
Yr 03-04, 08-09
Lance Lavine
Yr 07-08
Marcelo Valdes
Yr 03-04, 06-07
Admission into the M.Arch;Must be taken concurrently with Tech I and Architectural Theory
Offered
Fall every yr
Overview
Design projects focus on fundamental issues of space/form/ light/materiality in relation to
human habitation. Design as a process of exploration/inquiry. Modes/media of
representation, their critical impact.
Objectives
The goal of this course is to establish the core values, knowledge and procedures that
constitute the discipline and are essential in cultivating an architectural intellect.
Course Requirements
Scale and scope of projects create a cycle of investigation between large and small, real and
abstract, comprehensive and focused. Lectures and demonstrations are integrated to help
understand the theoretical goals of each section.
-Progression Problem The progression problem sets a methodological framework for
succeeding exercise as it seeks a rigorous development of an evolutionary formal logic.
-Public/private urban formal organizations. Progressive cooperative gaming processes are
used to collectively develop a urban community. Urban morphology, theories of design
(formalism, phenomenology, semiotics) and theories and concepts of contemporary space.
-Architectural analysis of an urban fragment. Topics addressed are theories of
representation, techniques of drawing, modeling and recording as ways of understanding
-An urban design exercise. Constructional logic that relates the part (the building detail as a
“critical moment”) to the whole building. This will include building materials, assemblies
and issues of envelope. This section is integrated with the Tech I class.
Level
#
NAAB Requirement
Understanding
5
Formal Ordering Systems
Ability
6
Fundamental Design Skills
Ability
7
Collaborative Skills
Ability
17
Site Conditions
Understanding
21
Building Envelope Systems
Understanding
24
Building Materials/Assemblies
Course Descriptions
Course Title
Course Number
Credits
Type of Course
Faculty
Prerequisites
Offered
Overview
Required
Graduate Architectural Design Two
ARCH 8253
9
Studio, Lecture
Andrzej Piotrowski (coordinator), Bob Ganser, Marc Swackhamer, Jennifer Yoos
Graduate Design ONE , Must be concurrently registered with Tech II
Fall
Investigations at a conceptually comprehensive level rigorously addressing issues of the
design process, representation, programming, technology, and urban relations.
Objectives
The studio provides an opportunity to experience a holistic way of organizing the
conceptual work of an architect. Thus the pedagogical emphasis of each studio section will
be on bringing critical insight and discipline to the design process—structuring ways of
conceiving, conceptualizing, exploring, and developing architectural ideas. This will include
general design efforts and specific areas of emphasis such as:
− Conceptualization of initial ideas and their revisions.
− Focus on conceptual function of media and modes of representation.
− Issues of structure, materiality and building technology.
− Daylight and experiential phenomena.
− Practical (accessibility, life safety and means of egress) and conceptual aspects of the
program, including input from potential users.
− Presentation and time-management skills.
Course Requirements
The sequence of initial exercises/projects will prepare students to design a complex and
conceptually comprehensive project—a design for a (preferably) public building in an urban
context. The final project should be thoughtful and competent enough to support
comprehensive technical development in the required Comprehensive Design course.
Section 1. Conceptual Issues
Section 2. Precedents
Section 3. Site explorations and/or critical programming.
Section 4. Design
Level
#
NAAB Requirement
Ability
2
Critical Thinking Skills
Ability
3
Graphics Skills
Ability
11
Use of Precedents
Understanding
12
Human Behavior
Understanding
13
Human Diversity
Ability
14
Accessibility
Ability
16
Program Preparation
Understanding
20
Life Safety
Course Descriptions
Required
Course Title
Technical Applications in Design/Comprehensive Design
Course Number
ARCH 8255(6cr fall) or 8254 (4 cr spring),
Credits
4 (6cr if schematic design is included in the course description)
Type of Course
Project-based Module (4 cr), Comprehensive Studio (6 cr)
Faculty
varies
Prerequisites
8252 grad Arch major or #
Offered
Spring module or fall studio, every yr
Overview
Design potential inherent in technical development process of design project. Testing
concepts, developing details, integrating building systems. Structural bay enclosure, cost
considerations, regulatory compliance. Building-information modeling, analog/digital
representations in architecture document production.
Objectives
The objective of this course is to explore the design potential inherent in technical
development of a design project. Course work will test design concepts by developing
details, integration of building systems, structural bay, enclosure, cost considerations and
regulatory compliance. Exercises are intended to encourage students to expand projects
from previous studio semesters to a high degree of technical competence.
Course Requirements
~Program and Building Types: 10,000 square feet, two stories, at least one long span
space.
~Graphic Conveyances: site plans; building plans, building sections, wall details, 1/2”
models and drawings, structural and HVAC. Lighting and integration documents.
~Research: construction systems, structural, aesthetic, informational, environmental
controls, accessibility, building codes and egress, programmatic issues
~Critical Thinking: design development
~Architectural Expression: compelling critical arguments (pragmatic or theoretical)
~Site and Context Conditions: affect structural principles, building systems selection,
environmental imperatives, accessibility and long-term performance.
~Ethical and Professional Judgments: ethical assessments and debates
Level
#
NAAB Requirement
Understanding
22
Building Services
Ability
23
Building Systems
Understanding
25
Construction Costs
Ability
26
Tech Docs/ Specs
Ability
28
Comprehensive Design
Course Descriptions
Course Title
Graduate Architectural Design Three
Course Number
ARCH 8255
Credits
6
Type of Course
Studio, Lecture
Faculty
Julia Robinson, “Housing & Urban design for New Orleans Lower 9th Ward”
Required
Bill Conway, “What role can architecture play in light of the current foreclosure crisis?”
John Comazzi, “Landscape Urbanism in the age of BIG + DIRTY”
Prerequisites
[8253, grad Arch major] or #
Offered
Fall, every yr
Overview
Projects that promote multiple forms of research and analysis infused into the design
process as necessary for the negotiation of complex sites, programs, and environmental
and/or cultural circumstances.
Objectives
Operating at scales larger than a single building, time-frames and horizons beyond current
generations, and /change/ as inevitable, these studios will sponsor collaborative practices
in the development of complex urban, rural, and/or sub-urban interventions. Infusing a
continual feedback of research and analysis into the design process, the studio sequence
will also model forms of self-guided practice to be refined and developed by students in the
subsequent and final semester of the curriculum.
Course Requirements
The settings for the studio’s work are expansive and vastly layered with cultural, historical,
commercial and natural conditions of significance that, together, comprise sites, programs
or situations of far greater complexity than the more controlled design projects of the first
two CORE studios. You will rarely, if ever, work alone in this studio, because any problem of
such complexity requires a collective and collaborative effort.
Section 1. Discovering the site, program or situation through multiple lenses at multiple
scales to disclose predominant-overt systems, divulge underlying-latent systems, and to
exploit gaps in those systems as opportunities.
Section 2 Developing a set of protocols, or complex adaptive systems, in staging multiple
futures for the particular project proposed by the individual instructor.
Section 3 Developing and communicating a strategy for resolving the issues.
Course Descriptions
Required
Course Title
Thesis
Course Number
ARCH 8777
Credits
12 (Max 18 cr per semester or summer; 10 cr total required; Plan A only)
Type of Course
studio
Faculty
includes most graduate faculty
Prerequisites
Fall, Spring, Sum, every yr
Offered
each spring
Overview
Student-led research projects with a documented text and graphic outcome
Objectives
The process of completing the thesis semester allows students to frame a trajectory for
their future work. Student research agendas are supported by the research methods
lectures in the first year Theory course, continued in the research segment of the
Professional Practice course in the second year. Thesis is the culmination of the students’
research agenda in school and sets a path for their future explorations.
Course Requirements
Thesis documents must meet graduate school requirements. Each student has a threefaculty committee, School faculty serve as committee members and chair. Support is given
for research and documentation.
Course Descriptions
Course Descriptions
The following are “selective” courses, students choose at least one from among these courses approved to meet a
requirement for History.
*ARCH 5421: Architectural Interpretation Cave & Light
*ARCH 5423: Gothic Architecture
*ARCH 5424: Renaissance Architecture
*ARCH 5425: Baroque Architecture
*ARCH 5431: 18C Arch & Enlightenment
*ARCH 5432: Modern Architecture
*ARCH 5434: Contemporary Architecture
*ARCH 5445: Suburbia
*ARCH 5446: Arch Since WWII Post-War Experimentation; Aesthetics & Politics
*ARCH 5461: North American Indian Architecture
Course Descriptions
Course Descriptions
Course Title
Architectural Interpretation: Cave & Light*
Course Number
ARCH 5421
Credits
3
Type of Course
seminar
Faculty
Robert Ferguson Yr 06-07
Prerequisites
[3411, 3412] or #
Offered
Fall, odd yrs
Overview
Historical/hermeneutical investigation of iconography of grotto. Intertwined themes of
descent into earth and ascent to light, from earliest strata of human culture to present day.
Objectives
Course Requirements
NAAB Student Performance Criteria Met by this Course
Level
#
NAAB Requirement
Understanding
8
Western Traditions
Course Descriptions
Course Title
Gothic Architecture*
Course Number
ARCH 5423
Credits
3
Type of Course
Lecture with recitation
Faculty
Leon Satkowski Yr 03-04, 05-06
Prerequisites
M Arch major or instr consent
Offered
Spring, even yrs
Overview
Architecture and urbanism in Europe, 1100-1400. Primary focus on France, England and
Italy, with emphasis on buildings of the cathedral era.
Objectives
Understanding of spatial, structural, and symbolic issues in major Gothic cathedrals.
Introduction to critical ideas: limitations posed by the term ”Gothic.,” unique contributions
of Italian churches and civic spaces.
Course Requirements
Two Exams and term paper.
Level
#
NAAB Requirement
Understanding
8
Western Traditions
Course Descriptions
Course Title
Renaissance Architecture*
Course Number
ARCH 5424
Credits
3
Type of Course
Faculty
Leon Satkowski
Prerequisites
Offered
F, Spring, when feasible
Overview
History of architecture and urban design in Italy from 1400 to 1600. Emphasizes major
Yr 03-04, 04-05, 05-06, 07-08
figures (Brunelleschi, Alberti, Bramante, Palladio) and evolution of major cities (Rome,
Florence, Venice).
Objectives
Course Requirements
Level
#
NAAB Requirement
Understanding
8
Western Traditions
Course Descriptions
Course Title
Baroque Architecture*
Course Number
ARCH 5425
Credits
3
Type of Course
Faculty
Leon Satkowski
Prerequisites
Offered
Fall, odd yrs
Overview
Architecture and urban design in Italy from 1600 to 1750. Emphasizes major figures
Yr 04-05, 06-07, 08-09
(Bernini, Borromini, Cortona, Guarini) and evolution of major cities (Rome, Turin).
Objectives
Course Requirements
Level
#
NAAB Requirement
Understanding
8
Western Traditions
Course Descriptions
Course Title
18C Arch & Enlightenment*
Course Number
ARCH 5431
Credits
3
Type of Course
seminar
Faculty
Robert Ferguson
Prerequisites
Arch 3412M Arch grad student or #
Offered
Fall & Spring, every yr
Overview
Architecture, urban planning, and garden design in Europe and America from 1650 to 1850.
Objectives
Build up the context of baroque representation against which the new movement declared
Yr 05-06, 06-07, 07-08
itself, and try to understand the consequences in terms of our own situation. Centered in
the 18th century, we shall need to engage 17th and 19th realities and personalities; dwelling
long in the Holy Roman Empires, in England and in France and French architectural theory,
we may come to ground outside Europe including the newly United States. The presence of
Rome, ancient and modern, will be a constant. The reciprocity of representation and
interpretation will structure our inquiry.
Course Requirements
Exam, quiz and major paper
Level
#
NAAB Requirement
Understanding
8
Western Traditions
Course Descriptions
Course Title
Modern Architecture*
Course Number
ARCH 5432
Credits
3
Type of Course
Faculty
Rachel Iannacone
Yr 07-08
Nancy Miller
Yr 03-04, 04-05, 05-06,
Prerequisites
Offered
Fall, when feasible
Overview
Architecture and urban design in Europe and the United States from early 19th century to
World War II.
Objectives
Course Requirements
Level
#
NAAB Requirement
Understanding
8
Western Traditions
Understanding
10
National/Regional Traditions
Course Descriptions
Course Title
Contemporary Architecture*
Course Number
ARCH 5434
Credits
3
Type of Course
Faculty
Rachel Iannacone
Yr 06-07, 08-09
Nancy Miller
Yr 04-05, 05-06
Prerequisites
Offered
Fall every yr
Overview
Developments, theories, movements, and trends in architecture and urban design from
World War II to present.
Objectives
Course Requirements
Students are responsible to work with a group to present and moderate one in-class
discussion, present their research to the class, and submit one research paper.
Level
#
NAAB Requirement
Understanding
8
Western Traditions
Understanding
9
Non-Western Traditions
Course Descriptions
Course Title
Suburbia*
Course Number
ARCH 5445
Credits
3
Type of Course
Faculty
Kate Solomonson
Yr 05-06
Prerequisites
Offered
Fall every yr
Overview
Suburbia, from origins in 18th-century England to present. Historical changes and present
challenges, especially in America. Ideology, mythology, planning, development, geography,
transportation, the family. Specific sites/designs. Representations in film, television,
popular literature, and music.
Objectives
Course Requirements
Level
#
NAAB Requirement
Understanding
10
National/Regional Traditions
Course Descriptions
Course Title
Arch Since WWII: Post-War Experimentation; Aesthetics & Politics*
Course Number
ARCH 5446
Credits
3
Type of Course
seminar
Faculty
Ritu Bhatt
Prerequisites
3412 or #
Offered
Fall every yr
Overview
Avant-garde responses to post-war consciousness of social issues/meaning in architecture.
Yr 07-08
Eroding communal identity, common man, architectural symbolism, monumentality,
critical regionalism, place/technology in form making, popular culture, rise of theory.
Objectives
Course Requirements
Postwar Experimentation: Aesthetics and Politics deals with a variety of case studies from
the west as well as the non-west particularly emphasizing inter-cultural nature of
architectural dialogues and how tenets of western avant-gardism were transformed by
regional constraints when introduced to post-independent agendas of the non-western
world. The particular case-studies in the section on Nation building include Beirut,
Lebanon; Dhaka, Bangaladesh; Chandigarh, India; in addition, we have a session that
critiques "critical regionalism" with a focus on Japanese modernism and another one on
Tropicalism which focuses on Singapore. Toward the end the students review a range of
readings on globalization/ rise of the creative class/ global cities.
Level
#
NAAB Requirement
Understanding
8
Western Traditions
Understanding
10
Course Descriptions
Course Title
North American Indian Arch*
Course Number
ARCH 5461
Credits
3
Type of Course
Faculty
Lee Tollefson
Prerequisites
Offered
Spring, every yr
Overview
Historic/contemporary principles/theories of North American Indian architecture. Culture,
Yr 03-04, 04-05, 06-07, 07-08
technology, environment, art, and craft of North American Indians in their
settlements/architecture.
Objectives
The view presented in this course is uniquely one of viewing architecture and its
relationship to history, environment and culture. This view will be different from one of a
purely anthropological or archeological perspective through the emphasis on the
architecture and settlements. As the course develops through the semester there will be a
focus on three architectural topics: Symbolism in architecture (relation to socio-cultural
phenomena); Environment or ecological issues; Tectonics (art and craft of construction
with emphasis on structure).
Course Requirements
Three quizzes, final exam and research paper
Level
#
NAAB Requirement
Understanding
8
Western Traditions
Understanding
10
Course Descriptions
Course Title
Topics in Architectural History*
Topic Classes must be pre-approved by the Curriculum Committee in order to qualify as a
Required History Elective.
Course Number
ARCH 5410
Credits
3
Type of Course
seminar
Faculty
Bakirtzis,Nikolas
Yr 08-09
Bhatt,Ritu
Yr 03-04
Arthur Chen
Yr 03-04, 04-05, 05-06, 06-07, 07-08
Robert Ferguson
Yr 03-04, 04-05, 07-08
Rachel Iannacone
Yr 06-07, 07-08
Lance Lavine
Yr 07-08
Nancy Miller
Yr 03-04, 05-06
Julia Robinson
Yr 03-04
Leon Satkowski
Yr 06-07, 07-08
Kate Solomonson
Yr 03-04
Prerequisites
M Arch major or #
Offered
Overview
Advanced study in architectural history. Readings, research, seminar reports.
Objectives
Course Requirements
History Elective meeting Criteria
8 : Western Traditions
9 : Non-Western Traditions
Course Descriptions
The following two courses are used for accelerated students and for 3+ students:
Course Title
Accelerated UG Arch Studio*
Course Number
ARCH 5291(see ARCH 8251)
Credits
9
Type of Course
Studio and Lecture
Faculty
same as ARCH 8251
Prerequisites
Admission to the M. Arch program
Offered
Every Fall
Overview
see ARCH 8251
Objectives
Course Requirements
Course Descriptions
Course Title
ARCH 5101
Course Number
Architectural Design Studies
Credits
7
Type of Course
Studio, Lecture
Faculty
Renee Cheng
Yr 06-07, 07-08
Yr 06-07, 07-08
Lance Lavine
Yr 05-06, 06-07, 07-08
Andrzej Piotrowski
Yr 06-07, 07-08
Leon Satkowski
Yr 06-07, 07-08
Marc Swackhamer
Yr 06-07, 07-08
John Comazzi
Yr 06-07
Prerequisites
3+ track for MArch
Offered
Summer, every yr
Overview
Principles/methods architectural design/ Theories, history, technologies, media, and
processes as foundation for critical thinking.
Objectives
This is a series of coordinated co-taught lectures/seminars/studios for students admitted
to the Master of Architecture program with degrees in subjects other than architecture. It is
an intensive experience during the summer preparing the students for their entry to
Graduate Design.
Course Requirements
Analytic modeling, visual thinking
Course Descriptions
Course Descriptions
The following courses are elective courses and, while they respond to a wide array of Student Performance Criteria,
are not used to demonstrate meeting minimum NAAB standards.
Additional material will be added to this section in the final draft of the report
Course Descriptions
Course Descriptions
Course Title
Principles of Design Program
Course Number
ARCH 5241
Credits
4
Type of Course
Faculty
Julia Robinson
Prerequisites
M Arch major or #
Offered
Spring
Overview
Concepts and techniques of architectural programming, including space and activity
Yr 08-09
analysis, site selection, precedent study, code review, appropriate technology identification,
hypothesis formulation and evaluation.
Objectives
Students will
~apply a particular design methodology for hypothesis development challenge their
preconceptions;
~make and critique alternative propositions that relate to issues of program;
~work with images and words to reveal intentions, possibilities and limitations;
~work with precedents to develop a vocabulary of formal expression
Course Requirements
Emphasis on conceptual development, research, and analytic drawing. Each week students
will explore one or more issues with a completed exercise due for presentation on Friday.
These exercises are intended to accumulate to create a final document that represents a set
of decisions about the design direction that a project could take. The document would be
of such a form that it could be the basis for further design development. The exercises that
make up the document are due periodically during the module, the final document is to be
handed in on the last day of the course module.
Course Descriptions
Course Title
Accelerated UG Arch Studio*
Course Number
ARCH 5291(see ARCH 8251)
Credits
9
Type of Course
Studio and Lecture
Faculty
same as ARCH 8251
Prerequisites
Admission to the M. Arch program
Offered
Every Fall
Overview
see ARCH 8251
Objectives
Course Requirements
Course Descriptions
Course Title
Conceptual Drawing
Course Number
ARCH 5301
Credits
3
Type of Course
Lecture and lab
Faculty
Andrzej Piotrowski
Prerequisites
[1301, M.Arch major] or #
Offered
Fall
Overview
Drawing as way of analyzing, exploring, and generating design ideas. Projection systems,
Yr 05-06, 07-08
diagramming, mapping. Different modes of visual perception (Nonverbal structures).
Objectives
Explore how different modes of drawing relate to conceptual thinking; learn to identify
design ideas in the material world and images; improve general drawing skills;
Course Requirements
In addition to the high volume of graphic production it is expected that students will learn
how to critically read and develop their own work. Self-directed and self-motivated
improvement will be essential in assessing student’s educational achievement in this
course.
Course Descriptions
Course Title
Visual Communication Techniques in Architecture
Course Number
ARCH 5313
Credits
3
Type of Course
Lecture
Faculty
Renee Cheng
Yr 06-07
Mike Christenson
Yr 03-04, 04-05
Yr 05-06, 06-07
Marc Swackhamer
Yr 05-06
Prerequisites
Offered
Fall and Spring
Overview
Delineation, presentation, and design techniques. Various visual media and methods of
investigation.
Objectives
Course Requirements
Course Descriptions
Course Title
Architecture in Watercolor
Course Number
ARCH 5321
Credits
3
Type of Course
Lecture
Faculty
Monica Fogg
Yr 03-04, 04-05, 05-06, 06-07, 07-08, 08-09
Douglas Lew
Yr 03-04, 04-05, 05-06
Prerequisites
M Arch grad student or #
Offered
Overview
Watercolor as a tool in design process. Foundation principles, techniques, medium, tools,
materials. Color relationships, mixing, composition, applications to design.
Objectives
Course Requirements
Course Descriptions
Course Title
Topics in Architectural Representation
Course Number
ARCH 5350
Credits
1 to 3
Type of Course
seminar
Faculty
Lee Anderson
Yr 06-07
Arthur Chen
Yr 03-04, 04-05, 05-06, 06-07, 07-08
Lance Lavine
Yr 03-04, 07-08
Julia Robinson
Yr 03-04
Ozayr Saloojee
Yr 06-07, 07-08
Virajita Singh
Yr 03-04
Malini Srivastava
Yr 03-04
Marc Swackhamer
Yr 06-07
Prerequisites
[5321, [Arch major or M. Arch major]]
Offered
Fall, Spring, or Sum, every yr
Overview
Selected topics in architectural representation.
Objectives
Course Requirements
Course Descriptions
Course Title
3-D Computer Arch Modeling
Course Number
ARCH 5361
Credits
3
Type of Course
Lecture and lab
Faculty
Dozier,James
Prerequisites
M Arch major
Yr 03-04, 04-05, 05-06, 06-07, 07-08, 08-09
Offered
Overview
Use of 3D computer modeling for representation in abstract/realistic ways. Computer
modeling software. Creation/arrangement of objects, setting up lighting, developing
surface materials, creating still renderings/animations. Ways in which computer
visualization can be used for design exploration, for feedback during development of ideas,
and for realistic representation of fully formed designs.
Objectives
Course Requirements
Course Descriptions
Course Title
Introduction to CAAD
Course Number
ARCH 5381
Credits
3
Type of Course
Lecture and lab
Faculty
Anderson,Lee Bruce
Yr 03-04, 04-05, 05-06, 06-07, 07-08, 08-09
Anderson,Kristine
Yr 04-05
Christenson,Mike
Yr 03-04, 04-05
Dozier,James
Yr 03-04, 04-05
Prerequisites
Arch or BED or M Arch or grad student in LA or #
Offered
Fall every yr
Overview
2-D drawing, 3-D modeling/animation, printing, plotting. Electronic
networking/communications, database management, spreadsheet analysis, land-use
analysis, project management.
Objectives
Course Requirements
Course Descriptions
Course Title
Computer Aids for Design
Course Number
ARCH 5382
Credits
3
Type of Course
Lecture and lab
Faculty
Lee Anderson
Prerequisites
5381 or arch grad major or #
Offered
Spring, every yr
Overview
2-D/3-D CAD, image manipulation. Advanced multimedia visualization techniques for
Yr 03-04, 04-05, 06-07, 07-08
design, including solid modeling, photo-/realistic imaging, animation, videoediting/recording.
Objectives
This course explores some interesting potentials for 3D modeling, specifically:
1) Photorealistic rendering
2) Scripting for computational design.
3) Rapid Prototyping and Fabrication
4) Virtual Reality
5) Building Information Modeling using Revit
Course Requirements
An assignment each week and a quiz after each section
Course Descriptions
Course Title
Topics in Architectural Theory
Course Number
ARCH 5450
Credits
1 to 4
Type of Course
seminar
Faculty
Arthur Chen
Yr 06-07, 07-08
Thomas Fisher
Yr 03-04, 04-05, 05-06
Lance Lavine
Yr 04-05
Julia Robinson
Yr 04-05
“Innovative Housing & Urbanism in the Netherlands”
Prerequisites
Arch major or M Arch major or #
Offered
Fall, Spring, Sum, ev yr
Overview
Selected topics in architectural theory and criticism.
Objectives
Course Requirements
Course Descriptions
Course Title
Arch: Defining the Discipline
Course Number
ARCH 5451
Credits
3
Type of Course
Faculty
Gunter Dittmar
Prerequisites
M Arch major or #
Offered
Spring when feasible
Overview
Architecture as a discipline: its nature, role, purpose, and meaning discussed within a
Yr 03-04, 05-06
general, philosophical, and theoretical framework. Investigation and discussion of
paradigms defining architectural theory and practice.
Objectives
Course Requirements
Course Descriptions
Course Title
Architecture: Design, Form, Order and Meaning
Course Number
ARCH 5452
Credits
4
Type of Course
Faculty
Gunter Dittmar
Prerequisites
M Arch major or #
Offered
Overview
Explores architecture and the issue of meaning. Explores fundamental and constituent
Yr 03-04, 04-05, 07-08, 08-09
elements of architectural form and order; their inherent tectonic, phenomenal, experiential,
and symbolic characteristics; their potential and implications for the creation and structure
of meaningful human places.
Objectives
To bridge the gap between theory and design, between thought, meaning and physical form
To become familiar with, and gain in-depth understanding of, some of the foremost
philosophical and theoretical viewpoints and approaches to contemporary architecture
To uncover the underlying paradigms and premises, and analyze how they inform and
become manifest in a respective canon of architectural form, and define meaning through
the disposition and articulation of its constituent elements and architectonic order
To personally engage a particular philosophical/theoretical viewpoint and approach
through an exploratory design/analysis process in order to understand its architectural and
design implications not merely intellectually, but also physically ~to explore potentially
useful “diagnostic” tools and modes of representation to make explicit and “visible”
underlying notions and potential meaning
Course Requirements
Starting with Phase 1, each of the four in-class reviews plus the final presentation will be
graded.The final grade will be computed from the best four grades of the five presentations
(each valued at 25%). Participation and contribution to the in-class discussions will also be
considered for the final grade, especially if the numerical grade falls between two letter
grades. Though the evaluation of each phase will vary to some degree, it will typically
emphasize substance and depth of content, richness and rigor of exploration, creativity in
use of modes of representation, and quality of visual and verbal presentation.
Course Descriptions
Course Title
Daylighting and Architecture Design
Course Number
ARCH 5539 (revised course)
Credits
4
Type of Course
Faculty
Mary Guzowski
Prerequisites
5514, M Arch major or #
Yr 03-04, 04-05, 06-07
Offered
Overview
Role of daylighting in architectural design: principles, strategies, energy and environmental
issues, psychology of light, color, and integration of electric lighting. Design projects
investigate qualitative and quantitative issues through drawing, physical models, and
photometric analysis.
Objectives
Course Requirements
Projects (five iterative investigations at site/room/component scales); investigating
incremental issues of daylighting: Quality of light, Site, Program, Color and materials,
Structure, Passive systems, Envelope
Course Descriptions
Course Title
Topics in Technology
Course Number
ARCH 5550
Credits
ARCH 5550
Type of Course
Lecture
Faculty
Lucas Alm
Yr 07-08, 08-09
John Carmody
Yr 05-06
Arthur Chen
Yr 03-04
Bruno Franck
Yr 05-06, 06-07
Lance Lavine
Yr 03-04, 07-08
Julia Robinson
Yr 03-04
Stephen Weeks
Yr 05-06, 06-07, 07-08
Prerequisites
M. Arch major
Offered
Overview
Selected topics in architecture technology, e.g., construction, environmental management,
energy performance, lighting, materials.
Objectives
Course Requirements
Course Descriptions
Course Title
Design in the Digital Age
Course Number
ARCH 5611
Credits
3
Type of Course
Lecture
Faculty
Lee Anderson
Prerequisites
Grad student or upper level undergrad student
Offered
Spring, every yr
Overview
Introduction to design, design process. Developing/understanding ways of seeing,
Yr 03-04, 04-05, 05-06, 06-07, 07-08
thinking, and acting as a designer. Changes in design being wrought by digital technology.
Objectives
Arch 3611/5611 covers a variety of topics related
to how digital tools are changing both the process and product of design. Digital
technologies are having a profound impact on design, both as tools for designers, and as a
domain that is in need of attention from designers. As tools, digital technologies—from
Virtual Reality to electronic communications—have the potential to radically change the
ways in which designers work. Our class will exploring 3D modeling, visualization, analysis,
information management, communication, presentation, and design’s relationship to the
manufacturing process.
Course Requirements
Team design project. There will most often be an assignment each week. Typically, an
assignment will be handed out at the Monday class, due by class time the next Monday.
Each assignment will take four to six hours.
Course Descriptions
Course Title
Topics in Historic Preservation
Course Number
ARCH 5670
Credits
1 to 3
Type of Course
seminar
Faculty
Arthur Chen
Yr 05-06, 08-09
Robert Mack
Yr 07-08
Prerequisites
Arch or M Arch major or #
Offered
Fall, when feasible
Overview
Selected topics in the theory, philosophy, research, and methods of architectural historic
preservation.
Objectives
Course Requirements
Course Descriptions
Course Title
Historic Preservation
Course Number
ARCH 5671
Credits
3
Type of Course
seminar
Faculty
Todd Grover
Yr 05-06, 06-07, 07-08, 08-09
Robert Mack
Yr 03-04, 04-05, 05-06, 06-07, 07-08. 08-09
Prerequisites
ARCH 3412 or #
Offered
Fall every yr
Overview
Philosophy, theory, and origins of historic preservation. Historic archaeology and research,
descriptive analysis, and documentation of historic buildings. Government's role in historic
preservation, preservation standards and guidelines, preservation and building codes,
neighborhood preservation, preservation advocacy, and future directions for historic
preservation. Research on architectural and historical aspects of historic sites using primary
and secondary resources and on controversial aspects of preservation.
Objectives
The course is designed to give students a general understanding of the entire field of
Historic Preservation and with specific emphasis on documentary research, written
documentation of historic properties, and critical analysis of preservation issues.
Course Requirements
Report on MHS Research Center, District survey, Research paper, National Register
Nomination, Advocacy presentation, Issues Letter, Quizzes
Course Descriptions
Course Title
Historic Building Conservation
Course Number
ARCH 5672
Credits
3
Type of Course
seminar
Faculty
Todd Grover
Yr 04-05, 05-06, 06-07, 07-08
Robert Mack
Yr 03-04, 04-05, 05-06, 06-07, 07-08
Prerequisites
3412, 5671 or #
Offered
Spring, every yr
Overview
Historic building materials, systems, and methods of conservation. Discussion of structural
systems, building repair and pathology, introduction of new environmental systems in
historic buildings, and conservation of historic interiors. Research on historic building
materials and techniques using primary and secondary resources and on documentation of
a specific historic site through large-format photography and measured drawings.
Objectives
The course is designed to give students a familiarity with historic building materials and
systems, causes of their deterioration, and appropriate methods for their conservation. In
addition, students will learn recording techniques including measured drawings and largeformat-photography.
Course Requirements
several quizzes, research paper with associated submissions, the building conditions
evaluation, and the HABS survey materials
Course Descriptions
Course Title
Design Principles of Urban Landscape
Course Number
ARCH 5711
Credits
3
Type of Course
Lecture
Faculty
Arthur Chen
Yr 03-04, 04-05
Forsyth,Ann
Yr 05-06
Cynthia Jara
Yr 06-07
Richard Milgrom
Yr 04-05
Nancy Miller
Yr 03-04, 07-08
Julia Robinson
Yr 03-04
Prerequisites
M Arch major or LA grad major or grad student or #
Offered
Spring, every yr
Overview
Art/design of creating city, neighborhood, and development plans. Public policies, planning
tools/processes, and physical models used by design professionals and private/civic
institutions to shape physical environment.
Objectives
Course Requirements
Up to 6 short written assignments and one major term paper.
Course Descriptions
Course Title
Proseminar in Metropolitan Design
Course Number
ARCH 5721
Credits
3
Type of Course
seminar
Faculty
Prerequisites
[[5711 or equiv], enrollment in CMD prog] or #
Offered
Overview
Reading seminar. Evolution of the contemporary city. Dynamics that created contemporary
urban spatial patterns. Planning/design theories that have guided public interventions in
the built environment. Thematic texts, classroom discussions.
Objectives
Course Requirements
Course Descriptions
Course Title
Topics in Urban Design
Course Number
ARCH 5750
Credits
1 to 4
Type of Course
seminar
Faculty
Arthur Chen
Yr 03-04, 04-05, 05-06, 06-07, 07-08, 08-09
William Conway
F Yr 06-07, 07-08
Lance Lavine
Yr 07-08
Julia Robinson
Yr 03-04, 06-07, 07-08
Prerequisites
Offered
Overview
Objectives
Course Requirements
Special topics in theory/practice of urban design.
Course Descriptions
Course Title
Sustainable Design Theory/Practice
Course Number
ARCH 8561
Credits
3
Type of Course
seminar
Faculty
Mary Guzowski
Yr 06-07, 07-08
Doug Pierce
Yr 06-07, 07-08, 08-09
Prerequisites
[5513, [grad MS or MArch]] or #
Offered
Fall every yr
Overview
History, theory, and ethics of sustainable design processes/practices. Emphasizes
approaches to sustainable architecture. Regional/global ecological issues, design
strategies, methods of assessment. Primary architectural/technological implications of
sustainable design theory/practice that inform design thinking/research. Sustainable
design issues.
Objectives
Course Requirements
Research projects, case studies, fieldwork
Course Descriptions
Course Title
Energy and Indoor Environmental Quality Issues in Sustainable Design
Course Number
ARCH 8563
Credits
3
Type of Course
Faculty
John Carmody
Yr 06-07
Lara Greden
Yr 07-08
Prerequisites
[5513, [grad MS or MArch]] or #
Offered
Spring, every yr
Overview
Energy/IEQ aspects of sustainable design related to global environmental issues.
Energy/IEQ strategies, methods, and tools as applied to sustainable building design.
Objectives
Course Requirements
Research projects, case studies
Course Descriptions
Course Title
Materials Performance in Sustainable Building
Course Number
ARCH 8565
Credits
3
Type of Course
Faculty
Rick Carter
Yr 07-08
Richard Strong
Yr 07-08
Blaine Brownell
Yr 08-09
Prerequisites
[5512, grad MS or March]] or #
Offered
Fall every yr
Overview
Building-material properties, resource conservation, fabrication/construction processes in
production of high performance sustainable building designs. Application of
assessment/evaluation tools (LCA, BEES, Athena or LEED) for IEQ, waste reduction and
management with an emphasis on experimental/analytic methods. Aesthetic/technical
solutions that integrate design selection processes, construction methods, commissioning
processes, and facility management, maintenance, and decommissioning.
Objectives
~Develop knowledge of how the materials selection and performance aspects of
sustainable design fit into the context of a whole building design process.
~Develop knowledge of determining materials resource and energy flows and ways to
evaluate sustainable product certification methods – the interaction between
manufacturing conservation, recycle/reuse and waste – as fundamental to the design
process.
~Develop evaluation and assessment (decision making) processes for material life-cycles;
construction use and maintenance; manufacturing and fabrication; material
acquisition/preparation/ and reuse, recycling and disposal.
~Develop knowledge of Eco-Labeling and LCA assessment tools and their function with
other strategies (Athena™, LEED, and B3) that improve energy efficiency, conserve
materials resources and reduce waste during construction, building operations and deconstruction.
Course Requirements
Three projects/exercises will be used to investigate the major course topics
Course Descriptions
Course Title
Site and Water Issues in Sustainable Design
Course Number
ARCH 8567
Credits
3
Type of Course
Faculty
Rich Strong
Prerequisites
[5512, [grad MS or MArch student]] or #
Yr 07-08, 08-09
Offered
Overview
Site, water and site/building integration aspects of sustainable design. Ecological
principles, site analysis. Water/site/building integration strategies, methods, and tools
integrated with sustainable design issues such as energy, indoor environmental quality, and
materials. Research projects, case studies, measurement methods.
Objectives
Course Requirements
Course Descriptions
Retired
Course Descriptions
The following courses were taught after 2002 but prior to the development of the new curricular sequences in both the
Graduate design studio sequence and the Building technology sequence. These classes are now phased out and the new
classes are in place.
ARCH 5511: Construction Materials in Architecture
ARCH 5512: Building Methods in Architecture
ARCH 5513: Thermal Design in Architecture
ARCH 5514: Lighting and Acoustical Design
ARCH 5292: Accelerated UG Arch Studio
ARCH 5571: Architectural Structures I
ARCH 5572: Architectural Structures II
ARCH 5371, 5372, 5373, 5374: Computer Methods
Course Descriptions
Course Descriptions
Retired
Course Title
Construction Materials in Architecture
Course Number
ARCH 5511 (replaced by new class Arch 5515)
Credits
3
Type of Course
lecture
Faculty
Sharon Roe
Yr 03-04, 04-05,05-06, 06-07, 07-08
Steve Weeks
Yr 03-04
Prerequisites
Offered
Overview
Building materials, assemblies, and construction operations shaping building designs.
Material properties for design/detailing of building systems, elements, and components.
Implications in design applications..
Course Descriptions
Retired
Course Title
Building Methods in Architecture
Course Number
Credits
3
Type of Course
Faculty
Renee Cheng
Yr 03-04, 04-05,05-06, 06-07
Mike Christenson
Yr 05-06
Sharon Roe
Yr 06-07
Stephen Weeks
Yr 04-05
Prerequisites
Offered
Overview
Analysis of architectural materials, building systems, and construction operations related to
enclosure systems design, building infrastructure, and detailing. Application of legal
constraints and regulations (e.g., ADA, building codes, life-safety issues) in preparation of
drawings, specifications, and construction documents for building design.
Course Descriptions
Retired
Course Title
Thermal Design in Architecture
Course Number
Credits
3
Type of Course
Faculty
Loren Abraham
Yr 07-08
William Weber
Yr 03-04, 04-05,05-06, 06-07
Prerequisites
Offered
Overview
Thermal and climatic issues in the design of small and mid-size buildings. Investigations in
built and mechanical methods to modify climate. Evaluation of the impact of design
techniques on energy use, the environment, and architectural meaning.
Course Descriptions
Retired
Course Title
Lighting and Acoustical Design
Course Number
Credits
3
Type of Course
Faculty
Jonee Kulman Brigham
Yr 03-04
Mary Guzowski
Yr 04-05,05-06, 06-07, 07-08
Prerequisites
Offered
Overview
Principles of daylighting, electric lighting, and acoustic design in architecture. Relationship
between luminous and acoustic environments, human comfort and architectural
experience. Analytical methods, design process, and modeling of daylighting.
Course Descriptions
Retired
Course Title
Architectural Structures I
Course Number
Credits
3
Type of Course
Faculty
Scott Durand
Yr 05-06, 07-08
Bruno Franck
Yr 03-04, 04-05, 06-07
Prerequisites
Offered
Overview
Influence of history/culture on architecture/structure. Structural mechanics, analysis, form
finding, and design by experimental, qualitative/intuitive, and quantitative methods. Vector/form-active structural systems, funicular structures. Bending/compression elements,
plates/grids. Tensile architecture, shells. Traditional construction materials.
Course Descriptions
Retired
Course Title
Architectural Structures II
Course Number
Credits
3
Type of Course
Faculty
Bruno Franck
Yr 03-04, 04-05, 05-06, 06-07
Prerequisites
Offered
Overview
Overview of advanced materials: reinforced fiberglass, structural glass, and structural
tensile fabrics. Impact of construction technology on architecture and methods of
integrating knowledge of structural materials and construction methods into the design
process.
Course Descriptions
Retired
Course Title
Comp Methods I, II, III, IV
Course Number
ARCH 5371, 5372, 5373, 5374 (phased out)
Credits
1 cr each
Type of Course
Lecture, lab
Faculty
Sharon Roe
Yr 03-04, 05-06, 07-08
Marc Swackhamer
Yr 04-05, 05-06, 06-07
Ian Mclellan
Yr 07-08
Mary Guzowski
Yr 07-08, 08-09
Prerequisites
Offered
Overview
5371. Introduction to current techniques, computer programs, and their application to
architectural computing.
5372. Current techniques, computer programs, and their application to architectural
computing and design.
5373. Advanced techniques, computer programs, and their application to architectural
computing in design, theory, and technology.
5374. Advanced architectural computing applications in design, history, theory,
representation, and technology.
Course Descriptions
Retired
Course Title
Graduate Architectural Design II
Course Number
ARCH 8252 (also ARCH 5292)(replaced by 4 cr. Project-based modules)
Credits
6
Type of Course
Studio
Faculty
Sharon Roe
Yr 03-04, 04-05, 05-06, 07-08
Marc Swackhamer
Yr 06-07
Prerequisites
Offered
Overview
Fundamental architectural problems involving design as a creative inquiry. Individual and
collaborative effort.
Requirements
Curriculum vitae are in alphabetical order by faculty last name:
(more information and additional faculty will be included in final draft of report)
Loren E. Abraham
Lee B. Anderson
Ritu Bhatt
Blaine Brownell
Arthur Hui-Min Chen
Renee Cheng
John Comazzi
William F. Conway
Gunter Dittmar
Gregory Donofrio
Thomas Fisher
Mary Guzowski
Rachel Iannacone
Cynthia Jara
Michael (Mic) Johnson
Lance LaVine
Thomas Meyer
Nancy Miller
Andrzej Piotrowski
Julia Robinson
Sharon Roe
Ozayr Saloojee
Leon Satkowski
Katherine Solomonson
Marc Swackhamer
Leslie Van Duzer
William Weber
J. Stephen Weeks
Loren E. Abraham
Adjunct Assistant Professor
Teaching Area
Technology
Courses
Arch 5516 Tech II: Luminous & Thermal Design
Educational Background
Business Administration Certificate, Northeast Metro University, 1987-88
BA Architecture/Landscape Architecture, Interdisciplinary, UMN, Minneapolis MN, 1977
Architectural Technology Courses, Southeast Technical Institute, Sioux Falls, South Dakota, 1972
Academic and Professional Positions
Adjunct Assistant Professor, UMN, College of Design, Architecture Department, 2005-p
Continuing Education Instructor: Renewable Energy Systems, American Institute of Architects, 2006-p
Public Education Workshop Instructor: Passive Design and Renewable Energy, MRES, 2007-p
Abraham + Associates Architects, Minneapolis, Minnesota, Principal, 2001-p
Daybreak Technology, LLC, Minneapolis, Minnesota and Charlottesville, VA, Principal, 1997-p
Guest Lecturer, Bethel University, Adult MBA Program, Business and the Environment, 2007
William McDonough + Partners, Charlottesville, Virginia, Architect, Energy Specialist, Director of Research,
1994-1997
Training Seminar Instructor-Designing Low Energy Buildings with Energy 10, DOE/FEMP, 1997-1998
Workshop Instructor, Passive Solar Design Strategies/BuilderGuide Software, Passive Solar Industries
Council, 1994-1996
Andersen Window Corporation, Bayport, Minnesota, Advanced Research Manager, 1989-1994
Andersen Window Corporation, Bayport, Minnesota, R&D Product Design Engineer, 1984-1989
KKE Architects, Minneapolis Minnesota, Project Architect, 1983-1984
RSP Architects, Minneapolis Minnesota, Project Architect, 1982-1983
Abraham and Broussard Architects, St. Paul, Minnesota, 1982
David Todd Runyan & Associates, St. Paul, Minnesota, Architect, 1970-1982
Buetow & Associates, St. Paul, Minnesota, Architect Intern, 1979-1980
Drake & Sessing Architects, Saint Paul, Minnesota, Architect Intern, 1978-79
Koch Hazard Associates, Architects, Sioux Falls, SD, Architect Intern, 1977-19781
Landscape Designer, Dundee Nursery, 1976-1977
Intern, Ward Whitwam & Assoc Architects, Sioux Falls, SD, 1974-1975
Steel Erection Crew Foreman, Maxcore Engineering, Aberdeen, SD, 1974
Apprentice Carpenter in the South Dakota Carpenter Apprenticeship Program, 1973-74
Membership, Registration, Certifications
1990-p
Licensed Architect, Minnesota, registration no. 20882, 1990-present
1993-p
US Green Building Council Founding Member, 1993-present
2007-p
US Green Building Council Mississippi Headwaters Chapter Member, 2007-present
1990-p
American Institute of Architects (AIA),1990-present
2008
American Solar Energy Society (ASES) Member, 2008-p
2006
LEED Accredited Professional, US Green Building Council, 2006
2006
Minnesota Renewable Energy Society Member, 2006-p
2005
McClauren Institute Contributing Member, 2005-p
Research, Publications, Exhibitions, Creative Practice
2005
2000-05
Reimagining the relationship between Human Beings and their Environment, The
Hennepin
County Brookdale Regional Center, Daybreak Press, 2005
Guest Lecturer and Jury Member, UMN, College of Architecture and Landscape
Architecture
Academic and Professional Service
2004-p
AIA Minnesota Chapter, Committee Chairperson present, 2004-present
1991-p
AIA Committee on the Environment (COTE), 1991-present
2008
Minnesota Renewable Energy Society, Board Member, 2008
2007
Solar Decathlon Project Advisor, UMN College of Design, 2007-p
2005
Sustainable Technology Faculty Committee, UMN College of Design, 2005-p
Presentations, Invited Lectures
2008
2007
2007
2007
2007
2005
2004
2004
2004
Renewable Energy in Commercial Buildings, Energy Design Expo, Duluth, MN, Feb.
29, 2008
An Ecological Approach to Daylighting Design, International Interior Design
Association,
Continuing Education Workshop, Minneapolis, MN, Nov. 7, 2007
A Sustainable Future: Design as Devotion, Cornerstone Music Festival, Bushnell,
IA, June 28-30, 2007
Renewable Energy in Commercial Buildings, AIA Workshop, Earl Brown Center,
SP, MN,
Mar. 13, 2007
Renewable Energy in Commercial Buildings, Energy Design Expo, Duluth, MN, Feb.
28, 2007
Twin Cities Green Roof Council, Minneapolis Central Library Greenroof,
Minneapolis, MN,
Mar. 4, 2005
Sustainable Architecture - Energy & Environmental Choices, Brooklyn Center,
Minnesota,
Sep. 22, 2004
Minnesota Public Radio Midmorning Program, Sustainable Architecture Interview,
Sep. 21, 2004
Twin Cities Green Roof Council, 901 Cherry - Gap Offices Greenroof, Minneapolis,
MN,
August 9, 2004
Lee B. Anderson
Associate Professor
Teaching Area
CAD, Design
Courses
Arch 3611/5611
Arch 4381/5381
Arch 4382/5382
UMN, School of Architecture, Master of Architecture, 1981
Sophia University, Tokyo, B.S. in Asian Studies and Mathematics, 1973
Associate Professor, College of Design, Department of Architecture, UMN
Digital Design Consortium Director, 2007
Digital Design Consortium Director, 2001-2003
Director of Graduate Studies, 1996-2001
Interim Department Head, 1997-99
President, SketchTech, Inc., 1986-96
Acadia (Association for Computer Aided Design in Architecture)
Grants, Awards, Honors
2003-p
NSF Information Technology Research (NSF-ITR) grant titled “Effectively Harnessing
Virtual Environments Technology for Visualization and Design” (2007 -2010) $424,000(coPI with Associate
Professor Victoria Interrante CSci)
NSF CAREER grant titled “High Quality and Efficient Rendering of Discrete Primitives
for Interactive Visualization” $408,959 2/1/03-1/31/08 plus extensions (co-PI with Associate
Professor Victoria Interrante CSci)
2007-08
Institute of Advanced Studies Social Networks study grant covener $10,000 2007-2008
(co-PI with Associate Professor Victoria Interrante CSci)
2007
Winner (with student team) Google Earth "Build your own Campus" contest 2007
2003-06
NSF Information Technology Research (NSF-ITR) grant titled "Collaborative Research in
Immersive Design Environments". $379,196 2003-09-01 to 2006-08-31 Plus extensions
(co-PI with Associate Professor Victoria Interrante CSci)
2006
Roy Jones Award for Outstanding Research 2006
2006
UMN iFellow, 2006
2003
Graphics" $195,000 (including University matching funds) Granted 9/11/2003(co-PI with
Associate Professor Victoria Interrante CSci)
2007-10
2006
Victoria Interrante, Brian Ries, Jason Lindquist and Lee Anderson (2007)
"Elucidating the Factors that can Facilitate Veridical Spatial Perception in Immersive
Virtual Environments",IEEE Virtual Reality 2007
Ross Treddinick, Lee Anderson and Victoria Interrante (2006) "A Tablet Based
Immersive Architectural Design Tool", Proc. of ACADIA (Assoc. for ComputerAided Design in Architecture) 2006. (acceptance rate: 20%)
2006
Victoria Interrante, Lee Anderson and Brian Ries (2006) "Distance Perception in
Immersive Virtual Environments, Revisited", IEEE Virtual Reality 2006, pp. 3-10.
2003
Lee Anderson, James Esser and Victoria Interrante (2003) "A Virtual Environment
for Conceptual Design in Architecture", 9th Eurographics Workshop on Virtual
Environments/7th International Workshop on Immersive Projection Technology
2007
Academic Technology Advising Committee (University)
Advisory Board-GRAVEL, Institute for New Media Studies, School of Journalism and Mass
Communication
College Curriculum
College Technology
Department Curriculum
Faculty Consultative Committee-College
School Graduate Curriculum
2008
2007
2007
2006
2006
2006
2005-06
Invited presenter and panelist at the Networks & Neighborhoods in Cyberspace
Symposium, UMN. 2008
Creativity and Cognition 2007, June 13-15, 2007, Washington, D.C. Gave
presentation titled "Advancing architectural design and education through the use of
Virtual Environments technology" in the Tool for Creativity workshop
Victoria Interrante, Brian Ries, Jason Lindquist and Lee Anderson (2007)
"Elucidating the Factors that can Facilitate Veridical Spatial Perception in Immersive
Virtual Environments", IEEE Virtual Reality 2007
Building Information Modeling in Education, invited presentation, NTNU,
Trondheim, Norway-Fall, 2006
Ross Treddinick, Lee Anderson and Victoria Interrante (2006) "A Tablet Based
Immersive Architectural Design Tool", Proc. of ACADIA (Assoc. for ComputerAided Design in Architecture) 2006.
Victoria Interrante, Lee Anderson and Brian Ries (2006) "Distance Perception in
Immersive Virtual Environments, Revisited",
Virtual Reality Seminar, Invited seminar, School of Architecture, NTNU,
Trondheim, Norway-Fall, 2005, 2006
Ritu Bhatt
Assistant Professor
Teaching Area
History/Theory/Culture
Courses
Arch 5546 Architecture Since WWII: Post-Ware Experimentation, Aesthetics & Politics
1996-2000 Ph.D., History, Theory & Criticism, Department of Architecture, Massachusetts Institute of Technology,
Cambridge, MA
1991-93 Masters of Architecture, Kansas State University, Manhattan, KS
1990 Bachelor of Architecture, Department of Architecture, University of Roorkee, India.
Assistant Professor, UMN, 2003-present
Visiting Assistant Professor, Departments of Architecture, Comparative Literature and
Rhetoric, University of California, Berkeley, 2000-2003
Project Architect Design Plus, Inc New Delhi, India, 1990-91
Intern Design Plus, Inc New Delhi, India, Summer 1998
American Association of Aesthetics
Environmental Design Research Association
International Association for the study of Traditional Environments
Quadrant Program, UMN Press
Society of Architectural Historians
2008
2008 AIA Education Honors Award for an Incomplete Curriculum for
Transformation, a collaborative work co-authored with Renee Cheng, John Comazzi,
Ozayr Saloojee, and Marc Swackhamer
current
Ritu Bhatt, "Aesthetic or AnAesthetic: The Competing Symbols of Las Vegas Strip,"
Instruction as Provocation, or Relearning from Las Vegas," edited by Aron Vinegar
and Michael Golec UMN Press, forthcoming
2008
Ritu Bhatt and Julie Brand, "Christopher Alexander: A Review Essay," Design
Issues, Volume XXIV Number 2, Spring 2008, pp.93-102
current
Currently preparing a proposal to study the spatial practices that support mind-body
cognition in Mcleod Gunj, Upper Dharam Shala, India
current
Currently preparing a series of journal articles based on my dissertation work: "On
the Epistemological Significance of Aesthetic Values in Architectural Theory."
2004
Ritu Bhatt, "Aesthetic or AnAesthetic: The Competing Symbols of Las Vegas Strip,"
Visible Language, Special issue on Learning from Las Vegas 37.2, Spring 2004.
2008
Paper Reviewer for the session on "The End of Architectural History and Reports of
Its Demise, "ACSA 96th Annual Meeting, 2008
2008
Heritage Preservation Committee, 2008-9
2008
2007
History, Theory Culture Committee, 2008-9
Paper Reviewer for the session on "Teaching the History Survey," ACSA 95th
Annual Meeting, 2007
2007
Heritage Preservation Search Committee, 2007-8
2007
Model T Graduate Curriculum Development 2007-8
2007
Undergraduate Curriculum Committee, Fall 2007
2005
Organizer, Public symposium, Feng Shui: Everyday Acts of Space Making, CALA,
UMN, October 28, 29, 30, 31, 2005 http://www.cala.umn.edu/fengshui/index.html
2005
Co-Chair Scholarship and Awards Committee 2005-6
2005
Faculty Evaluation Committee 2005-6
2005
Graduate Curriculum Committee 2005-6
2004
Awards Committee 2004-5
2004
Committee: Development of M.S. program in History, Theory and Culture 2004-5
2004
Faculty Search Committee 2004-5
2008
Feng shui Analysis of Ralph Rapson Hall and Weisman Museum at UMN Campus,
IASTE Cambridge, UK, 2008
2005
Feng-Shui Analysis of Ralph Rapson Hall and Weisman Museum at the UMN Twin
Cities Campus," EDRA, Veracruz, Mexico, 2008
Julia Robinson and Ritu Bhatt, Developing Culturally Critical Perspective in Early
Design Education, 24th National Conference on the Beginning Design Student,
Atlanta, 2008
Exploring Cognition in Everyday Environments: Comparison between Christopher
Alexander's Pattern Language and Feng Shui-Chinese Art of Space Making, EDRA,
Atlanta,
Christopher Alexander's Pattern Language: Search for an Alternative Conception of
Knowledge, in the Session on The Embodied Mind and Its Challenge to
Architectural History, SAH Annual Meeting, Vancouver 2005
2005
Conference Panel Co-Chair with Alona Nitzan-Shiftan, Inter-Cultural Negotiations
of PostwarArchitectural Knowledge, SAH Annual Meeting, Vancouver 2005
2008
2008
2006
Blaine Brownell
Assistant Professor
Joined the faculty in Fall 2008
Teaching Area
Sustainability, Design
Courses
Arch 8251 Graduate Design I
Arch 8565 Materials Performance in Sustainable Building
Master of Architecture, Rice University, 1998
Bachelor of Arts in Architecture + Certificate in East Asian Studies, Princeton University, 1992
Assistant Professor, UMN
Visiting Professor in Sustainability, University of Michigan, 2007-08
Visiting Research Fellow / Fulbright Scholar, Tokyo University of Science, 2006-07
Associate / Architect, NBBJ, 1999-06
Associate / Intern Architect, Willis Bricker & Cannady, 1998-99
Intern Architect, Takenaka Komuten, 1997
Research Assistant, Yung-Ho Chang, 1995-1996
Intern Architect, Giattina Fisher Aycock, 1992-1994
Intern Architect, Kajima Kensetsu, 1991
2005
Construction Document Technologist, Construction Specifications Institute, 2005
2005
Sustainable Building Advisor, National Sustainable Building Advisor Program, 2005
2003
Registered Architect, Washington State, 2003
2003
Registered Architect, NCARB, 2003
2003
LEED Accredited Professional, United States Green Building Council, 2003
2006-07
Fulbright Fellowship, Research Fellowship to Japan, 2006-2007
2006-07
Fulbright Fellowship, Research Fellowship to Japan, 2006-2007
2006
40 Under 40 Award, Building Design & Construction, March 2006
2004
Nomination, Mentor of the Year, NBBJ, 2004
2003-04
Leader, Leading Change Program, NBBJ, 2003-2004
2009
Matter in the Floating World (book proposal), Princeton Architectural Press, 2009
2009
Transmaterial 3 (book proposal), Princeton Architectural Press, 2009
2008
2008
Katie Gerfen, "The Second Annual R+D Awards," Architect, August 2008
Amy Cortese, "In Search of Better (and Greener) Building Blocks," The New York
Times,
2008
Sarah Rich, "Material Cultures," Dwell, February 2008
2008
Material Complexity in Architecture, Materia (Italy), July 2008
2008
Transmaterial 2, Princeton Architectural Press, 2008
2008
PET Wall (Installation), The University of Michigan, March-April, 2008
2008
Materials Library Committee, College of Design
2008
Exhibitions Committee, College of Design
2008
Material Futures: Securing Architecture + Cities, ACSA/Department of Homeland
Security, Washington, DC, 2008.06.27
Material Futures in Architecture, Illinois Institute of Technology, Chicago, IL,
2008.04.15
Material Futures in Architecture, University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX,
2008.04.14
2008
PET Wall Exhibition Lecture, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, 2008.03.28
2008
Material Futures in Architecture, Washington U in St. Louis, St. Louis, MO, 2008
2008
Material Futures, Southern Illinois University, Carbondale, IL, 2008.02.25
2008
Material Futures in Architecture, Syracuse University, Syracuse, NY, 2008.02.01
Material Futures: Securing Architecture + Cities, ACSA/Department of Homeland
Security,
Washington, DC, 2008.06.27
2008
2008
2008
Arthur Hui-Min Chen
Associate Professor
Teaching Area
Representation, Design, Heritage Preservation
Courses
Port Cities Study Abroad
Arch 5670 Topics in Historic Preservation
Ph.D., Architectural History, Theory and Criticism, Georgia Institute of Technology, 1993
M.Arch., North Carolina State University, 1983
B.Arch., Tamkang University, 1976
Director of Study Abroad Program-Port Cities Studies: Lisbon, Barcelona & Venice, present
Director of the Center for World Heritage Studies, present
Associate Professor, UMN, 2001-p
Associate Professor, UMN, 1998-2001
UMN; Cass Gilbert Visiting Professor, 1996-1998
State University of New York at Buffalo; Clinical Associate Professor, Graduate Faculty, 1989-96
Georgia Institute of Technology; Design Studio Instructor, Architecture, 1986-1989
East Carolina University, Assistant Professor, 1983-1984
Present
Fellow of the World Academy of Art and Science, Present
Present
Advisor to the National Commission to UNESCO of the Philippines, Present
Present
Advisor to World Heritage Centre of UNESCO to undertake the university
partnership projects of conservation, Present
2006-07
Principal Investigator, UNESCO Project Grant ($60,000) for developing the digital
inventory of historic sites in Isheri Sheri at Baku in Azerbaijan, 2006/8
2008 Principal Investigator, Travel grant from UNESCO for leading the Expert
Mission Team to Xian, China
Principal Investigator, Cranbrook Academy Campus Project Grant ($50,000) for
preparing the nomination dossier of the campus as a World Heritage Site in the US
Tentative List, 2006/7
2007
2007 Principal Investigator, Travel grant from UNESCO grant for leading the Expert
Mission team to the Batanes archipelago, Philippines, 2007
2006-08
2008
2007
2006
Member of the UNESCO-ICOMOS evaluation team to Baku, Azerbaijan, 2007
Principal Investigator, Travel grant from UNESCO for the mission to Baku
Azerbaijan, 2007
UMN reoccurring funds ($50,000 yearly) for operating the Center for World
Heritage Studies, 2006-p
2006
CALA Mann Frederick Mann Award for Disciplinary Service, 2006
2007
2004
Principal Investigator, Project Grant ($13000) for developing adaptive uses of
schemes at Luchesse Shipyard in Giudecca, Venice, by VESTA, 2004
2004
Selected for Exhibition at Le Biennale for design research work in Venice, 2004
2007-p
Institutional building. CWHS is a research unit in the College of Design at the University of
Minnesota, founded on a unique partnership with UNESCO's World Heritage Centre., 2005-p
Batana Archipelago in the Philippines. CWHS works with UNESCO and officials in the Philippines
to provide expert consultation and technical assistance in the process of developing, reworking,
and resubmitting the nomination dossier.., 2007-p
forthcoming
The Baku Inventory Project, Paris: UNESCO (forthcoming)., Present
2007/2008
The Batanes Archipelago in the Philippines. UNESCO/WHC, 2007/2008
2007/2008
The Daming Palace Park in Xian. UNESCO/WHC Daming Palace in Xian, China, 2007/2008
2005-p
present
present
Director, graduate study abroad program of Port Cities: Lisbon, Barcelona, and
Venice,
Director, the Center for World Heritage Studies
present
External Reviewer of the Ph.D. program in Architecture, Virginia Tech, Present
present
Guest Reviewer, Architectural Research Quarterly, ARQ, Present
present
Member of Editorial Board, Journal of Architectural and Planning Research, JAPR,
present
Member of ICOMOS-USA, Present
present
Paper Reviewer for the ACSA National and International Meetings, Present
present
Represent CDes to International Program Committee, UMN, Present
2008
2008 Presentation at the 2008 Heritage Meeting, An Inventory Model for Baku
2005/2007
Leading UNESCO missions to Baku Azerbaijan, 2005/2007
2007
Expert observer at the 31st UNESCO World Heritage Committee Meeting,
Christchurch, New Zealand, June 19-30, 2007
2007
2007
2007
ICOMOS International Committee on the Interpretation of World Heritage, 2007
Invited Expert by the Romualdo Del Bianco Foundation, International Preparatory
Conference on "The Historical Architectural Heritage in the New Social Political
Situation after the Soviet Union," Florence, Feb 20-22, 2007
Invited Expert by the Romualdo Del Bianco Foundation, International Preparatory
Conference on "The Historical Architectural Heritage in the New Social Political
Situation after the Soviet Union," Florence, Feb 20-22, 2007
Renee Cheng
Professor
Teaching Area
Technology, Professional Practice, Design
Courses
Arch 5670 Professional Practice in Architecture
Harvard University Graduate School of Design, Cambridge, Massachusetts Master of Architecture, 1989
Harvard College, Cambridge, Massachusetts A.B., Psychology Concentration, Cum Laude, 1985
School of Architecture, College of Design, UMN, Minneapolis, Minnesota, Head of the School of Architecture,
Professor, 2008-p
School of Architecture, College of Design, UMN, Minneapolis, Minnesota, Head of the School of Architecture,
Associate Professor, 2004-2008
Department of Architecture, College of Architecture and Landscape Architecture, UMN, Minneapolis, Minnesota,
Director of Design, Associate Professor, 2001-2004
Minnesota Licensed Architect #44732
NCARB Certificate #45755, Certified since 1995
2007
2004
AIA Minnesota President-elect (pending), 2007
Principal Investigator: $17,000 Grant sponsored by the Steel Tube Institute for case
study
educational material., 2004-5
2007
Can BIM Inspire New Directions in Architectural Education?. In Fresh Air:
Proceedings of
the ACSA Ninety Fifth Annual Meeting Held in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, March
2007,
455-460. Washington, DC: ACSA
2006
Computing Technologies. Edited new chapter in Architectural Graphic Standards,
11th edition, ed. A. Pressman, 932-956. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 2007
Principal Investigator, Building Information Modeling as a Design Tool, Digital
Design Consortium, University of Minnesota. Ongoing research in collaboration
with local firms and contractors on the topic of BIM. Work involves a prototype
hospital with the firm of HGA architects using performance data to drive BIM.,
2007
Suggestions for an Integrative Education. In AIA Integrated Practice Report, eds.
N.Strong,
D.Friedman, M.Broshar, essay 5, Washington, DC: AIA., 2006
2006
Getting Real: Design Ethos Now: Proceedings of the ACSA Ninety Fourth Annual
Meeting, eds. R. Cheng, P.Tripeny. Washington, DC: ACSA., 2006
2007
2007
2006-p
2006-p
2004-07
2007
Member, Colleagues Advisory Board, Weisman Art Museum, Minneapolis, MN,
2006-present
Member, McKnight Advisory Committee, advising on the McKnight Arts and
Humanities
Endowment, 2006-present
Advisory Board, Architectural Graphic Standards, AIA National. One of a 7 member
board., 2004-2007
Chair, ACSA White Paper on BIM and Comprehensive Studio, advisory for the
NAAB
accreditation review., 2007
2007
Facilitator, Architectural Education in the 21st Century, ACSA/AIA Cranbrook
Teachers Seminar. Bloomfield Hills, MI., 2007
Invited contributor, White Paper on The Future of Architectural Education, AIA
Technology
in Architectural Practice Conference., 2007
Invited Panelist, Women in Administration, hosted by the Vice-Provost for
Academic
Affairs, UMN, 2007
2007
Invited participant, AIA Research Summit, Seattle, WA., 2007
2007
2006
Juror, AIA National BIM TAP awards., 2007
Co-Chair, "Getting Real: Design Ethos Now." ACSA Annual Meeting, Salt Lake City,
Utah., 2006
2004
Presentor & Participant, Case Study Initiative. ACSA/AIA Cranbrook Teachers
Seminar. Bloomfield Hills, MI., 2004
2007
2007
2006
Can BIM Inspire New Directions in Architectural Education? ACSA National
Meeting. Philadelphia, PA., 2007
Curricular Strategies. Faculty Development Lecture Series. Howard University,
Washington DC., 2006
2006
The Internship Trap. AIA Minnesota Convention Panel, Minneapolis, MN., 2006
2007
2006
2005
Turning the Big Ship: BIM and Architectural Education. Panel on BIM. ACSA
Adminstrators' Conference. Phoenix, AZ. (presented by proxy due to illness)., 2006
"Evolving Tools, Evolving Ideas." Education Summit. Association of Computer
Aided
Design in Architecture (ACADIA). Waterloo, Canada. (also broadcast on
Architecture Radio). 2005
John Comazzi
Assistant Professor
Teaching Area
Design
Courses
Arch 8255 Graduate Design IV
Arch 5280 Graduate Project Based Module
Master of Science in Architectural History and Theory, University of Michigan: Taubman College of Architecture
and Urban Planning, 1999
Master of Architecture, University of Michigan: Taubman College of Architecture and Urban Planning, 1998
B.S.-Architecture, University of Virginia: School of Architecture, 1993
Assistant Professor of Architecture UMN: College of Design_School of Architecture 2006-present
Lecturer in Architecture, University of Michigan: Taubman College of Architecture and Urban Planning,
2001-2006
Adjunct-Lecturer in Architecture, University of Michigan: Taubman College of Architecture and Urban Planning,
1999-2001
Founding Partner, design-CRED, Minneapolis, MN, 2006-present
Founding Partner, Wilkins + Comazzi design L.L.C., Ann Arbor, MI, 2002-2006
Principal, PLY Architecture + Design, Ann Arbor, MI, 2000-2002
Architecture Intern, David W. Osler, Architect, Ann Arbor, MI, 1999-2000
2008
AIA Education Honor Awards (with Renee Cheng, Ritu Baht, Ozayr Saloojee and
Marc Swackhamer), 2008
2007
School Buildings-The State of Affairs: $3100. SHARE-Boston (Swiss House for
Advanced Research and Education). Consulate of Switzerland.
2007
2007
Architecture and Pedagogy: $1000. Office of International Programs Travel Grant,
CASE: Council for the Advancement and Support of Education, Bronze Award for
Excellence in Design, CDES Fall 2007 Lecture Poster (with J. Boyd-Brent and J.
Schacht)
2007
Dayton Hudson Faculty Fellowship, Research Topic: The Architectural Eye of
Balthazar Korab. Awarded by the Metropolitan Design Center
2007
UMN, Successful Grant-In-Aid Proposal selected as Exemplary for posting on the
UMN's Graduate School website to "provide new applicants with a framework and a
useful guide in writing their own proposals.", 2007
2008
The Saarinen Legacy: Photographs by Balthazar Korab, Minneapolis Central Public
Library, Minneapolis, MN, October-November, 2008. Designer + Curator (with B.
Korab, C. Korab, and A. Jarvi)
2008
Drawings and Illustrations produced for book: Feasting in the City of Paradise, by
Sussan Babaie, PhD, forthcoming 2008, Role: Illustrator and artistic director for
Interpretive and analytical diagrams (with Sam Zeller)
Performance and Architecture: A review of the Walker Art Center and the Tyrone
Guthrie Theater, in Journal of Architectural Education, Blackwell Publishing, Inc.,
forthcoming 2008, (I also supplied all images used in the essay).
07, 08
Scaffolds, Billboards and Cupcakes: Design Camp 2007, by John Comazzi, Anselmo
Canfora and Wendy Friedmeyer, Fabric Architecture, January/February 2008.
Features the work of Design Camp 2007
2008
Making Material Matter: Design in Education, Creative Engagements: Teaching with
Children, 4th Global Conference, July 5-7, 2008, Mansfield College, Oxford,
2008
2008
2008
2008
2006-08
2007
2007
School of Architecture-Urban-Suburban-Rural Committee, member, 2008-P
School of Architecture-Candidate Search Committee member: Design-TechnologySustainability, 2008
Architecture Project Leader-Project Leader, Open Architecture Competition -Invited
by Jeffery Swainhart, MAFH, 2008
School of Architecture-member, Graduate Curriculum Committee, School of
Architecture 2006-2008
School of Architecture-recruiter, School of Architecture-Graduate Program, (UVA &
University of Maryland), 2007
School of Architecture-reviewer, Undergraduate Research Opportunities Program,
College of Design, 2007
2008
2008
2008
Children, Spaces, Relations: New thoughts on Environmental Design for Young
Children fromReggio-Emilia, Italy, Institute for Child Development Colloquium
Series, University of Minnesota, College of Education and Human Development,Invited by BarbaraMurphy,
Director of the Shirley G. Moore Lab School, February, 2008
Design as Catalyst for Learning, Cooper-Hewitt Summer Design Institute
Workshop, Walker Art Center, Minneapolis, MN
Making Material Matter: Design in Education, Creative Engagements: Teaching with
Children, 4th Global Conference, July 5-7, 2008, Mansfield College, Oxford, United
Kingdom
William F. Conway
Associate Professor
Teaching Area
Urban Design, Design
Courses
Arch 5750 Territorial Cities
Master of Architecture, Yale University, School of Architecture, New Haven, Connecticut, 1989
B.A. Architecture, North Dakota State University, Fargo, North Dakota, 1986
UMN, School of Architecture, Associate Professor of Architecture, 2008-present
Thesis Coordinator, Associate Professor of Architecture, UMN, School of Architecture, 2004-2008
Visiting Professor, School of Architecture University of Arkansas, 2006
Principal: Conway+Schulte Architects, P.A. 113 Washington Avenue North Minneapolis, MN 55401, 2000-present
Department Head, Associate Professor of Architecture, UMN, School of Architecture, 1999-2004
Visiting Artist: American Academy in Rome, 1989-90
Principal: Conway+Schulte 428 Fifth Street, Suite B, Ames, Iowa 50010, 1994-2000
Designer: Cesar Pelli & Associates New Haven, Connecticut., 1988-1989
Teaching Fellow and Project Manager-Knowledge Map Project, Design Institute, UMN, 2002-2003
Licensed Architect: States of Arkansas, Wisconsin, Iowa, Minnesota
NCARB Certificate, No. 49953, 1998
Member, Urban Land Institute, 2006-present
Member, US Green Building Council 2005-present
Member, AIA, 1999-present
2008
AIA Honor Award for Regional and Urban Design, Visioning Rail Transit in
Northwest Arkansas:, Lifestyles and Ecologies, William F. Conway with University of
Arkansas Community Design Center,
2008
NCARB Prize, Visioning Rail Transit in Northwest Arkansas:, Lifestyles and
Ecologies, William F. Conway with University of Arkansas Community Design
Center, 2008
2007
AIA Education Honor Award for Excellence, Visioning Rail Transit in Northwest
Arkansas: Lifestyles and Ecologies, William F. Conway with University of Arkansas
Community Design Center, 2007
2007
Merit Award, Archiving Memory, William F. Conway with Nancy Ann Coyne and
Marcy Schulte, Society of Environmental Graphic Design (SEGD), 2007
2006
MACTac Award, Archiving Memory, William F. Conway with Nancy Ann Coyne and
Marcy Schulte, First Place, Interior Signage, 2006
2005
AIA Minneapolis Merit Award, Iowa State University Transit Shelter,
Conway+Schulte Architects, P.A., 2005
2005
First Place: Invited Competition Meredith Corporation Headquarters, Entry Pavilion,
Media Center, Resource Center and Site Design, Des Moines, IA, 2005
2008
Lotte Tower New construction Busan, Korea, 2008
2008
MacArthur Park Master Plan, Little Rock, AR., 2008
2008
Paul Nelson Photo Studio Interior renovation Minneapolis, MN, 2008
2008
Residence New construction Edina, MN, 2008
2008
Stone Arch Lofts Interior renovation Minneapolis, MN, 2008
2008
Core Distribution Interior renovation Minneapolis, MN, 2008
2007
"Culture and the Recalibration of First Ring Suburbs," with Marcy Schulte Green
Braid: Towards and Architecture of Ecology, Economy and Equity, Ed. by Kim
Tanzer and RafaelLongoria Pub. by Routledge, 2007, p. 113-121
2007
NWA Rail Transit in Northwest Arkansas: Lifestyles and Ecologies Ed. by Stephen
Luoni pub. University of Arkansas Community Design Center, 2007
2007
Tracing History Architecture Minnesota Pub. By AIA Minnesota April 2007, Vol. 33
Issue #2 Article by Mason Riddle
2007
Constitution Committee, member College of Design UMN, 2007
2007
2006
ACSA National Awards Juror ACSA Administrators Conference Minneapolis, MN,
Search Committee, member Director, Metropolitan Design Center College of
Design UMN
Paper Reviewer ACSA West Meeting Surfacing Urbanisms: Recent Approaches to
Metropolitan Design
2006
Chair, Professional Practice Committee School of Architecture UMN
2006
M. Arch. Ad hoc Curriculum Committee School of Architecture UMN
2007
2008
Visioning: MacArthur Park, Master Plan Arkansas Art Center Little Rock, AK
2006
Culture and the Recalibration of First Ring Suburbs with Marcy Schulte Surfacing
Urbanisms, ACSA West Regional Conference Woodbury University Los Angeles, CA
2006
Recalibration of First Ring Suburbs and Mid-Century Homes with Marcy Schulte
Mid-Atlantic Popular / American Culture Association Conference Baltimore, MD
2006
The City in a Park: How Cities Use Parks AIA Little Rock invited lecture Arkansas
Art Center Little Rock, AK
Gunter Dittmar
Associate Professor
Teaching Area
Design, Theory
Courses
Arch 8251 Graduate Studio I
Arch 5451 Defining the Discipline
Arch 5452 Architecture: Design, Form, Order, Meaning
M.Arch Yale University, 1967
Dipl. Ing. (Arch.), Tech. University, Munich, Germany, 1965
Studies in Philosophy, Ludwig. Maximilians University, Munich, 1975-1976
Director of Design, School of Architecture, 2008/2009
UMN, Department of Architecture, Assoc. Professor, 1970
Brandenburg Tech. University, M-Term, Visiting Professor, 2002
2007
The (Endless) Question of Architecture, article in Festschrift in honor of Karsten
Harries, Cloud-Cuckoo-Land, International Journal of Architectural Theory, E. Führ,
ed., 2007
2008
Director of Design
2008
Chair, Graduate Curriculum Committee
2004-present
Governing Faculty Committe
2003
Chair, CALA (College of Arch. & L.Arch.)Curriculum Committee 2003-p
2004
Chair, Design Faculty Search Committee
2008
Chair, History/Theory/Culture Committee
2007
Coordinator, Graduate Design I (together with Sharon Roe)
2003-8
Member History/Theory/Culture Committee
2003-present
Member, Architecture Admissions Committee
2003-present
Member, Architecture Design Committee
2003-present
Member, Architecture Graduate Curriculum Committee
2007
Member, Technology/Design Faculty Search Committee
2008
Peter Zumthor/Architecture of Being, Building and Dwelling, MplsPublic Library,
2007
Design Intelligence and Design Thinking/or Lessons Learned from Paper Folding
(Exercise)', Oaxaca Workshop on Beginning Design Education, 2007
2005
2003
Invited Panelist and Respondent, Symposium 'The City and Identity, Oaxaca,
Mexico,
Invited Lecture Presentation 'Is Sustainable Architecture Sustainable', Conference
on Sustainable Architecture, Oaxaca, Mexico, 2003
Gregory Donofrio
Assistant Professor
Joins faculty in Jan 2009
Teaching Area
Heritage Preservation
Courses
Arch 4150 Topics in Historic Preservation
2008
2001
1998
Cornell University College of Architecture, Art and Planning Ithaca, NY
Ph.D., Historic Preservation Planning (expected Dec.)
Cornell University, Ithaca, NY
M.A., Historic Preservation Planning
Vassar College, Poughkeepsie, NY
B.A., major: History of Science & Technology, Departmental Honors; minor:
American History
Spring 2007 Cornell University College of Architecture, Art and Planning, Department of City and
Regional Planning, Visiting Lecturer.
2003-2006 Cornell University College of Architecture, Art and Planning, Department of
Architecture, , Graduate Teaching Assistant
2001-2003 New York State Historic Preservation Office, Waterford, NY
Historic Sites Restoration Coordinator for New York City, NYS Grade 19 (Scientific &
Technical)
2005-present
Private Architectural Conservation and Historic Preservation Consultant,
Philadelphia, PA
Summer 1999
Jablonski Berkowitz Conservation, Inc., New York, NY
2005
Student Paper Competition Award Winner, Agriculture, Food & Human Values
($500)
2007
Andrew W. Mellon Fellow, $2,000, Massachusetts Historical Society, Boston, MA
2003-2005 National Council for Preservation Education (NCPE) Fellowship, $30,000
2003-2004 Historic Preservation Research Fellowship, $5,000, Cornell University
2000
John W. Reps Award for Superior Academic Achievement, Cornell University 19982000
Department Fellowship, Cornell University
1998-2000 Eloise Ellery Graduate Fellowship, $2,000, given by Vassar College
current
current
Dissertation “The Container and the Contained: The Functional Preservation of
Historic Food Markets”
“Urban Planning, the Natural Environment, and Public Health,” with Nancy Wells,
Ph.D., submitted July 2008 for inclusion in the Encyclopedia of Environmental
Health, edited by Jerome Nriagu, to be published by Elsevier in 2009.
Thomas Fisher
Professor and Dean
Teaching Area
Theory
Courses
Arch 5411 Principles of Design Theory
MA, Case Western Reserve, 1980
BArch, Cornell, 1975
Dean, 1996-present
1996-p
Associate member of the American Institute of Architects, 1996-present
1996-p
Member of the Association of Collegiate Schools of Architecture, 1996-present
2005-p
Member, Urban Land Institute, 2005-present
2006
AIA Minnesota President's Citation, 2006
2005
AIA Minnesota Special Award "Leadership in Architectural Education" 2005
2005
Minnesota Monthly, "10 Minnesotans Changing your World" 2005
in progress
Architectural Ethics, book in progress for Princeton Architectural Press
in progress
2008
Salmela Architect, II, book in progress for UMN Press
Ensuring a Healthy and Prosperous Future, Architecture: Celebrating the Past,
Designing the Future, 2008
2008
Public Interest Architecture, Expanding Architecture, Design as Activism, 2008
2008
Seeing Ghost Ghosts, Building an Architectural Vision, 2008
2008
The Architecture School as a Type, Designing for Designers, 2008
2008
2002-08
Architectural Design and Ethics: Tools for Survival, Architectural Press, 2008;
Articles: 77 in a variety of professional and popular magazines and newspapers from
2002-2008
2008
Designing for Designers: Lessons Learned from Schools of Architecture, edited with
Jack Nasar Wolfgang Preiser, Fairchild, 2008
2007
A New Social Contract, Equity and Sustainable Development The Green Braid, 2007
2007
2006
The Epicurean House Farrar House, Bohlin Cywinski Jackson, 2007
Architecture's Pre-Medieval Condition T/here, A Journal of Architecture and
Landscape Architecture, 2006
2006
Reconciling Art and Design Praxis/Practice, 2006
2005
Architectural Research Architectural Graphic Standards, 2005
2005
2005
Design Practice in Professional Practice 101, 2005
Home Among the Homeless T/here, A Journal of Architecture and Landscape
Architecture, 2005
2005
If You're Cold, Add Layers Gould Evans, Architects, 2005
2005
Lake/Flato Architects, Rockport Press, 2005
2005
Salmela Architect, UMN Press, 2005
1996-p.
Board Member, AIA Minnesota, 1996-present.
2004-p
Advisory Board Member, Faith & Form, 2004-present
2008-09
President Elect, Association of Collegiate Schools of Architecture, 2008-09
2008
Architectural Design and Ethics St. Olaf College, 2008
2008
Sustainability and Ethics, University of New Mexico, 2008
2005
Studio Culture: a 21st Century Model University of Manitoba, 2005
2003
Architectural Form and Architectural Education University of Lisbon, 2003
2003
Salmela Architect, Bohlin Cywinski Jackson University of Hartford, 2003
2003
Salmela Architect Northeastern University, 2003
Mary Guzowski
Associate Professor
Teaching Area
Sustainability, Daylighting
Courses
Arch 5516 Tech II: Luminous & Thermal Design
Arch 8561 Sustainable Design Theory and Practice
Master of Architecture, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, 1990
Bachelor of Arts, Major in Fine Arts, Kalamazoo College, Kalamazoo, MI, 1982
L'ecole des Beaux-Arts, Aix-en-Provence, France
1998-date Associate Professor, School of Architecture, UMN, Minneapolis, MN
IEQ Coordinator (with Rachelle Schoessler Lynn), CALA GreenLight Charette, CALA, January 2005.
2001-2004
Member, ACSA Task Force for Sustainability.
2006
Special Recognition in Design Education, American Institute of Architects
Committee on the
Environment, MS Sustainable Design Program, 2006 (received as Chair on behalf
of the MS
Sustainable Design Committee).
2004
Educator Award, American Institute of Architects Minnesota, 2004.
2000-p
2006-08
Minnesota Sustainable Design Guide, UMN, (with J. Carmody et al.), 2000-on
going. Neutral Design Project,” American Institute of Architects, 2008-2009,
“Carbon
$75,000 (with $75,000 in matching funds from an Anonymous Foundation) (CoP.I. with Terri Meyer Boake and John Quale; P.I.: Jim Wasley).
“Minnesota Zero Energy Design Protocol (mnZED Protocol),” Minnesota Pollution
Control Agency (MPCA), 2007-2009, $60,000 (Co-P.I. with J. Carmody and R.
Strong).
“Renewable-Architecture Education Initiative,” MPCA, 2006-2008, $60,000 (P.I.
with Co-P.I., J. Carmody).
2007
“Is Beauty Only Skin Deep: The Building Envelope and Its Implications for
Daylighting Design,” 2007 Proceedings of the American Solar Energy Society
2007
“The New Architecture of the Sun and Wind,” American Institute of Architects
Committee on the Environment Sustainable Design Whitepapers, AIA COTE, 2007.
2005-07
“A Multicultural Approach to Ecological Design Education,” Center for Teaching and
Learning Services, UMN, 2005-2007, $2,500 (P.I.).
2008-09
2007-09
2004-07
“The Affordable Housing Initiative,” U.S. Department of Housing and Urban
Development, 2004-2007, $400,000 (Co-P.I. with J. Carmody et al.).
2007
“Is Beauty Only Skin Deep,” American Solar Energy Society (ASES), July 2007.
2006
“An Integral Theory of Sustainable Design Explored Through Daylighting,” 2006
Proceedings of the American Solar Energy Society, July 2006 (with M. DeKay).
2006
“Solar Design in Minnesota: Lessons from Zero Energy Housing,” 2006
Proceedings of the American Solar Energy Society, July 2006 (with W. Weber).
2007
Coordinator and Moderator, “Sustainability Now,” Associated Collegiate School of
Architecture (ACSA) Administrator’s Conference, Minneapolis, MN, October 2007
(with Tom Fisher, Judith Sheine, and Jim Wasley).
2007
Coordinator and Moderator,“Architecture 2030 Challenge: Zero-energy Design in
Minnesota,” Ed Mazria, Third Annual Earth Day Forum,
00-01,05-07
Paper reviewer, American Solar Energy Society (ASES), 2007, 2006, 2005, 2001,
01,04,06,07
Paper reviewer, ACSA Annual Meetings, 2007, 2006, 2004, 2001.
2006
Coordinator and Moderator, “Innovations in Solar and Renewable Energy,” Thomas
Spiegelhalter, Second Annual CALA Earth Day Forum, April 2006.
Paper reviewer, Journal of Solar Energy, September 2006 (J. Page, J.L. Scartezzini, J.
Kaenf, N. Morel, “On-site Performance of Electrochrome Glazings Coupled to an
Anidolic Daylighting System”).
2006
Moderator, “Design for Climate Recovery,” ASES, 2006.
2005
Coordinator and Moderator, “Integrated Sustainable Design,” Robert Berkebile, First
Annual CALA Earth Day Forum, April 2005.
2006
2007
“Teaching Sustainability in Schools of Architecture,” ASES, July 2007. (Invited
presentation to a professional audience with Jim Wasley et al.)
2007
“Greening the Curriculum,” ASES, July 2007. (Invited presentation to a professional
audience with Michael Zaretsky et al.)
2007
“Sustainable Design Education,” Walter Wagner Forum, 2007 American Institute of
Architects (AIA) Convention, San Antonio, Texas, May 2007.
2007
“On Ecological Design Education,” AIA Conference on Sustainability in Higher
Education,” AIA, February 2007. (
Rachel Iannacone
Teaching Area
Modern History
Courses
Arch 4434/5434 Modern Architecture
Arch 4432/5432 Contemporary Architecture
Ph.D., University of Pennsylvania, 2005
M.A., University of Pennsylvania, 2001
B.A., Art History Honors, University of Pennsylvania, May 1994
Fall 2006 –Present: Visiting Assistant Professor, College of Design, UMN, Minneapolis, MN
Fall 2005 – Spring 2006: Visiting Assistant Professor, Art History Department, Ithaca College, Ithaca, NY
2005-09
College Art Association 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009
05, 07, 09
Society of Architectural Historians 2005, 2007, 2009
2002-03
Dumbarton Oaks Junior Fellowship, Garden and Landscape Studies, 2002-2003
present
Designing Play Book project, target date: Fall 2011
2009
College Housing in the Post-World War II period Article project, target date
2009
New York City and Beaux Arts Parks Article Project, target date: Fall 2009
“The Small Parks Movement in New York City and the Civilizing Process of
Immigrants at the Turn of the Twentieth Century,” Gardens and the Construction of
Cultures in the Americas (Washington D.C.: Dumbarton Oaks, 2008).
“Central Park,” and “Neighborhood Playgrounds and Parks,” Robert Moses and the
Transformation of New York edited by Hilary Ballon and Kenneth T. Jackson (New
York: W.W. Norton, 2007).
2008
2007
2009
“An Elevating Influence: Beaux-Arts Public Parks in New York City.” Agents of
Civilization: Civic Art and the National Body at the Turn of the Twentieth Century,
Association of Historians of American Art, College Art Association Conference,
February 2009.
2007
“College Housing for Co-eds, Eero Saarinen’s Women’s Dormitory at the University
of Pennsylvania,” Art History Department, UMN, December 4, 2007.
2006
“Public Space in New York at the Turn of the Twentieth Century,” Design@Noon,
College of Design, School of Architecture, UMN, November 1, 2006.
2004
“The Meaning and Use of Public Space in the Early Twentieth Century: Fannie
Griscom Parsons and the First Garden Schools of New York City,” Women and the
Creation of Public Landscape, Society of Architectural Historians Annual Meeting.
2004
“ ‘A little lawn-planting intelligence’: Samuel Parsons Jr. and the Debate over Public
Space in Twentieth Century New York,” Philadelphia Museum of Art Symposium.
Assistant Professor
Teaching Area
Technology, Design, Heritage Preservation
Courses
Arch 5517 Technology III: Structural Systems
Arch 5280 Project Based Module
University of Alcala de Henares and Carolina Foundation Excellence Program, Madrid, Spain. 2005 Master Degree
in Conservation and Restoration of Heritage Cities and Buildings.
Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México UNAM. Mexico City 1994 Licensed Architect with distinction
(professional degree to practice architecture).
Assistant Professor of Architecture, Fall 2008 to present
Visiting Assistant Professor, UMN. Spring 2006 – Spring 2008
Design Principal . Benjamin Ibarra Architecture, 2004 - 2006
Cass Gilbert Visiting Professor, UMN. Fall 2002, 2004.
Design Principal. Lastra – Ibarra Arquitectos. 1999 - 2004
Cass Gilbert Visiting Professor, UMN. Fall 2002, 2004.
1998
Registered Architect by the Mexican General Professions Department within the
Department of Public Education
ICOMOS US member.
National Trust for Historic Preservation member.
Spanish Association for Cultural Heritage Management
2005
Carolina Foundation Fellowship, Excellence Program in Heritage Conservation at
Spain. 2005
2004
Cass Gilbert Fellowship, CALA, UMN, 2002 and 2004.
Stereotomy of the Sixteenth Century Buildings at Mixteca Alta, Oaxaca, Mexico.
Completion:
present
present
2008
date tbd
UNESCO mission to the Philippines. Advisor, Nomination Dossier of Batanes
Islands. Center for World Heritage Studies (CWHS), U of M and UNESCO.
Completion Date: February 2009
Inventory System of Historic Buildings at Baku, Azerbaijan. CWHS, U of M and
UNESCO. Documentation completed 2006, Publication December 2008
Research / book: “The Heritage of Icheri Sheher at Baku Azerbaijan”. World
Heritage Center UNESCO. Forthcoming
2007
Essay: “The City of Oaxaca as a World Heritage Site”. Book in commemoration of
the 475th anniversary of Oaxaca City. Casa de la Ciudad, Harp Foundation. 2007
2007
Essay: “Can BIM inspire a new direction in Architectural Education?” With Renee
Cheng. ACSA National Conference Proceedings. 2007
2007
Article: “The stereotomy of the Open Chapel at Teposcolula, Mexico”. Loggia
Magazine Number 20, College of Architects, Valencia, Spain. 2007
2006
Essay: “Sixteenth Century Indigenous Architecture, and the Monastic House of San
Juan Teposcolula, Oaxaca”. ARPA Conference Proceedings, Valladolid, Spain. 2006
2007, 2008
Research Fellow. Center for World Heritage Studies. UMN. Fall 2007, Spring 2008.
2007
Seminar in Modern Heritage in Mexico City. Coordinator of the seminar with
Center for World Heritage Studies. UMN. Fall 2007.
2007
Final review guest reviewer. Sam Fox School of Design and Visual Arts, Department
of Architecture. Washington University of Saint Louis. Fall 2007
2007
2006, 2007
Final review guest reviewer. Department of Architecture. University of Arkansas.
Graduate Admissions Committee. College of Design, School of Architecture. UMN.
Spring,2006 - Spring 2007
2005
Seminar in Latin American Heritage at Madrid, Spain. Coordinator of the seminar
with the Cultural Heritage Spanish Association. 2005
2008
“Oaxaca a World Heritage City of the present time”. "Sacred Sites | Sacred Sights:
Past/Present/Future," CDes UMN 2008
“Stereotomic and Structural challenges of Ancient Masonry Buildings” University of
Arkansas. 2008
2007
“Oaxaca a World Heritage City of the present time”. National Trust for Historic
Preservation Conference. Twin Cities 2007
2008
2007
2005
2005
“Can BIM inspire a new direction in Architectural Education?”. With Renee Cheng
at ACSA National Conference. Philadelphia 2007
“Renovation of Sixteenth Century Indigenous Architecture, San Juan Teposcolula, a
Sustainable and Regional Development Project” University of Alcala de Henares,
Spain. 2005
"Geometry, stereotomy and graphic representation in the conservation of heritage in
Oaxaca, Mexico". Seminar in Latin American Heritage, Museum of America,
Madrid, Spain. 2005
Cynthia Jara
Associate Professor
Teaching Area
History, theory, design
Courses
Arch 4701 Introduction to Urban Form and Issues
Arch 5711Urban Design
Arch 4284 Undergraduate Studio 4
Education M.Arch, Columbia University 1977
M.A. in Curriculum and Teaching, Columbia University 1972
B.A. in History, Carleton College 1971
Teaching and UMN, Associate Professor 1997-Present
Administrative Director of Graduate Studies 2001-02
UMN, Assistant Professor 1983-97
Colunbia University, Instructor of Architecture 1981-85
New York University, Adjunct Lecturer 1982-85
Professional I.M. Pei & Partners, New York 1978-82
UMN, Institute of Technology
2000-p
National Architectural Accrediting Board, Visiting Team 2000-Present
1998-p
UMN, Faculty Senate 1998-Present
2001
Research Rockefeller Archive Center, Travel Grant 2001
1992
Professional Honors UMN, Single Quarter Leave 1992
1986
George Taylor Award for Distinguished Teaching 1986
1991-4
UMN, Graduate School Grant-in-Aid 1991-94
1995
1997
1996
1996
Publications "Adolf Loos's Raumplan Theory," Journal of Architectural Education,
48:3 (February 1995), pp. 185-201.
"Adolf Loos and Ludwig Wittgenstein: The Common Bond of Sprachkritik," ARRIS:
Journal of the Southeast Chapter of the Society of Architectural Historians, 7 (1997),
pp. 19-31.
“The Forest Hills Experiment: Philanthropy, Urbanism, Design, and Technology,”
Proceedings of the 84th ACSA Annual Meeting and Technology Conference
(Washington, D.C.: ACSA, 1996), pp. 624-30.
“Prefabrication in the Design of Housing at Forest Hills Gardens in New York,
1909-1919," Proceedings of the ACSA European Conference (Washington, D.C.:
ACSA, 1996), pp. 282-89.
1999-p
Judicial Committee 1999-Present
2000-p
Subcommittee on Twin Cities Facilities Support Services 2000-Present
Michael (Mic) Johnson
Professor in Practice
Teaching Area
Comprehensive studio
Courses
Arch 8255
Bachelor of Architecture, University of Oregon, 1976
Professor in Practice, College of Architecture and Landscape Architecture (Graduate Design
Studio), University of Minnesota, 2003 to present
Adjunct Professor of Architecture, School of Architecture (Design Studio), Univ. of Oregon, 1981,
1984, 1994-1998
Adjunct Professor of Architecture, School of Art (Design Studio), Portland State University, 1993,
1994
Visiting Design Critic and Lecturer Univ. of Notre Dame, 1990; Arizona State Univ., 1990,
Oklahoma State Univ., 1991 Univ. of Oregon, 1979-1984, 1992-1993; Oregon School of Design,
1983-1984; Portland State Univ., 1993
Design Principal, Ellerbe Becket, Minneapolis, Minnesota, 2006-present
Principal, RSP Architects, Minneapolis, Minnesota, 2002-2006
Design Principal, Ellerbe Becket, Minneapolis, Minnesota, 1998-2002
Partner, Johnson Design Studio Architecture, Portland, Oregon, 1993-1998
Design Consultant, Ellerbe Becket, Minneapolis, Minnesota, 1993-1998
Design Partner, Yost Grube Hall Johnson, Architecture, Portland, Oregon, 1990-1993
Design Principal and Chief for Architecture and Interiors Group, Ellerbe Becket, Minneapolis,
Minnesota, 1985-1990
Senior Project Designer, SERA Architects, Portland, Oregon, 1983-1985
Designer, Skidmore, Owings & Merrill, Portland, Oregon, 1979-1983
Design Consultant, Daniel Mann Johnson Mendenhall, Portland, Oregon, 1978-1979
Registered Architect, State of Oregon, 1981; and State of Minnesota, 2008
National Council of Architectural Registration Boards, 2005
Citation of Merit Award, Healthcare Design magazine. University Hospital, Dubai Healthcare
City/Harvard Medical International, Dubai, United Arab Emirates. 2008.
First Place, Commercial Category: Ceramic Tiles of Italy Award. Target Northern Campus,
Building D, Brooklyn Park, Minnesota. 2007.
Facility Design Award, Association of College Unions International. Coffman Memorial Union
Renovation, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota. 2005.
Healthcare Design (Samsung Cancer Center and University Hospital), 2008
Architecture Minnesota (Samsung Cancer Center), 2008
Healthcare Design (Yonsei University Medical Center, New Severance Hospital), 2006
Architectural Record (Target Store, Albany, California), 2005
Architecture and Culture (Yonsei University Medical Center, New Severance Hospital), 2005
Landscape Architecture (Healing Gardens, Good Samaritan Hospital and Emanuel Hospital),
2003
Portland Tribune (Emanuel Children’s Garden), 2003
Architecture Minnesota (Coffman Memorial Union), 2003
“The New Urban Landscape,” Exhibition of Drawings, Minneapolis, Minnesota, 2004
“Towers”, Exhibition of Drawings, Minneapolis, Minnesota, 2002
Korea’s Samsung Cancer Center: Leading-edge Integrated Treatment, Education and Research.
Tradeline Academic Medical Center Conference, October 2008.
Yonsei University Medical Center’s New Severance Hospital: Planning and Design that Respects a
Cultural and Contextual Framework. Healthcare Design.07 Conference, The Center for
Health Design and the AIA Academy of Architecture for Health, Dallas, Texas, November
2007.
At the Edge of Community and University Development. Society for College and University
Planning, North Central Regional Conference, Ann Arbor, Michigan, October 2007.
A Global Perspective: International Healthcare Design and Development. Panel Discussion
Participant, Healthcare Facilities Symposium, Chicago, Illinois, October 2007.
Engaging the Community and Urban Context in Plant Design: Lessons Learned from District
Energy St. Paul’s
Yonsei University Medical Center’s New Severance Hospital: An Urban Oasis. International
Congress on Design + Health, Glasgow, Scotland, June 2007.
Strategies for Incorporating Big Box Retail into Urban Environments. Portland Business Alliance
Monthly Luncheon, Portland, Oregon, March 2007.
Architecture in the Public Realm. Konkuk University – Invited Lecture, Seoul, Korea, March 2007.
900 Nicollet Case Study.
International Healthcare Practice. Twin Cities Healthcare Engineering Association, Minneapolis,
Minnesota, November 2006.
Yonsei University Medical Center’s New Severance Hospital: An Urban Oasis. Healthcare
Facilities Symposium, Chicago, Illinois, October 2006.
Urban Field Notes. University of Minnesota College of Design, Minneapolis, Minnesota, October
2006.
Riverbend Commons and Coffman Union. Designing, Building and Renovating a Multi-Use
Facility, National Association of College Auxiliary Services, Regional Conference,
Minneapolis, Minnesota, August 2005.
Big Box Retail in Dense Downtowns. University of Notre Dame School of Architecture & City of
South Bend Department of Community and Economic Development, South Bend, Indiana,
April 2005.
“Coffman Memorial Union Design Process” The A’s to Z’s of Renovation Seminar. Association of
College Unions International Regional Conference, Minneapolis, Minnesota, May 2004.
Lance LaVine
Professor
Teaching Area
Design, Technology, Theory
Courses
Arch 1701 The Designed Environment
Arch 8255 Graduate Studio V
Oaxaca Study Abroad
Master of Architecture, University of Pennsylvania, 1970
Master of City Planning, University of Pennsylvania, 1970
Bachelor of Architecture, UMN, 1968
Professor, School of Architecture, UMN, 1991-present
Coordinator of Oaxaca Program, School of Architecture, UMN, 1998-present
Director of Undergraduate Studies, Department of Architecture, UMN, 1994-2002
Associate Professor, Department of Architecture, UMN, 1980-1991
Visiting Lecturer, Humberside School of Architecture, Kingston Upon Hull, England, Spring 1985
Visiting Lecturer, Tainjin University, Tainjin, Peoples Republic of China, Spring 1981
Assistant Professor, SALA, UMN, 1975-80
Assistant Professor, SALA, UMN, 1975-80
2008
Chair, BDA Workshop, 2008
2006
Chair, Core Curriculum Task Force, 2006
2007
Chair, White Paper Group for Technology+Design
2002-04
Wilder Affordable House Demonstration Project with Mary Guzowski, Stroush Wilder
Foundation, St. Paul, MN, 2002-2004
prior to 03
Energy+Architecture with U of Oregon, Developing strategy for use of energy use
simulation progress, energy scheming in a design studio, 1999-2001
2005, 2008
Constructing Ideas, Kendall/Hunt Publishing Co., First Edition 2005, Second Edition
2006
Conversations in Oaxaca: The City and Identity, Editor and Contributor, “Institutions,
Architecture, and Urban Residence, pp. 41-55, 2006, CASA de la Ciudad
2009
2009
School of Architecture Admissions Committee, Spring 2009
Place-empathetic Architecture: The Work of Enrique Lastra and Daniel Lopez, PISO,
Mexico City, May 2009.
Thomas Meyer
Teaching Area
Comprehensive design
Courses
Arch 8254 Technical Development in Design; Arch 8254 Comprehensive Studio
Bachelor of Architecture, UMN, 1971
Adjunct Associate Professor in Practice, UMN College of Design, 2006–Present
Founding Principal/Supervisory Architect—Meyer, Scherer & Rockcastle, Ltd., 1981–Present
Assistant Professor, UMN College of Architecture and Landscape Architecture (CALA), 1982–1992
Associate Professor, UMN College of Architecture and Landscape Architecture (CALA), 1993–1999
2006-p
Member, UMN Task Force on College Design, 2006–Present
2005-p
Member, AIA Minnesota Board of Directors, 2005–Present
2007
Member, UMN Twin Cities Master Plan Design and Preservation Work Team, 2007
Registered Architect, State of Wisconsin, Registration #1348
NCARB, Certification #47865, File #71907
Minnesota Preservation Alliance
Registered Architect, States of Minnesota, Iowa, Wisconsin, Arizona, New Jersey
2007
AIA Minnesota/Midwest Home Architect of Distinction, 2007
2006
Elected into AIA College of Fellows, 2006
2005
National AIA Honor Award for Architecture (Mill City Museum), 2005
2004
National Trust Historic Preservation Award (Mill City Museum), 2004
2004
Waterfront Center Excellence on the Waterfront Top Honor (Mill City Museum), 2004
Minnesota Chapter ASID Interior Design Competition Award, First Place for Residential
Design/
Multiple Spaces (Cowles Loft), 2004
2004
2009
City House Interpretive Center (Saint Paul, MN) Conversion of former grain elevator
into 10,200 sf interpretive center on Mississippi River, to be completed in 2009.
2009
Valspar Ameriprise Corporation Office (Minneapolis, MN) Office fit-out for multi-billion
dollar corporation, to be completed in 2009.
ongoing
DeLaSalle High School Playing Fields (Minneapolis, MN) New playing fields for school
and city park board, located on Nicollet Island, to be completed in 2008.
Centennial Mills Redevelopment (Portland, OR) Redevelopment of 12 historic industrial
mill structures on Portland riverfront into community-defining mix of shops,
restaurants, offices, and educational facilities, completion date tbd.
ongoing
Asian Pacific Cultural Center (Saint Paul, MN) Feasibility study for adaptive reuse of
historic brewery site into shared cultural center, completion date tbd.
2007
Schaar’s Bluff Gathering Center (Nininger Township, MN) New 3,500 sf environmental
center (designed to meet LEED Gold standards), completed in 2007.
2007
Carmichael Lynch Office (Minneapolis, MN) Adaptive reuse of 90,000 sf in former
warehouse for advertising agency, completed in 2007.
2007
Minnesota Valley National Wildlife Refuge Environmental Education Center (Carver,
MN) New 16,000 sf environmental education center, completed in 2007.
2008
2005-p
Member, AIA Minnesota Finance Committee, 2005–Present
2008
Juror, AIA Philadelphia Honor Awards, Philadelphia, PA, 2008
2007
2003present
President, AIA Minnesota, 2007
Numerous AIA state Honor Award juries
2008
Panelist: From Mill to Museum Exhibit Opening Panel Discussion, Minneapolis, MN,
September 11, 2008
2006
Panelist: The Waterfront Center Conference, Portland, OR, September 30, 2006 , Topic:
“Waterfront Cultural and Educational Facilities: The Added Dimension”
2006
Speaker: UMN College of Design Design@Noon Series, Minneapolis, MN, September
20, 2006 Topic: “Design at Noon”
2006
Speaker: Walker Art Center “Drawn Here” Lecture, Minneapolis, MN, June 2006
Nancy Miller
Research Associate, Adjunct Assistant Professor
Teaching Area
Modern History, Urban Planning
Courses
Arch 5711 Introduction to Urban Form and Issues
Ph.D., Department of the History of Art, University of Pennsylvania, 1999
M.Arch, College of Architecture and Landscape Architecture, UMN, 1993
B.A., College of Liberal Arts, UMN, 1989
Director of Undergraduate Studies, School of Architecture, College of Design, June 2008–Present
Associate Director, Center for World Heritage Studies, College of Design, June 2007–Present
Adjunct Assistant Professor & Lecturer, School of Architecture, College of Design, 2007–Present
Research Associate, Center for World Heritage Studies, College of Design, 2006–2007
Adjunct Assistant Professor & Lecturer, Department of Architecture
College of Architecture and Landscape Architecture, 1999–2006
Research Associate, Design Center for American Urban Landscape / Metropolitan Design Center, College of
Architecture and Landscape Architecture, 2000–2004
2007-08
Member, Network of Interdisciplinary Initiatives Working Group, UMN, 2007–
2008
2008
Buckman Fellowship, College of Design, 2008
2009
Social / Architectural History of the UMN Campus, book, under contract to UMN
Press, 2010.
Development of Minnesota Modernism Map tour within www.placeography.org, in
collaboration with the Center for World Heritage Studies and the Minnesota
Historical Society, Spring 2009.
2008
“The Breuer Zone,” Architecture Minnesota (AM), January/February 2008.
2008
“A New Chapter: St. John’s Chapter House Renovation,” AM, January/February
2008
“A Warm Reception: St. John’s Abbey Guesthouse,” AM, January/February 2008.
2008
“Material Matters,” AM, January/February 2008.
2007
“On the Right Track,” AM, November/December 2007.
2007
“Bank Statement: The Westin Minneapolis,” AM, September/October 2007.
2007
“Urban Revolution: Urban Outfitters Headquarters,” AM, September/October 2007.
2007
“Study Hall: Music Ed Building, UMN,” AM, September/October 2007.
2010
2007
“Material Matters,” AM, May/June 2007.
2007
“A Delicate Matter: Benedicta Arts Center Expansion,” AM, March/April 2007.
2007
“Material Matters,” AM, January/February 2007.
2007
Minnesota Modernism Map, 2007
2006
2006
“Pipe Dream: Day Block Renovation,” AM, November/December 2006.
“Turning the Page: Franklin and Sumner Community Libraries,” AM,
September/October 2006.
2006
“Speed Reading,” AM, September/October 2006.
2006
“Straight and Narrow,” AM, July/August 2006.
2006
“Building Blocks,” AM, May/June 2006.
2006
“Material Matters: Plastics,” AM, May/June 2006.
2006
“Arrested Development,” AM, January/February 2006.
2006
“Material Matters: Wood,” AM, March/April 2006.
2005
“Inside Out,” AM, November/December 2005.
2005
“Prison Reform,” AM, September/October 2005.
2005
“Civic Centennial,” AM, January/February 2005.
2004
“Architecture,” New Book of Knowledge, (NY: Scholastic Library Publishing, 2004).
2005-p
2008
Member, Preservation Alliance of Minnesota, Advocacy Committee. 2005–Present
Chair, MS–Heritage Preservation Degree Program Advisory Group, School of
Architecture, College of Design, 2008
2008
Chair, Undergraduate Curriculum Committee, School of Architecture,
2008
Member, Faculty Search Committee, Heritage Preservation, College of Design,
2005
Coordinator, “Capitol Views: Building, Public Life & Culture,” UMN, 2005
2003
Member, Steering Committee, 38th St. Light Rail Station Area Planning Committee,
City of Minneapolis Planning Department. 2003
2008
“From Beaker to Building: Material Innovation in the Architecture of Eero
Saarinen,” ACSA West Regional Conference, Los Angeles, October 2008
2008
“Eero Saarinen in the Corporate Landscape,” Eero Saarinen: Beyond the Measly
ABC, Symposium, Minneapolis Institute of Arts & Walker Art Center, Minneapolis,
2008
Session Moderator, Sacred Sights, Sacred Sites, College of Design, UMN, April 4,
2006
“Past Forward: The Landscape of Modernism in Minnesota Today,” The Future of
the Modern Past, Symposium, Weisman Art Museum, UMN, May 2006.
2004
Rochester Art Center, Rochester, MN, October 14, 2004.
2004
“The Corporate Icon Next Door: A History of the IBM Manufacturing Facility in
Rochester,” Rochester Art Center, Rochester, MN, October 14, 2004.
Andrzej Piotrowski
Associate Professor
Teaching Area
Design, Representation
Courses
Arch 2301 Introduction to Architectural Drawing
Arch 8253 Graduate Design III
Arch 5301 Conceptual Drawing
Magister Inzynier Architekt; Department of Architecture, The Warsaw Polytechnic, Warszawa, Poland; 1979
Associate Professor, Department of Architecture, UMN, 1998-present
Assistant Professor Department of Architecture, UMN, Tenure Track; 1993 – 1998
Assistant Professor Department of Architecture, UMN, 1988-1998
1988-1989, Associate Architect: Mulfinger, Susanka, and Mahady Architects; Minneapolis, MN. USA;
1981-1988, Founder: Piotrowski Architectural Design; Lublin, Poland;
Architectural License, Poland; 1981-now
2006
The American Institute of Architects, Minnesota, Special Award for Education; 2006
2008-p
2002-p
2000-p
2008
2008
“On Interpretations: A Case of Unselfconscious Representation” paper accepted for
publication in Cloud-Cuckoo-Land: International Journal of Architectural Theory; 2008in progress
Architecture of Thought, a book project accepted for publication by the UMN Press.
2000-in progress
2000-Present Architecture of Thought, a major study in history and theory of
architecture, to be published by the UMN Press in 2010.
“Digital Explorations of Byzantine Architecture” a paper accepted for the Media and its
Applications in Cultural Heritage international conference, November, 2008, Petra
University, Amman, Jordan 2008-in progress
“The Spectacle of Architectural Discourses,” at Architectural Theory Review, (13:2,
Routledge, 2008): 130 -144; 2008
2007
“Discerning High Modernism,” a paper proposal submitted to Journal of Architectural
Education, (under review); 2007-in progress
“Le Corbusier and the Modern Modality of Representation” published digitally by The
Role of the Humanities in Design Creativity conference,.
http://www.lincoln.ac.uk/home/conferences/human/papers/Piotrowski.pdf (EMTEC,
University of Lincoln, UK, 2007); 20
2006
“Representational Function of Daylight in the Katholikon of Hosios Loukas,” published
digitally by 21st International Congress of Byzantine Studies,
http://www.byzantinecongress.org.uk/paper/VII/VII.1_Piotrowski.pdf 2006
2006
Served as one of the organizer and curators of the Praxis/Practice exhibition in the
Katherine E. Nash Gallery, Regis Center for Art, UMN. 2006
2007
2006
2003-05
2002-05
Served as one of the organizers of the Site/Life Mapping exhibition at the Minneapolis
College of Art and Design. 2006
Research Instrumentation: An Immersive Projection Environment for Collaborative
Research in Visualization, Perception, Architectural Design and Computer Graphics,
(collaboration with Lee Anderson Department of Architecture, Baoquan Chen, Victoria
Interrante, Gary Meyer, Department of Computer Science and Engineering) supported
by the Linda and Ted Johnson fund
Research and Development of Next Generation Digital Design Tools for Architecture,
(collaboration with Baoquan Chen, Department of Computer Science and Engineering)
supported by the Linda and Ted Johnson fund; 2002-2005
1995-p
2007
1995 - Present, UMN Public Art on the Twin Cities Campus Committee, member;
2007, Member of the ACSA Architecture as Discipline group preparing the NAAB
Accreditation Review Conference;
2002-2005
Founding Member of the UMN Digital Design Consortium;
2004
The American Institute of Architects, Minnesota, 25-Year Award Program, Juror;
2003
UMN Grant in Aid Committee, member,
2007
Presentation at The Role of the Humanities in Design Creativity International
Conference,
EMTEC, University of Lincoln, UK, 15-16th November 2007.
2007
Invited presentation at the UMN Oaxaca Workshop, Oaxaca, Mexico, March 12-17, 2007.
2006
Invited presentation at the 21st International Congress of Byzantine Studies, London,
Julia Robinson
Professor
Teaching Area
Culture and Social Forces
Design
Courses
Arch 3711 Environmental Design and the Sociocultural Context
Ph.D. Delft Technical University, the Netherlands 2004
M.A. Anthropology UMN 1980
Bachelor of Architecture, Univ.of Minnesota (with distinction) 1971
Professor UMN, School of Architecture 1994-present
Association for Retarded Citizens, Philadelphia, Department of Natural Resources, State of Minnesota, State of
Minnesota Pre-Desgn Advisory Committee Capital Budget Reform Group, State of Minnesota Department of
Human Services, Town of Rockport Massachusetts Pigeon Cover Property Study Committee) 2004
Assoc Prof (Tenured) UMN, Dept of Architecture 1985-1994
Assistant Professor UMN, School of Architecture 1980-85
Lecturer UMN, School of Architecture 1975-80
Program Director Innovative Hsg & Urban Design in the Netherlands 1999,02,04,07,08
Visiting Professor Eindhoven Technical University, 1994
Visiting Scholar Massachusetts Institute of Technology 1988-89
Program Director Innovative Hsg & Urban Design in the Netherlands 1999,02,04,07,08
1976-p
Environmental Design Research Association (EDRA) 1976-pres
1982-pres
Registered Architect Minnesota 1982-pres
1982-pres
American Institute of Architects (AIA), Minnesota Society (MSAIA) 1982-pres
1984-pres
International Association for Person-Environment Studies (IAPS) 1984-pres
1990-pres
American Anthropological Association (AAA) 1990-pres
1987-pres
Affiliated Faculty Member: Program on Developmental Disabilities 1987-pres
2008
Metropolitan Design Center, Univ of MN “Travel, Exhibit & Publication: New Orleans
Studio”, - ($7,000), PI 2008
2006-07
Metropolitan Design Center Dayton Hudson Faculty Fellow 2006-07
2004-07
2004-06
2003
Bush Teaching Grant for Large Classes (Architecture 3401/ 3711) 2004-2007
US Department of Housing and Urban Development. “Affordable Housing InitiativesCase Study Prototypes” Project Team Member 2004-2006
Amherst H. Wilder Foundation and other local agencies. “Promoting Design Excellence
in Affordable Housing: The Single Family Case Demonstration Project” - Mary
Guszowski, Lance LaVine & John Carmody, Principal Investigators. Project Team
member for Social & Cultural Issues 2001-2003
2007
“Near and Far” Architecture Library, UMN Solo exhibit of 37 Watercolors 2007
2007
2006
“Scenes of France” California Building Gallery, Minneapolis 2 paintings 2007.
Institution & Home: Architecture as a Cultural Medium, Delft, Netherlands: Techne
Press 2006
“Designing Research: The Scholarship of Teaching and Learning in Large Lecture
Courses” V. Ruhe, J. Robinson and S. Wick, In Proceedings: Scholarship of Teaching
and Learning Annual Meeting, London 2006
2006
“Landmarks in an Architectural Research Trajectory: Degrees of Institutionality,”
International Assoc for Person-environment Studies (IAPS), Alexandria Egypt 2006
2006
“Domesticity to Oppression: Values & Appropriate Housing Design,” Housing
Symposium, IAPS Conference Proceedings, Alexandria Egypt. 2006
2006
2007-p
Teaching Evaluation Advisory Group 2007-pres
2006-p
Senate Committee on Disabilities 2006-pres
2007-p
C Des Honors Representative 2007-pres
2008
2008
2008
“Home Range: A personal perspective from the Midwestern US” Invited paper:
Symposium on Home Range IAPS Conference, Rome 2008
“Travel Pedagogy for International Study of Housing & Urbanism” Invited paper:
Symposium on Teaching Culture to Architecture Students, IAPS Conference, Rome,
“Improving Large Lecture Instruction using Student Assessment: A Research-Based
Approach” Lead author with Brad Cohen and others for the London Conf of the Society
on Teaching and Learning
Sharon Roe
Senior Lecturer/Adjunct Assistant Professor
Teaching Area
Design, Technology
Courses
Arch 8251 Graduate Design I
Arch 5515 Technology One: Building Materials and Construction Systems
Master of Architecture, University of California, Berkeley, 1992
Bachelor of Architecture, U of Minnesota, Institute of Technology, Minneapolis, 1982
Bachelor of Arts, UMN, College of Liberal Arts, Minneapolis, 1969
Senior Lecturer/ Teaching Assistant Professor, UMN, 2002-present
Adjunct Assistant Professor, (50%), UMN, 1998-2002
Cass Gilbert Visiting Scholar, (80%), UMN, Spring 1998
Assistant Professor, North Carolina State University, 1993-1998
Assistant Professor, Mississippi State University, 1992-1993
Adjunct Assistant Professor, UMN (50%), 1988-1992
1984-p
Registered Architect, State of Minnesota, 1984-present
2000-05
Member, American Institute of Architects, 2000-2005
prior to 03
Member, American Institute of Architects, 1984-1991
2006
Ralph Rapson Teaching Award, CALA, 2006
03-05, 07-p
Authored the new GDI curriculum and continue to revise (2002, 2003, 2004, 2004,
2005, co-authored new GDI 2007, 2008)
2004-p
B.D.A. Planning Task Force, Summer 2004 to Present
2003-p
Design Committee, Member, 2003-present
2002-p
Design Coordinators Group, 2002-present
2002-p
Graduate Admissions Committee, Member, 2002- present
2001-p
CALA Scholarship Committee, Member, 2001- present
2008-09
2003-07
Sponsored UROP Student (Undergraduate Research Opportunities), 2008-09
Introduced a new format for GDI. Developed a series of intensive four-day workshops.
These workshops serve to introduce the students to their computers in the fall and to
special issues of representation and programming in the spring. These have now been
converted into the Catalysts offered to all graduate students in the spring.
Developed the ADA Workshop offered every spring (2003-2007) and moved into first
semester GDI this fall). This is a four-day hands-on experience for all GDI students
including readings and lectures from consultants on sight, mobility and building code.
2004-07
Undergraduate Curriculum Committee, member, 2004-2007
2007
2007
Design Workshop, Committee Chair, 2007
Recruited faculty for 8 workshops for Fall 2007. Worked with each of the faculty to
develop individual syllabi.
2007
PhD in Civil Engineering, Examining Committee Member, 2007
2004-06
Design Search Committee, Member, 2004-2006
2006
Masters in Civil Engineering, Examining Committee Member, 2006
2004-05
2005
Academic Policies Committee, Chair, 2004-2005
GDI design studio student (Todd Costain) won an Honorable Mention in the
ACSA/AISC Student Design Competition for the “Student Union” project, spring 2005
2002-04
Digital Design Search Committee, Member, 2002-2004
2008
Ozayr Saloojee
Assistant Professor
Teaching Area
Design
Courses
Arch 1701 The Designed Environment
Arch 8253 Graduate Studio III
M.Arch, Carleton University School of Architecture, Ottawa, 2001
B.Arch, Carleton University School of Architecture, Ottawa, 1999
Assistant Professor of Architecture, UMN, August 2005-Present
Designer, Martin Conboy Lighting Design, Ottawa, June 2004-July 2005
Sessional Instructor (Part-Time Faculty), Carleton University School of Architecture, June 2001-April 2005
Associate, Gulzar Haider Design Group, Ottawa, June 1996-June 2004
Teaching Assistant, Carleton University School of Architecture, August 1999-April 2001
Teaching Intern, Carleton University School of Architecture, January 1999-April 1999
Designer, John K. Szczepaniak, Landscape Architecture, Summer, 1999, 2000
Co-Founder/Principal, Blue Pooch Design Build, Summer 1998-June 1999
2008-p
ACS – Architectural Forum on Spirituality (June 2008 – present)
2008
UMN McKnight Endowment for the Arts and Humanities, ($20,000), February 2008
2007
Grant-in-Aid of Scholarship, Research and Artistry, UMN ($20,000), July 2007
2006
Faculty Mini-grant, Metropolitan Design Center ($1000), November 2006
2003
Honorable Mention, St. Mark’s Coptic Village International Competition (with GHDG
and Architects Alliance, Toronto), September 2003
2008-09
Christ Church Lutheran: Three Photographic Visions, Organizer, Curator, Christ Church
Lutheran, Minneapolis, MN, with VJAA Architects and Site Assembly Fabricators,
October 12, 2008-January 9, 2009
2008
Invited contributor to European Architecture Journal, ‘Wolkenkuckucksheim,’
2008
‘Solomon’s Narrative: Architecture, Text and the Sacred,’ Chapter in forthcoming book
Reading Spiritualities, to be published by Ashgate Press, November 2008.
2008
Work/Book. Drawings and Sketchbooks featured in Nash Gallery Exhibition, UMN, June
2008
ARCHITECTURE IN ISTANBUL: 2008 Festival of Nations, River Center, St. Paul.
2008
SACRED SITES | SACRED SIGHTS: Architecture, Ethics and Spiritual Geographies
Organizer and curator. School of Architecture: HGA Gallery, Minnesota, MN: UMN,.
2008
FACULTY WORK (Abrams | Ibarra-Sevilla | Saloojee) School of Architecture: Rapson
Library, MN: UMN, March-April 2008.
2007
‘Flamel’s Dream: Architecture as Alchemy.’ 23rd International Conference on the
Beginning Design Student Conference Proceedings. Professor C. Rathmann, editor.
Savannah, GA: Savannah College of Art and Design, March 2007.
2005-p
M. Arch Thesis advising (August 2005-Present)
2006-p
Undergraduate Curriculum Committee (January 2006-present)
2009
Fullbright Application Review Committee, September 2009
2008
Paper reviewer, JAE and ACADIA (2008)
2007-08
Member, Technology Faculty Search Committee (2007-2008)
2006-07
Steering and Advisory Committee on Service and Engagement (2006-2007)
2006
PRAXIS/PRACTICE, Member of advisory and curatorial committee, Regis Center for
Art: Nash Art Gallery, Minnesota, MN: UMN, November 2006.
2006
Jury Member, AIA Honor Awards (2006)
2008
The Next Building: Eliel and Eero Saarinen at State UMN, Mankato, Invited lecture ,
October 9th, 2008
In the Form of His Father: Eliel and Eero Saarinen at Christ Church Lutheran, ‘Eero
Saarinen: Beyond the Measly ABC,’ Walker Art Center, Minneapolis Institute of Art,
UMN and Christ Church Lutheran, October 12, 2008
2008
Sinan: Tradition in Transformation [Public Lecture] ‘Working Through Architecture: 9
Architects | 9 Lectures | 9 Tuesdays’ Pohlad Hall, Minneapolis Central Library.
2008
2007
2005
Narrative (His)Stories: Architecture, Religion and Sacred Space [paper presentation], The
Past in the Present. Dept of Historical Studies, Glasgow, Scotland: Glasgow School of
Art,.
The Solomnic Narrative: Architecture, Text and the Sacred [paper presentation], Reading
Spiritualities - Constructing and Representing Spiritualities Through Texts - Literary,
Visual and Sacred. Department of Religious Studies, Lancaster, England: Lancaster Univ.
Leon Satkowski
Professor
Teaching Area
Architectural History to 1750
Courses
Arch 3411 Architectural History to 1750; Arch 4425/5425 Baroque Architecture
Arch 4424/5424 Renaissance Architecture; Arch 4423/5423 Gothic Architecture
Arch 5410 History of Minnesota Architecture
Harvard University, 1971-77, M.A. (1972), Ph.D (1977)
Cornell University, 1965-70, Bachelor of Architecture (1970)
Professor of Architecture, UMN, July 1994 to date
Associate Professor of Architecture, UMN, 1986-94.
Associate Professor of Architecture, Syracuse University, 1981-86.
Assistant Professor of Architecture, Syracuse University, 1977-81.
Visiting Assistant Professor of Architecture, Cornell University, Spring 1981.
Expert professional witness on architectural plagiarism for Ervin, Cohen, and Jessup (Los Angeles) and Gordon
Rees (San Diego) regarding case in Federal Court, Central District of California, 2004-2006.
Minnesota Architecture and Landscapes: A Guide and a History. Research in progress.
Contract with U of M Press.
02, 05, 08
Italian Architecture of the 16th Century Co-author Colin Rowe. NYC:Princeton
Architectural Press, 2002. Japanese edition, 2005; Spanish edition expected Fall 2008..
2008
Review of Fabrizio Nevola, Siena: constructing the Renaissance city. Choice, August
2007
Review of Richard J. Goy, Building Renaissance Venice: patrons, architects, and builders,
c. 1430-1500. Choice, February 2007.
2006
Review ofAndrea Palladio. Palladio's Rome: a translation of Andrea Palladio's two
guidebooks to Rome, ed. and tr. by Vaughan Hart and Peter Hicks. Choice December
2006
Review of Will Pryce, Buildings in Wood for Choice, January 2006.
2004
Review of Georgia Clarke. Roman House-Renaissance Palace: Inventing Antiquity in
Fifteenth-Century Italy. (Architecture in Early Modern Italy.) Renaissance Quarterly
2004
Review of Harris, Dianne Suzette. The nature of authority : villa culture, landscape, and
representation in eighteenth-century Lombardy University Park, Pa., Choice
Katherine Solomonson
Associate Professor
Teaching Area
Architectural History, ca. 1700-presesnt
Courses
Arch 3412 History Since 1750; Arch 4445/5445 Suburbia; Arch 4434/5434 Contemporary
Architecture; Arch 4435/5435 Modern Architecture
Ph.D., History of Art, Stanford University, 1991.
BA, History of Art, Stanford University, 1978.
Fall 2006-present: Associate Dean for Academic Affairs, College of Design; Associate Professor, School of
Architecture, University of Minnesota, Twin Cities.
Summer 2001-Spring 2004: Acting Co-Head, Department of Architecture, University of Minnesota, Twin Cities.
Fall 1999-present: Associate Professor, Department of Architecture; Adjunct Associate Professor, Department of Art
History and Department of American Studies, UMN Twin Cities.
1998-Spring 1999: Adjunct Assistant Professor, Department of American Studies, UMN Twin Cities.
Spring 1994-Spring 1999: Adjunct Assistant Professor, Department of Art History; Graduate Faculty member,
Comparative Studies in Discourse and Society, University of Minnesota, Twin Cities
2007
2004
2007 Telling River Stories, National Endowment for the Humanities planning grant
(member of the project team, Patrick Nunnelly, Principal Investigator).
2004 Alice Davis Hitchcock Award, for The Chicago Tribune Tower Competition:
Skyscraper Design and Cultural Change in the 1920s, awarded annually by the Society of
Architectural Historians for the most distinguished work of scholarship in the history of
architecture published by a North American scholar.
ongoing
current
Reviews: Times Literary Supplement (London), American Studies International, San
Francisco Chronicle, Chicago Tribune, Journal of the Society of Architectural Historians,
Art Bulletin, Choice, Library Journal.
Minnesota Buildings and Landscapes (book project), co-author with Jane Hession,
Michael Koop, and Leon Satkoski, UMN Press, contract.
current
current
current
current
Cass Gilbert in the West: Making a National Landscape (book project), editor and coauthor, with contributions by Paul Larson, Lance Neckar,, Janet Whitmore, Thomas
Blanck and Charles Locks. Minneapolis: UMN Press, in progress,
Andrew Shanken, 194X (in press)
Paula Lupkin, Manhood Factories: YMCA Architecture and the Making of Modern
Urban Culture (in press).
Dianne Harris, Little White Houses (advance contract)
Annmarie Adams, Medicine by Design: The Architect and the Modern Hospital, 18931943
2008
2007
2006
2005
2003
Carla Yanni, The Architecture of Madness (2007).
Series description: Opening up new lines of inquiry into American architecture and
landscape, books in this series explore the complex and dynamic interplay between
buildings, landscapes, and the social, cultural, economic, and political processes that
shape and are shaped through them. Books published, in press, and under contract.
“The Chicago Tribune Tower: Publicity Creates Community,” chapter in The American
Skyscraper: Cultural Histories. Roberta Moudry, ed. New York: Cambridge Univ.Press,
The Chicago Tribune Tower Competition: Skyscraper Design and Cultural Change in the
1920s, New York: Cambridge University Press, 2001. Paperback, Chicago: Univ
of Chicago Press, 2003
2007-p
Learning Abroad Center Advisory Council, member. (UMN Service)
2000-p
UMN Press, reviewer and consultant for book projects in architectural history. (
1999-08
2005-08
State Review Board for National Register Nominations, Minnesota, member.
Society of Architectural Historian, national board, member. Diversity Committee,
member (2005-2006); Digital Technology (2006-2007)
2000-07
UMN Press, Committee on the Press (faculty editorial board), member.
2006-07
Master Planning – Design and Preservation Task Force (UMN Service)
Chair and moderator, session on preservation and globalization at the National Trust for
Historic Preservation annual conference, St. Paul, MInnesota, October 2007.
Respondent, “The Value of the Visual: Nineteenth-Century American Landscapes”
session, Organization of American Historians Annual Meeting, Minneapolis, MN,
CALA-DHA/CHE Task Force, co-chair (with Becky Yust) – Strategic Positioning task
force, charged with developing recommendations for the new College of Design.
2007
2007
2005-06
2003-06
2005
All-University Honors Committee, member. (UMN Service)
Co-chair, “Capitol Views: Building, Public Life and Culture,” (in celebration of the
Minnesota State Capitol’s centennial), Minneapolis, MN, October 15, 2005.
2008
2008
“Enacting Discovery: Itasca State Park and the Mississippi Headwaters,” presented at
Desighing the Parks, Part 1, co-sponsored by the University of Virginia and the National Park
Service, Charlottesville, Virginia, May 20, 2008.
“Railroad Hospitals in the West,” presented at the annual meeting of the Vernacular
Architecture Forum, Fresno, California, May 2008.
Marc Swackhamer
Assistant Professor
Teaching Area
CAD, Design
Courses
Arch 1281 Design Fundamentals I
Arch 8253 Graduate Design III
Master of Architecture Degree, Rice University Graduate School of Architecture, May 1997
Bachelor of Architecture Degree, University of Cincinnati School of Architecture and Interior Design, June 1995
Assistant Professor of Architecture, Department of Architecture, UMN, August 2004 - present
Assistant Professor of Architecture, School of Architecture and Interior Design, University of Cincinnati,
Sept. 2002 – August 2004
Visiting Assistant Professor of Architecture, School of Architecture and Interior Design, University of Cincinnati
Sept. 2001 - Aug. 2002
2007
“An Incomplete Curriculum for Transformation” – curricumlum proposal won an AIA
Education Honor Award (co-authors, John Comazzi, Ozayr Saloojee, Ritu Bhatt, and Renee
Cheng)
“Drape Wall + House” received Best in Category Award in the Environments category of
the 53rd Annual Design Review in The International Design (ID) Magazine – slvDESIGN
(jury consisted of Marc Tsurumaki of LTL Architects, Joe Rose, Curator of Architecture and
Design at the Art Institute of Chicago, and Winka Dubbeldam of Archi-Tectonics and
Director of the Post-Professional Program at the University of Pennsylvania) 2007
2007
“Sound Team” and “Glare Team” from graduate seminar Bio-Inspired Systems won AIA
COTE (American Institute of Architectus, Committee On The Environment) Award –
projects will travel around U.S. to be displayed at regional and national AIA events (jury
consisted of, among others, Dr. Dayna Baumeister, co-founder of the Biomimicry Guild)
2006
“CRI: IAD Performance-Driven Paint Application and Alternative Building Materials for
Pre-Fabricated Wall System” – NSF Equipment Grant Proposal, Co-Principal Investigator
with Professor Gary Meyer - not awarded November 2006
2008
2007-p
“Cloak Wall / House” – continuation / further development of “Drape Wall + House”
2006-p
“Coffee Filter” – new coffee shop in existing building at 1500 Monroe Street, Minneapolis –
client, Industrial Art & Design 2006 - present
2008
2008
Transmaterial 2: A Catalog of Materials that Redefine our Physical Environment, edited by
Blaine Brownell, Drape Wall invited for publication – slvDESIGN February 2008
“Computer Craft: Handiwork in the Age of Digital Fabrication” by David Dewane,
published in Cite: The Architecture + Design Review of Houston, issue no. 73, winter
2008– article written about slvDESIGN’s work. January 2008
2005-07
authored 3 case studies (Kimmel Center for the Performing Arts, Loblolly House, and
Porter House) for a new chapter on Emerging Technology, edited by Department Head,
Renee Cheng in re-designed Architectural Graphics Standard, John Wiley & Sons, 2007.
2007
“Drape Wall + House” published in Chinese periodical Community Design, - slvDESIGN
July 2007 issue no. 23, pp. 60 – 67
2007
“Cloak Wall / House” prototype appeared in Here By Design III: Process and Prototype at
the Goldstein Museum of Design – slvDESIGN October 2007
2007
2007
2007
2006
2006
2005
2004
“Disperse” acoustic installation, room 225 Rapson Hall, College of Design, UMN –
published in Princeton’s 306090 10: Decoration
“Digi-Fab” Knowledge Map published (map, database, essay, explanation of digital
fabrication) through collaboration with Janet Abrams, Director, Design Institute, Scott
Christensen, Design Institute, and Ariel Apte-Carter, MGMT. Design – authored essay,
“Three Loops” as part of publication, generated illustrations, edited portions of publication,
and both creative work and student work appears in publication October 2007
“Food Processor” (essay on GD1 studio work) published in proceedings: 23rd International
Conference on the Beginning Design Student, Savannah College of Art and Design – coauthored with John Comazzi, Assistant Professor, College of Design, University of
Minnesota 2007
“Biomimicry and Architecture: An Analysis of the Role of Biology in the Architectural
Design Process” published in Proceedings: ARCC/EAAE: International Conference on
Architectural Research, Philadelphia, PA – co-authors, Corri Kluba, grad. arch. student,
UMN and Tim Jordan, grad. arch. student, UMN June 2006
“Biomimicry: Nature as Model, Measure, and Mentor” published in Proceedings:
“Intersections: Design Education and Other Fields of Inquiry” – 22nd National Conference
on the Beginning Design Student, Iowa State University – co-author, Tim Jordan, grad.
arch. student, UMN April 2006
The HOME House Project: The Future of Affordable Housing, MIT Press – book
published based on exhibition at the Southeastern Center for Contemporary Art, “Draft
House” appears – slvDESIGN March 2005
16 Houses: Owning a House in the City, Monacelli Press - book published based on 16
Houses Exhibition – slvDESIGN April 2004
2008
“HouMinn Practice” lecture presented at Rice University, School of Architecture,
Houston – slvDESIGN January 2008
2007
ACADIA 2007 International Conference, Halifax, Nova Scotia – invited to provide closing /
summarizing remarks at conference October 2007
Leslie Van Duzer
Professor
Teaching Area
Design Fundamentals, Design, History/Theory/Culture
Courses
Arch 1281 Design Fundamentals I, BDA workshop, Undergrad studio
Master of Architecture, University of California, Berkeley 1984-1986
Bachelor of Arts in Architecture, University of California, Berkeley 1976-1981
Professor;2008 - present
Associate Professor; 2005 - 5. 2008
Director of Undergraduate Studies 2005 - 6. 2008
Dalhousie University, Halifax 2007-2009 Adjunct Associate Professor, External Examiner
University of Pennsylvania Spring 2003 Visiting Associate Professor
Washington University, St. Louis Fall 2002 Visiting Associate Professor, with Juhani Pallasmaa, Finland
Arizona State University, Tempe 1997 – 2005 Associate Professor with tenure
University of Technology, Helsinki, Fall 1996 Visiting Instructor
University of California, Berkeley, Summer 1996 Visiting Lecturer
University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, 1995 - 1996 Adjunct Assistant Professor
2006-07
2008
2005
2006-2007 Dayton Hudson Faculty Fellow, Metropolitan Design Center, UMN,
Project: To Whom does it Concern?
Fall 2008 Institute for Advanced Studies Fellow, UMN, Project: The Art of Deception
Andrew Mead, "Critic's Choice: Books of the Year," the architects' journal (15.12.05): 47.
AWARD
2009
Leslie Van Duzer and Maria Szadkowska. Adolf Loos: Works in the Czech Lands (2009)
2008
Leslie Van Duzer, "Adolf Loos Readymade" in ptah (2008). Finland
"Adolf Loos: Works in the Czech Lands" – contributor, Opening 9.30.2008, City of
Prague
Museum, Prague
2008
2008
2007
Leslie Van Duzer, To Whom does it Concern? (working title - December 2008)
Leslie Van Duzer, "Villa Müller: An Adolf Loos Readymade" in DOMES Architectural
Review (spring 2007). Greece
2006
Leslie Van Duzer, "In Wonder" in Archipelago: Essays on Architecture, ed. Peter
MacKeith (Helsinki: Rakennustieto Oy, 2006), 23-27.
2006
ARCH 1281 Service Learning Project, Places 18.2 (September 2006). UC Berkeley
2006
2005
"Adolf Loos: La Villa Müller, 1928-1930/2002" – contributor, Opened 7.12.2006
Hermann Hall, IIT, Chicago and Opened 11.13.2002, Pavillon de l'Arsenal, Paris
Kent Kleinman and Leslie Van Duzer. Mies van der Rohe: Krefeld Villas, NY: Princeton
Architectural Press, 2005.
2007-p
2007-pres, Architecture tour author for the new Guthrie Theater by Jean Nouvel
2007-09
2007-2009, External Examiner, Dalhousie University, Halifax
2008-09
2008-2009, Member, Mill City Commons Board, non-profit organization in the
Minneapolis Riverfront Neighborhood age in place
2003
2008
2003, 2000, 1994, Alvar Aalto Symposia, Finland
2008 International Education Conference, Honolulu. "Magic and the Art of Deception in the
Classroom," with Eric Van Duzer (workshop)
2008 International Education Conference, Honolulu. "Mis(sed) Perceptions," with Eric Van
Duzer (paper presentation)
2007
Architecture Education Summit 2007, Los Angeles, CA, "Straddling Dichotomies"
2007
Curiosity Camp, UMN Continuing Education, "Going Global"
2007
University of Texas, Arlington, "The Art if Deception"
2006
ACSA / CELA Administrators Conference, Scottsdale, AZ, "Teaching Teachers to Teach"
2006
Alvar Aalto Academy, Finnish National Gallery, Helsinki, "Adolf Loos Readymade"
2006
Illinois Institute of Technology, Chicago, "Adolf Loos and the Villa Müller"
2006
Dalhousie University, Halifax, "The Art of Deception: Adolf Loos and Mies van der Rohe"
2006
Washington State University, Pullman, Washington, "On Magic and Architecture"
2008
William Weber
Teaching Area
Technology, Sustainability
Courses
Arch 5516 Tech 2
Arch 55xx Topics in Technology: Sustainable Housing Infrastructure
Masters of Architecture, CALA-UMN, 2002
Bachelor of Arts in Architecture, UMN, 1997
Adjunct Assistant Professor/Lecturer, School of Architecture, College of Design (nee the Department of
Architecture, CALA) UMN, 2002-present
Research Fellow, Center for Sustainable Building Research, College of Design, UMN, 2002-present
Project Manager. Affordable Housing Initiative: Case Study Prototypes a HUD-Community Outreach Partnership
Center. Primary funding from US HUD and the Amherst H. Wilder Foundation. 2004-2007
Researcher, Building Research Group CALA-UMN, 5/2000-2002
Research Assistant, Building Research Group CALA-UMN 1999-2000
Teaching Assistant, CALA-UMN, 1998-1999
Project Manager, Minnesota Green Affordable Housing Guide, Primary funding from MN OEA. 2004
2006-08
Co-P.I. with John Carmody. Minnesota Sustainable Affordable Housing Knowledge
Base. Primary funding from the McKnight Foundation, 2006 (– 2008)
2007-08
Project Manager. Viking Terrace, Worthington Minnesota Green Building Health
Outcome Evaluation. In partnership with the National Center for Healthy Housing.
Primary funding from the US EPA and MN BCBS. 2007 (-2008)
2006-08
Project Manager. Green Communities Program and Pilot Project Assistance and
Evaluation. Primary funding from the Greater Minnesota Housing Fund
2008
2007
2007
2006
A Deeper Shade of Green, Architecture Minnesota, May – June 2008
By the Numbers: Climate Change and the 2030 °Challenge, Architecture Minnesota,
January – February 2007
Innovation by Nature: The Emerging Field of Biomimcry, Architecture Minnesota,
January – February 2007
MPCA Eco-Experience at the Minnesota Sate Fair: Exhibit HUD-CPOC Affordable
Housing Initiative, August – September 2006, project lead produced with AHI
project team.
2006
HOME House Project: The Future of Affordable Housing, Installation: HUD-CPOC
Affordable Housing Initiative, Weisman Art Museum January –, project lead
produced with AHI project team.
2005
Practice: The Next Housing Revolution Architecture Minnesota, May – June 2005
2004
2004
Book Review: Living Green Architecture Minnesota, May – June 2004
Windows Systems for High-Performance Buildings, Carmody, John. Norton Press
2004. (contributor)
2003
Researcher, The Single Family Case Demonstration Project. Primary funding from
the Amherst H. Wilder Foundation. 2003
2003
Technology: SIP or Stick? Architecture Minnesota, May – June 2003
2008
“Case Study: Green and Healthy Affordable Housing in Southwestern Minnesota,”
Greening the Heartland. Saint Louis, MO June 2008
2008
Lessons Learned”, w/ David Jacob PhD (NCHH) BCBS of Minnesota Grantee Conference.
2008
“Minnesota Green Communities Demonstration Projects: Lessons from the Field”
GreenbyDesign, Minneapolis, MN May 2008
2008
“Case Study: Viking Terrace”, w/ Rick Goodeman (SWMHP) Minnesota Municipal
Utilities Associations Conference, Bloomington MN March 2008
2008
“Shades of Green” Duluth Energy Conference and Expo, Duluth, MN February 2008
2007
“Breaking New Ground: The Minnesota Overlay to the Green Communities Criteria,”
GreenbyDesign, w/ Minnesota Housing Minneapolis, MN May 2007
2007
“The First Choice: Opportunities in Site Selection and Design”, Duluth Energy
Conference and Expo, Duluth, MN February 2007
2006
Solar Architecture in Minnesota: Toward Zero Energy Housing, ASES 2006 (abstract
reviewed) co-authored with Mary Guzowski
2006
“Sustainable Affordable Housing” Homes for All. Saint Paul, MN. December 2006
2005
“Sustainable Affordable Housing” Greening the Heartland Chicago, IL June 2005
2005
“Sustainable Affordable Housing” Living Green Expo Saint Paul MN April 2005
2005
“HUD-COPC: Affordable Housing Initiative” w/John Carmody Working Together
Conference New Orleans LO March 2005
2003
Wilder Single House Demonstration Project, PLEA 2003 – Conference on Passive and
Low
Energy Architecture. (co-author with Lance Lavine et. al.)
J. Stephen Weeks
Associate Professor
Teaching Area
Technology, Design, Sustainability
Courses
Arch 8565 Materials Performance in Sustainable Building
Undergraduate and Graduate Studios
Arch 5512 Building Systems
B.ARCH University of Minnesota, with High Distinction, 1973
AB Colby College, 1963, major Art
Associate Professor, 1985 - present
Director of Graduate Studies 2003-present
AIA St. Paul Board Member 2004-present, AIA Minneapolis Board Member 2003-present
Treasurer ARCC, (Architectural Research Centers Consortium), 2003-present
Vice-Chair CALA Assembly 2005-07
Department Co-Head 2001-2004
Study Abroad “Northern Europe”/”Port Cities 1995; 2000
Director of Undergraduate Studies 1991-95 and 1980-86
Assistant Professor, UMN 1979-85
Architect, Wisconsin1978, Minnesota, 1976
2008
2008 College of Design e-Scholarhip grant, Interactive website - Contemporary Design and
Building Processes of Architects Frank Gehry, Antoine Predock and Steve Holl.
2007
2007 AIA Minneapolis Merit Award, “The Work Force Home”; the architect of four homes
exploring sustainable construction technologies in affordable housing.
200307
Architect four three of four houses constructed as part of the HUD/Affordable Housing Initiative
($400,000), with CSBR, PI, Mary Guzowski and Lance Lavine, 2003-2007.
2006
Exhibition of the Wilder Affordable House SEPETTMS prototype, “The Home House Project:
The Future of Affordable Housing”, Weisman Art Museum, 2006
2006
Frederick Mann Award for Disciplinary Service, 2006
2006-p
2006-present Interactive website, Contemporary Design and Building Processes of
Architects Frank Gehry, Antoine Predock and Steve Holl.
2006
Accepted Poster, "Designing the Work Force Home", with Russell Wilson, for Affordable
Design: Convening the Conversation, the ACSA/Community Design Association/Fannie
Mae Foundation Annual Conference, Los Angeles, CA. June, 2006
2006
Exhibition, the “SEP/ETTMS Affordable House Demonstration” at Minnesota State Fair
Eco-Experience, Environment Exhibit Hall, w/ Billy Weber and Russ Wilson, Tom
Schirber, demonstration wall assembly and Flash video of construction process. 2006
2005
“Research, Design and Construction Technologies in Affordable Housing”, with William
Weber, John Carmody, Greening the Heartland “Cost, Practice and Policy,” Chicago
Illinois, June 2005, Published in Proceedings (CD-ROM) 2005.
2005
“Research, Design and Construction Technologies in Affordable Housing”, Stephen
Weeks, William Weber, John Carmody, ARCC 2005 Proceedings (CD-ROM) 2005
2000-p
Eastcliff Technical Advisory Committee, the President’s residence 2000-present
2007-09
2007-2009 University Senate Committee-on-Committees
2007-08
Chair CDES Curriculum and Policy Committee 2007-08
2008
Chair, AIA MN Disaster Assistance 2008-
2007-08
2000,
2003, 2005
2007present
2006-08 University Senator, College of Design
Juror, Wisconsin Golden Trowel Design Jury, 2000, 2003. 2005
IDP Educator – NAAB/NCARB position in the School of Architecture
200
6
Presenter, HUD Community Outreach Partnership Center (COPC) and Universities
Rebuilding America Program (URAP) Design Conference, University of Pennsylvania,
Philadelphia, PA.November, 16-19, 2006.
2005
Gallery talk as part of Exhibition, “the HOME House Project: The Future of Affordable
Housing”,with Rosemary Dolata, AIA, LHB Architects, LEED-AP, Weisman Art Museum
gallery,Minneapolis, MN. (16 attendees) April 22, 2006.
“Research, Design and Construction Technologies in Affordable Housing”, Stephen Weeks,
William Weber, John Carmody, UMN. at the Greening the Heartland, 2005: “Cost, Practice and
Policy,” Chicago Illinois, June, 1, 2005
2005
“Research, Design and Construction Technologies in Affordable Housing”, Stephen Weeks,
William Weber, John Carmody, at the 2005 ARCC Spring Research Conference, “The Reach of
Research”, College of Architecture, Art and Design, Mississippi State University
2005
“Masonry in Photographs”, at the University Professor Masonry Workshop, Co-hosted by CALA
and Civil Engineering, the UMN, and The Masonry Society, March 2005
200
6
Annual Reports
4.5 VISITING TEAM REPORT FROM THE PREVIOUS VISIT
Supplemental information to the APR must include a complete copy of the previous VTR.
SEE FOLLOWING PAGES FOR VISITING TEAM REPORT
4-151
Annual Reports
4-152
Annual Reports
4.6 ANNUAL REPORTS
Supplemental information to the APR must include the following documentation: Copies of all Annual Reports submitted to
the NAAB since the previous site visit. The NAAB responses to the Annual Reports.
Annual reports show that School of Architecture faculty salaries had been up to $30,000 below University
averages for faculty of similar rank. In 2005, 2006 and 2007, the Provost made available special merit funds
that would be competitively awarded. These so-called “star faculty” funds were meant to operate as pre-emptive
retention for faculty who served the School, College and University stategic mission. Under this program,
School of Architecture received almost 100K of additional funds permanently added to our operating funds.
This has helped raise School averages, although the full professor rank continues to be compressed.
All data in this section drawn from the annual statistics, highlighted are numbers that will be confirmed before
the team visit.
TABLE
Student Data
Full-Time Students
Part-Time Students
FTE Students
Arch Design Studio Students
Students Working Part-Time, professional or academic
Outside Stud. Serv. by Dept.
African-American Students
American Indian Students*
Asian/Pacific Isle Students
Hispanic Origin Students
Women Students
Foreign Students
Total Degrees Awarded
Grads. Fin. Estab. No. Yrs.
Degrees Awarded Women
Degrees Awarded Afro-Amer.
Degrees Awarded Amer. Ind.
Degrees Awarded Asi/Pac. Isl.
Degrees Awarded Hispanics
Min. Req. SAT/ACT/GRE
Number of Applicants
Number Accepted
Enrollment Target/Goal
Student Studio/Faculty Ratio
4-1 STUDENT DATA
2002-03
2003-04
2004-05
2005-06
2006-07
2007-08
147
3
145.5
147
approx 90%
n/a
147
3
145.5
147
approx 90%
n/a
133
3
148
148
approx 90%
n/a
137
3
139
139
approx 90%
n/a
148
0
148
148
approx 90%
n/a
146
0
146
146
approx 90%
n/a
15
12
15
15
18
16
61
15
29
61
15
29
64
15
60
72
15
58
74
7
65
71
7
61
11
16
26
25
19
32
5
0
2
4
4
4
n/a
180
89
55
12/1
n/a
194
102
55
12/1
n/a
187
94
50
12/1
n/a
188
112
50
12/1
n/a
189
94
50
12/1
n/a
225
98
48
12/1
4-153
Annual Reports
TABLE
Facility/Resource Data
4-2 FACILITIES DATA
2002-03
Departmental Library LCNA or 720-729 Collection
Total Architecture Collection in Department Library
University Library LCNA or 720-729 Collection
Total Architecture Collection in University Library
Departmental Library Architecture Slides
University Library Architecture Slides
Departmental Library Architecture Videos
Staff in Dept. Library
Number of Computer Stations (not inc. student laptops)
Amount Spent on Information Technology
Annual Budget for Library Resources
Per-Capita Financial Support Received from University
Private Outside Monies Received by Source
Studio Area (Net sq. ft.)
Total Area (Gross sq. ft.)
TABLE
2002-03
Faculty Data
Full-time Faculty
Part-time Faculty
Full-time Equivalent Facuty
Tenured Faculty
Tenure-track Faculty
Faculty Engaged in Service to Community
Faculty Engaged in Service to University
U.S. Licensed Registered Architects
Practicing Architects
FTE Graduate TAs
FT Faculty Avg. Contact Hrs/Wk
Architecture Studio Student Faculty Ratio
No. Full-time Faculty Credentials
Ph.D
D.Arch
M.A. or S.
Prof. M.Arch
B.Arch
Post Prof. Masters
Other
2003-04
2004-05
2005-06
2006-07
2007-08
12,000
34,884
18,500
12,000
34,884
18,500
12,000
34,884
18,500
12,100
35,000
18,500
12,300
35,000
18,500
12,300
42,724
29,486
130,000
130,000
130,000
130,000
131,000
1,050
2.8 fte
55
333,660
104,402
1,050
2.8 fte
55
333,660
104,402
1,075
2.8 fte
60
326,351
104,402
1,100
2.8 fte
56
326,351
105,000
1,200
2.8 fte
56
326,351
71,934
131,000
177,000
1,500
2.8 fte
56
999,000
75,897
26,435
150,000
26,435
150,000
26,435
150,000
26,435
150,000
26,435
150,000
26,435
150,000
4-3 FACULTY DATA
2003-04
2004-05
2005-06
2006-07
2007-08
2008-09
19
44
36
15
1
22
54
39
15
2
21
47
34
14
3
19
47
35
14
3
22
47
36
15
4
22
44
36
15
4
26
44
38
15
7
5
30
30
25.5
15
12
5
43
45
27.75
15
12
5
43
45
27.75
15
12
5
43
445
27.75
15
12
5
43
45
27.75
15
12
7
43
45
26
15
12
26
15
12
5
6
6
5
6
6
6
1
14
1
2
14
1
2
11
1
2
12
1
2
13
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
13
1
1
1
2
14
1
1
1
4-154
Annual Reports
TABLE
4-4 FACULTY SALARY DATA
Full-time Faculty Salaries
2002-03
NOTE: competitive University "Star" faculty funds available 2005-7
Professor Minumum
64,970
Professor Average
70,422
Professor Maximum
78,427
Professor University Average
94,950
Associate Professor Minimum
Associate Professor Average
Associate Professor Maximum
Associate Professor University Average
Assistant Professor Minimum (tenure-track)
Assistant Professor Average (tenure-track)
Assistant Professor Maximum (tenure-track)
Assistant Professor University Average (tenure-track)
2004-05
2005-06
2006-07
2007-08
68,609
71,838
76,521
94,950
68,609
71,838
76,521
94,950
78,060
80,826
83,140
97,915
85,275
93,705
97,920
101,097
94,260
99,311
101,837
116,702
53,847
57,133
65,915
67,791
57,394
58,469
67,249
67,791
57,394
58,469
67,249
67,791
60,004
64,473
72,045
68,495
65,717
73,773
79,040
70,721
71,000
79,107
84,907
76,664
N/A
N/A
51,000
51,000
51,000
55,208
51,000
51,000
51,000
55,208
51,000
51,625
52,000
55,216
54,500
57,174
62,000
57,011
58,800
61,362
67,170
59,267
55,208
TABLE
Faculty Data Equity
African-American Faculty, Full time
African-American Faculty, Part time
African-American Faculty, Associate
African-American Faculty, Assistant
American Indian Faculty, Any Rank
Asian/Pacific Island Faculty, Full time
Asian/Pacific Island Faculty, Part time
Asian/Pacific Island Faculty, Tenured
Asian/Pacific Island Faculty, Professor
Asian/Pacific Island Faculty, Associate
Asian/Pacific Island Faculty, Assistant
Hispanic Origin Faculty , Full time
Hispanic Origin Faculty, Part time
Hispanic Origin Faculty, Tenured
Hispanic Origin Faculty, Professor
Hispanic Origin Faculty, Associate Professor
Hispanic Origin Faculty, Assistant Professor
Women Faculty, Full Time
Women Faculty, Part Time
Women Faculty, Tenured
Women Faculty, Professor
Women Faculty, Associate
Women Faculty, Assistant
2003-04
4-5 FACULTY EQUITY DATA
2002-03
2003-04
2004-05
2005-06
2006-07
2007-08
note: does not include faculty with architecture as one of multiple tenure homes
0
1
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
1
0
0
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
2
3
3
3
4
0
3
3
3
3
0
0
0
0
2
2
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
2
2
2
2
2
0
0
0
1
2
2
0
0
0
1
1
1
2
3
3
3
3
3
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
6
7
8
8
9
9
14
14
14
14
14
10
5
5
5
5
5
6
1
1
1
1
1
1
4
5
4
4
4
5
0
0
1
1
1
1
4-155
APPENDICES
Appendix A Name
156
APPENDICES
Appendix A Name
4.7 SCHOOL CATALOG
Supplemental information to the APR must include a current school catalog
SEE FOLLOWING PAGES FOR CATALOG EXCERPTS
157
APPENDICES
APPENDICES
A P P E N D I X A:
A NEW CURRICULUM STRATEGY BOOKLET
In this sleeve is a draft copy of a publication we are finalizing. All required courses are
featured as well as examples of several types of elective modules. Some of the modules
described have been previously taught in semester long format. Study abroad is listed in the
booklet as a spring module, however, will continue to be offered as semester long for Spring
2009, with modules expected to begin in Spring 2010.
5-1
APPENDICES
5-2
APPENDICES
A P P E N D I X B:
AD-HOC CORE CURRICULUM REPORT
Core Curriculum Task Force
Final Report
November 12, 2006
Lance LaVine, Chair
John Carmody
Bill Conway
Terrance Rafferty
Ozayr Saloojee
Leon Satkowski
Mark Swackhamer
Leslie VanDuzer
Jennifer Yoos
Charge:
To develop curricular models of a Core graduate school architecture curriculum for faculty consideration.
At our last retreat, the faculty voted to adopt a Foundation/Elective Study curricular model. To implement this
curricular structure, our task force has been charged to develop alternate models of a common Foundation
curriculum. The broad objectives of this curriculum are to develop a curriculum that 1) lays a solid foundation
for professional practice; 2) creates a common educational base for all ensuing areas of elective study; and 3)
logically adapts to the needs of three streams of incoming students
Priorities:
Establish common curricular values
5-3
APPENDICES
Our Foundational curriculum should represent values that we hold in common. The structure of our
Foundation curriculum suggests both the kinds of emphasis that we place on different curricular topics and
the kinds of relationships that we seek to create between and among classes. This commonality of vision is
paired with an emphasis on individual student and faculty proclivities that might be pursued in Areas of
Elective Study in our new curricular model.
To propose an evolutionary rather than a revolutionary curricular shift
Our current curriculum has evolved over the last 15 years. This curriculum regularly shifts to represent both
new conditions of our discipline and faculty priorities. Our latest shift to a Foundation/Elective Study
curriculum recognizes both calls for expertise from the profession of architecture and the proclivities of our
current faculty. The broad objective of the Foundation curriculum is to build on the existing structure of our
curriculum to create a foundation education in architecture that can be supported by a broad spectrum of the
faculty.
To create curricular models that make clear the explicit and implicit consequences of alternate curricular
reorganizations.
The structure of our current curriculum might be generally seen as parallel strands of studio, technology, and
humanities classes. Each of the alternate structures of a Foundation curriculum that the Task Force proposes
in this report emphasizes a different general set of pedagogical values. By making structural relationships in
proposed curriculum alternatives clear as expressions of architectural values, our hope is to make Foundation
curriculum choices as transparent as possible.
Develop models that help resolve current curricular issues.
As our current curriculum has evolved, some portions of this curriculum appear to have become weakly
connected to an overall curricular strategy. Agreeing on common values in a Foundation curriculum may allow
us to find ways to structurally reconnect these areas to a common educational strategy.
Issues:
The following constitute the 8 major issues that the task force considered to be central to core curriculum
deliberations.
1. Creating a Core curriculum that fits the needs of different streams of incoming students
5-4
APPENDICES
In the future 50% of our graduate students will be from the BDA program, 20-25% from the 3+ program, 1525% from B.S. programs from either our own program or from other schools and 5-10% from accelerated
students. Should each of these incoming streams of students have separate paths through a Foundation curriculum
commensurate with their preparation in architectural studies?
2. Understanding the role of technology in our curriculum
We now offer 6 classes in technology in our curriculum but there is no clear tie of the information put forth in
these classes to studio design projects. The application of this information in design is an important part of
both professional practice and academic issues of design competence and imagination. Can the technology
curriculum be modified both to reduce the number of course offerings and to assure that technical knowledge can be
effectively employed in design thought?
3.Understanding the role of the Comprehensive studio in our curriculum
All students are required to complete an NAAB comprehensive requirement. We now fulfill that requirement
primarily in our Comprehensive studio. Should this Comprehensive studio be linked more directly to our technology
class work?
4.Understanding the role of study abroad in our curriculum
Our current Study Abroad offering is generally a stand-alone program. It represents a significant portion of the
course credits of our program and is also a significant aid in recruiting good students. Can graduate study
abroad be more tightly connected to our graduate curriculum as a whole? What purpose might it serve within
Foundation curriculum proposals?
5. Reducing student workload
Our students now take an average of 4 courses per semester in addition to working in jobs outside of the
Department or being TAs. Each class demands a significant commitment of time and thought from them. The
result too often is a competition for time and attention that results in either reduced quality of work in some
classes to the benefit of others or a reduced quality of work across all classes. Students complain about their
5-5
APPENDICES
workload. Can this problem be ameliorated by either reducing the number of classes that students take each semester or
by clarifying the structure of our curriculum?
6. Developing reciprocal responsibilities between Foundation and Elective Study Areas to form a complete professional
architectural education
A Foundation/Elective Study split in our curriculum implies that both portions of this curriculum have
obligations to the other and to the whole of a student’s professional and continuing academic education.
Requirements of the Foundation curriculum need to leave sufficient credits and curricular flexibility for
Elective Study Areas to become a significant part of a student’s education without compromising the quality of
a foundational architectural education. How many credits do areas of Elective Study require to achieve a critical
mass? How might alternate Foundation curriculum models be related to Elective Study Areas?
7. Adding to and deleting currently required course work
In our current curriculum students are not required to take graduate level history courses. Many faculty
members feel that our students should have more graduate training in representation. Others suggest that
technology classes ought to be more tightly woven together with a studio experience. Issues like these offer the
faculty an opportunity to decide if some of our existing curricular requirements ought to be replaced by new
offerings. Should some current course work be replaced by new academic concerns in our Foundation curriculum?
8. Developing linkages to M.S. course work and to other degree programs
An M.S track in Sustainable Design and certificates in Metropolitan Design, History/Theory/Culture, Heritage
Conservation/Preservation, and Emerging Technologies are either in place or are in the process of being
created as post-professional training. How does our graduate program curriculum encourage advanced work in
architecture or joint degrees?
Alternate Foundation Curriculum Models
The following proposals are designed to represent different ways in which a Foundation curriculum might be
considered. Each has explicit and implicit consequences for our curriculum as a reflection of our values and to
our graduate curriculum as a whole. Each addresses the 8 issues listed above in a different manner.
A. Everything at once: parallel strands of design studios, humanities, and technology classes serially organized (4
semesters/51 credits)
This model stresses the integrative value of weaving issues of design, technology, and the humanities together
each semester. Horizontal strands of design, technology, and/or the humanities would “balloon” in the Elective
5-6
APPENDICES
Studies year as progressive development of one or more of these strands. Study abroad could be included as ½
of second semester studies incorporating issues of design analysis, building methods, and architectural theory
in these studies. The second year of this Foundation would focus on advanced treatment of issues introduced
in the first year. This year would contain both Comprehensive studios in design and in technology. B.S.
students could enter this curriculum in the second year of this model. M.S studies might be partially
incorporated in Elective Studies as extensions of strands of thought initiated in the Foundation curriculum.
B. One Topic at a time: alternating rhythm of humanities and technology based curriculum (4 semesters/ 51 credits)
This model alternates semesters of concentration on architectural issues of the humanities and of technology
allowing students to concentrate on one kind of architectural issue at a time. Elective Study becomes an
enlarged vertical organization of study mimicking the structure of the preceding four semesters of Foundation
studies but with concentration in a single area of concern. Study abroad could be incorporated as ½ of the third
semester of Foundation studies stressing issues of design analysis, history, and theory. The second year would
be a more advanced consideration of issues taken up in the first year. B.S. students could enter this curriculum
at the beginning of the second year. M.S. studies would be incorporated partially in Elective Studies as in
Model A.
C. Blurred boundaries: an interlude of choices ( 3 semesters/ 42 credits)
This model creates a divided Foundation curriculum with a semester of workshop topics developed from
Elective Studies areas inserted as a third semester set of student study options. The fourth semester of this
model returns to Foundation studies with a 9 credit Comprehensive studio dedicated primarily to technical
issues in architecture. This blurred boundary between Foundation and Elective studies both allows students to
preview Elective Study choices before their final year of study promoting informed choice and knits the whole
of the curriculum together by relaxing the differences between the two portions of our new curriculum. B.S,
students could enter this curriculum in the second year. Study abroad might occur in the M-term of the first
year because Foundations studies are compressed into 3 semesters in this model. M.S. or other joint degree
studies might be almost completely accomplished in the 3 year program in this model if taken in place of other
electives because 3 semesters are given over to Elective Studies.
D. Design as central: compressed core (3 semesters/48credits)
This model emphasizes the role of design in architecture. It provides for 27 credits of design studios over the
first three semesters of Foundation studies in classes that meet 4 times per week to signify our expectations of
student growth in design thought and skills. Additional coursework during the first three semesters would be
limited to one technology and one humanities course each semester assuring that each class receives sufficient
attention. B.S. students would enter this curriculum in the Spring receiving credit for one semester of graduate
5-7
APPENDICES
work or possibly in the second year allowing them to complete M.S. coursework at the completion of their
normal graduate studies.. All students would be required to take an additional humanities and technology
class (perhaps related to their Elective Study area) as well as Professional Practice during their Elective Studies
tying the two portions of our curriculum partially together. A limited ( 3 week?) U.S trip to significant modern
buildings of the East or West coast would replace a longer study abroad program in this compressed
Foundation model. More extensive study abroad opportunities would become a part of specific Elective Study
areas allowing trips to be tailored to specific areas of architectural concern. M.S. and other joint degree work
could be taken up in Elective Studies as in Model C though there would be slightly less opportunity to do so
because of required humanities and technology classes in Elective Studies.
See attached graphics for detailed structure of these models.
MODEL A: HORIZONTAL STRANDS
year one
fall
06 cr
09 cr
3+ and BA summer coursework
03 cr
foundation
studio I
spring
possible
found.
study
abroad
technology I
history / theory
year two
fall
found.
studio II
(on site)
tech I
theory analysis
studio
spring
elective
or additional
representation
courses
elective
or additional
representation
courses
fall
technically
comprehensive
studio
technology II
technology II
urbanism
history / theory
elective
or additional
representation
courses
pro practice
12 cr
15 cr
year three
elective studio
or thesis
advisor / m. arch committee
summer
spring
elective studio
or thesis
(minimum 2 semesters in elective
study studios, if chosen over thesis)
advanced
study electives
advanced
study electives
B.S. Students
BDA and Accelerated Students
BA and 3+ Students
studio: 24 cr.
technology: 12 cr.
humanities: 12 cr.
pro. practice: 03 cr.
credit foundation: 51 cr.
elective studio / open elective: 39 cr.
5-8
APPENDICES
MODEL B: VERTICAL STRANDS
summer
year one
fall
03 cr
06 cr
09 cr
year two
spring
fall
year three
spring
fall
spring
humanity studio I
tech studio 1
humanity studio II
tech studio II
vertically
integrated,
student initiated
5th semester
vertically
integrated,
student initiated
5th semester
humanity I
technology I
humanity II
technology II
elective study
or open elective
elective study
or open elective
humanity I
technology I
humanity II
technology II
elective study
or open elective
elective study
or open elective
elective
or additional
representation
courses
elective
or additional
representation
courses
elective
or additional
representation
courses
pro practice
elective study
or open elective
elective study
or open elective
12 cr
15 cr
B.S. Students *
BA and 3+ Students
studio: 24 cr.
technology: 12 cr.
humanities: 12 cr.
* B.S. students might take semesters 1 and 3 or 4 rather than semesters 3 and 4.
MODEL C: DISPERSED CORE
summer
year one
fall
09 cr
computer
methods I
workshop
technology I
history I
spring
foundation studio
computer
methods II
workshop
technoloogy I-2
fall
m-term study abroad offerings
06 cr
03 cr
foundation studio
theory
work shop
studios
spring
comprehensive
studio
year three
fall
elective studio
or thesis
spring
elective studio
or thesis
A
B
C
computer
methods III
workshop
technology II
technology II-2
history II
elective
or additional
representation
courses
elective
or additional
representation
courses
elective
or additional
representation
courses
elective
or additional
representation
courses
professional
practice
12 cr
15 cr
year two
advanced
study
elective
advanced
study
elective
advanced
study
elective
advanced
study
elective
advanced
study
elective
advanced
study
elective
B.S. Students *
BDA Students
BA and 3+ Students
studio: 21 cr.
technology: 09 cr.
humanities: 09 cr.
5-9
APPENDICES
MODEL D: Design Emphasized
summer
year one
fall
06 cr
09 cr
spring
studio 1
03 cr
year two
studio 1
fall
comprehensive
studio
year three
spring
fall
elective studio
elective studio
or thesis
spring
elective studio
or thesis
minimum of 1
professional
practice course
required
technology I
technology I
humanity I
humanity I
technology II
minimum of 1
required
advanced study
elective in
technology
12 cr
humanity I
minimum of 1
required
advanced study
elective in
humanities
15 cr
B.S. Students *
BA and 3+ Students
studio: 27 cr.
technology: 09 cr.
humanities: 09 cr.
MODEL E: ALTERNATING RHYTHM
year one
technology I
foundation
studio I
year two
technology III
humanities I
technology IV
(mixed cohort of students - 2nd and 3rd year)
03 cr
fall
year three
design core studio
humanities III
humanities IV
06 cr
09 cr
technology II
spring
topics studio
(mixed cohort of students - 1st and 2nd year)
03 cr
topic
seminar
humanities II
topic
seminar
topic
seminar
topic
seminar
06 cr
topical
thesis
(10 credits)
topic
seminar
topic
seminar
09 cr
B.S. Students *
BA and 3+ Students
studio: 24 cr.
technology: 12 cr.
humanities: 12 cr.
Spring semester topics studio must include: Comprehensive Studio
Plan A or B Thesis project or papter
may include: Study Abroad
topics seminar: at least one Pro Practice
4 + 2 students take year one and three
5-10
APPENDICES
To: Governing faculty
From: Renee Cheng
Re: Graduate Professional Curriculum Discussion
Date: Jan 10, 2007
Context:
There are changes in the demand for professionally trained architects. The traditional
path to a traditional practice will always have value, but there is likely to be a significant
contraction in the number of people needed. While a traditional stream may be greatly
reduced, there seems to be a simultaneous increase in the value of “design thinking” in
the “design economy”. Books like Daniel Pink’s A Whole New Mind, discuss the
importance of open-ended creative thinking typically found in design training. While
there are many vehicles for design education, architecture is uniquely positioned to
address a wide range of scales, social/human dimensions, technical and philosophical
issues.
Ironically, to prepare graduates for this new and unfamiliar future, long-established
architectural principles are more important than ever. Architecture and buildings must be
understood from their social and historical context as well as aesthetic and technical
issues. Teaching the maddeningly slow-to-learn process of design – resolving seemingly
contradictory demands – is essential. A successful program in the future will offer a
fundamentally sound architectural education yet prepare graduates with design skills that
might be applied to fields outside those traditionally defined as architecture.
UMN identity:
Our faculty and students have diverse expertise, backgrounds and goals, making
agreement on a monolithic curriculum is impossible. However, we can agree on some
required common courses and opportunities for clear elective choices. There are values
we share: design is at the heart of architecture; architecture has ethical implications;
professional practice/buildings are relevant to architectural education
Proposed Core Models:
The Ad-hoc committee proposal outlines 4 models, two of which strengthen the existing
strategies (A/B), two are significantly different from our current curriculum (C/D). An
additional model E has been proposed as well as several modifications to model A.
All models provide a structure that has a “core” or shared curriculum and creates room
for advanced topics or streams. Streams provide vehicles for advanced design training by
going deeply with specificity into one topic – topics themselves may change as the
faculty and the professional context evolves. While each stream may lead to a MS degree
and/or specialized area of expertise, the goal in creating streams is simply to have a
vehicle through which design can be taught. Streams are created by a group of faculty for
a cohort of students. Each faculty group organizes a holistic curriculum that addresses a
specific knowledge area to complement a shared curriculum.
5-11
APPENDICES
5-12
APPENDICES
A P P E N D I X C:
FACULTY WHITE PAPER ON DESIGN
+
TECHNOLOGY
Design+Technology Whitepaper
12/11/07
submitted by Lance Lavine
The Design+Technology Whitepaper committee met four times for 1-! hours each in late
October and early November.. The meetings were well attended and discussion was
lively and illuminating, but the committee disbanded after these four meetings because
they were not able to come to conclusions concerning the relationship of technology to
design in our new curriculum. The following notes are, therefore, personal comments
though they are primarily based on committee discussions.
My understanding of the problems that have grown between design and technology
faculty about their respective roles in our curriculum begins with a staffing policy that the
faculty enacted 20 years ago. Before that time, our technology classes were often taught
by teachers from engineering departments. Our conclusion about that education was that
while it established a physics-based understanding of technological issues in architecture,
it did little to incorporate these issues in design thought. Steve Weeks became our model
of design-oriented faculty teaching technology. Steve taught building systems as organic
to design thought – not as a technical skill necessary to completion of construction
documents. Faculty who had a design-based vision of technological issues in architecture
became our standard for new hires. Mary Guzowski, Sharon Roe, Renee Cheng, and
Bruno Frank all fit this mold. As a result, this technology faculty taught their respective
specialties as if they were design thought rather than an independent form of knowledge.
This pedagogy soon became competitive with design studios, as it required much the
same kind of effort from our students. I believe that our curricular issues stem from this
unanticipated outcome of a conscious hiring and pedagogical policy.
Renee and I met to attempt to sort out this issue in our new curriculum. The issues we
considered were:
• Many profound changes facing the profession and education are directly linked to
Building Technology, Design or a combination of the two.
• The balance between required and elective technology coursework is consistent
with our new curriculum’s emphasis on both core and elective coursework
• A curriculum policy takes note of particular proclivities of individual faculty
members – our education is most effective when individual faculty are teaching
material in a circumstance that mirrors their values
• Student work overloading means inadequate attention to either selected subjects
or across the board
• The importance understanding the difference between the possible and the ideal
to make concrete progress toward instituting a new curriculum.
5-13
APPENDICES
Our conclusion is pragmatic: we observed that there are four types of building technology
+ design integration currently being pursued or planned. Each of these has underlying
values that we respect and wish to honor. The four types of technology + design are:
1. design and tech taught with overlapping design projects - GD1 Fall
2. design creates the need to know, tech supports as needed - GD2 fall
3. technology taught as design and visa-versa - current 5513/14
4. design provides the basis for technological development - proposed CompDesign
We propose:
• GDI continue its experiment in collaboration by overlapping a design problem
during the final six weeks of the studio with building systems. This experiment is
possible because faculty are willing and able to provide the very large time and
energy commitment to make it possible. It is being piloted this Fall. We should
await results of this experiment before deciding on its future.
• GDII+structures represents a different problem in terms of collaboration between
design and technology. Here four instructors follow very different paths toward a
common end. Unlike the common problem model of the GDI studio, four
different design and pedagogical models emerge from this studio. Common
connections with technology classes are made difficult by this model. Instead
design might interface with technology here on an “as needed” basis or by
creating a “need to know”. Design instructors might individually dip down into
the structures curriculum as they saw fit in terms of the role of structures in their
particular project and pedagogy.
• We also propose requiring a 7 week, double module, 6 credit, Environmental
Technology class in the Spring of the first year. This module incorporates design
as a part of the technology curriculum in itself. Environmental Technology
cannot be left out of our Core curriculum. Much time and effort has been spent
developing this class. It should be supported by our new curriculum.
• Finally, we propose a modified Comprehensive Requirement course. Like
Environmental Technology this class should be offered in the Spring of year II.
Its connection to the design studio is that it will be used to develop a project
already designed in the preceding semester as a base for an in depth
consideration of technical issues.
This strategy envisions four different approaches to collaboration between technology
and design curriculum. Three of these four attempts to find common ground between
technology and design will be piloted this year. The GDII+technology will probably
develop when our search identifies a new technology faculty member.
The strength of this strategy is that it makes possible a set of feasible collaborative efforts
between technology and design curriculum. Like design, it asks only that foundation
issues be covered by Core technology classes. Like design, it allows students and faculty
thereafter to take up issues that are of paramount interest. It treats our faculty as
5-14
APPENDICES
individuals acknowledging their individual insights in terms of the content and pedagogy
of our curriculum. Where each technology class sits in our curricular framework is
determined by clearly stating the nature of design+technology collaborations. Building
systems is taught in parallel to GDI because they will treat a design project in common.
Environmental Technology and the Comprehensive Requirement occupy a duel !
semester module allowing students to avoid taking another design based class at the same
time ameliorating student overload that occurs when they take two studio like classes at
the same time.
This is an imperfect solution to a curricular debate that will undoubtedly continue for the
foreseeable future. It might be considered a compromise to lose the clarity of a common
design+technology pedagogy and the division between Fall as Core curriculum and
Spring as Elective curriculum in the Model T. However, the major asset of this proposal
is that it allows our new curriculum to move forward as we learn about it.
5-15
APPENDICES
5-16
APPENDICES
A P P E N D I X D:
MEMOS REGARDING THESIS CHANGES FOR
2009
To: Current GD2 students
From: Renee Cheng, Steve Weeks
Re: 2008-9 Thesis
Date: May 12, 2008
For 2008-9 Thesis, there will be adjustments to the sequence and expectations of work.
The following remains the same as in the previous years:
•
The overall goal of thesis is for students to do work independent from
faculty-defined agendas. The written and design proposal should demonstrate
strategically applied design methodologies, including some form of research.
See below for more context on goals and expectations.
•
Plan A Thesis is required for all M.Arch students – this includes:
- a thesis document described by the Graduate School [link] with the
following adaptations for the M.Arch [link]
- Enrollment for ARCH8777 (12credits) – no grade
- Master’s Examining Committee is comprised of Chair and two Examining
Members
•
Spring semester Thesis studio will be taught in 4 sections, with 4 faculty
studio leaders
•
Students may request chairs or committee members from outside the studio
leader group and outside the School of Architecture faculty. Approval by the
DGS remains required.
•
Typically, GD3 students take ARCH5621, Professional Practice (T,TH 12:452:10). If any GD3 student is not planning to enroll in this course, please
contact Steve or Renee
These are the adjustments:
•
Students will be enrolled for all 12 credits of ARCH8777 during the spring
semester. This course work will include 9 credits of design, 1.5 credits of
Research Methods, 1.5 credits of Document Production
•
During the Fall semester, preparatory work will take the form of 8 symposia–
4 in October and 4 in November. Symposia will be included in the coursework
and class meeting times of ARCH5621. See below for more information.
•
Symposia, advising, committee assignments and chair assignments will be
arranged along the lines of the four “fields of study” outlined below.
5-17
APPENDICES
Four fields of study are described below, most full time faculty work in several fields of
study, however, for the purposes of advising thesis students, they will divide as listed:
1. Emerging Practices: the practice of architecture is rapidly changing. Digital
technology enables integrated collaborative practices that require nontraditional representation and development and delivery. Thesis work in this
topic area may incorporate practice issues, representation or digital fabrication.
Lee Anderson
Renée Cheng
Andrzej Piotrowski
Ozayr Saloojee
Marc Swackhamer
New Fac Product Design
2. History/Theory/Culture: the context of architecture is rapidly changing.
Perspective of understanding the historical, theoretical and cultural setting of
the past, present or speculation on the future is ever more important during
times of change. Thesis work in this topic area may incorporate historical
methodologies, theoretical explorations or cultural analysis.
Ritu Bhatt
Arthur Chen
Gunter Dittmar
Tom Fisher
Leon Satkowski
Kate Solomonson
Leslie Van Duzer
New Fac – Heritage Preserv
3. Sustainable Design and Building Technology: technological advances related to
building technology are rapidly changing. Understanding performance of new
and existing technologies are critical to achieving the goals of Architecture
2030 – zero-energy buildings. Thesis work in this topic may address building
performance, building technology, structural performance, energy, lighting or
materials.
Mary Guzowski
Sharon Roe
Steve Weeks
New Fac Sust #1
New Fac Sust #2
4. Urban/Suburban/Rural: the built environment is rapidly changing. Understanding
of the formal, political and social realities of human habitation has always been
an important part of architectural education. Thesis work in this topic may
include, density, land use, housing, emergency shelter.
Bill Conway
John Comazzi
Cynthia Jara
Lance Lavine
Julia Robinson
New Fac MDC
5-18
APPENDICES
Fall Semester:
ARCH5621 (3cr) is revised and taught by Renée Cheng (UMN) and Vince James (VJAA).
Time in class will be set aside for two cycles of discussion arranged around the four
fields of study. For example, emerging practices will meet in October and again in
November. Students attend all sessions, faculty will attend according to their advisory
listings above. For each symposium session, faculty will provide an overview of the
current state and trajectory for research and design in the field of study. Students
working within that field of study will prepare materials for discussion by the whole
group.
Symposium Cycle One (October), students must choose one of the four fields of study –
switching will be allowed at any time after this point. Faculty will give a brief overview of
current and emerging topics in the field of study. General discussion will follow based on
the student writing circulated in advance. Bibilography and precedent suggestions will be
discussed, possible grouping of interests among students will be identified. Each student
should prepare the following:
- 300 word text describing an issue, problem or topic they think is relevant for
discussion
- 300 word review of an academic book or article addressing the issue, problem or
topic
- 300 word review of a popular press article addressing the issue, problem or topic
Symposium Cycle Two (November), students must choose one of the four fields of
study. Faculty will briefly present exemplar syllabi that frame questions in that field of
study. General discussion will follow based on the student material circulated in advance.
Each student or student group should prepare:
- draft syllabus of a hypothetical design studio, outline must include: conceptual
goals, design methodology, provocations - exercises and readings, bibliography,
schedule, site, program, deliverables
At the end of November, students will be matched with their chairs and committee
members.
Spring Semester:
ARCH8777 (12 cr) will have a 9 credit design studio component lead by four faculty.
Though this might change, it is expected that Sharon Roe, Ozayr Saloojee and Dave
Dimond will be in this group. There will be a 1.5 credit research methods component that
will meet in four sections, divided by field of study. There will be a 1.5 credit document
production component that will meet in both large group and individual sessions.
Schedule of the semester will be adjusted to allow design time and document production
through early May. Documents will be turned in at the beginning of the final
presentation.
5-19
APPENDICES
General information regarding the M.Arch Thesis:
The M.ARCH Thesis measures the student’s knowledge in the field, the ability to conduct
research leading to a design proposal, and the ability to communicate architecture’s
discipline in visual and written representations. Students are expected to integrate the
design, research and document production for a simultaneous presentation in May – the
Thesis document and the design are completed at the same time.
To be considered satisfactory for the completion of the Master’s of Architecture
curriculum, the student’s Thesis direction and viability must be established several ways,
as evaluated by the student’s 3-member Master’s Examining Committee:
clarity of the thesis statement, the strategy for the investigation and its
development at an advanced level of inquiry and representation.
evidence of a research effort and a pattern of working that effectively
resolves scope of the issues.
the potential for the project to proceed to a reasonable conclusion or
implementation.
the project’s relevance to the discipline of architecture and it’s emerging
practices.
5-20
APPENDICES
Thesis 2008-9 (September 17, 2008)
Premise:
Thesis should be a student led independent project.
The written document should meet graduate school standards but not be allowed to
drive the design process
Context:
All students currently in GD3 will complete their program under the Plan A thesis. Pre-thesis as a formal
class was eliminated from the fall semester. During the spring semester, they enroll in ARCH8777 12
credits. This course is subdivided into a 9 credit design component and a 3 credit research/document
production component. No significant writing is expected in the fall semester, however it is expected that
thesis questions will be honed and ready for exploration at the beginning of the spring semester.
To support fall thesis prep, GD3 students will complete two exercises embedded in the research segment
of ARCH5621 Professional Practice. After completing those exercises they will enter into a process that
leads to a match of thesis chair and committee members for the spring semester.
On the faculty side of the equation: there are three Faculty Advisory Groups – History/Theory/Culture,
Sustainable Building Design, Urban/Suburban/Rural. These groups were formed for curriculum review but
could expand to form the basis of an advising and thesis support system.
There are currently 3 faculty assigned to lead thesis studios, Ozayr Saloojee, Sharon Roe, Dave Dimond.
An additional adjunct faculty can be added if needed. It was discussed that Ozayr would take student in
the HTC area, Sharon for SBT and Dave for USB.
Gayla Lindt will be involved in the fall and spring to support the students in defining their thesis question
and the process leading to the production of the final document meeting graduate school standards.
Sequence:
Sept 23-Oct 9: Propractice exercise #1 (GD2 and GD3 students all working individually) Identify a
question and use three different approaches. Write 3 short essays describing the question
and approach. Feedback provided in class and support through research workshops lead by
Gayla Lindt.
Oct 9: GD3 students choose one of their three essays for faculty feedback. Gayla and Renee sort
into 3 groups for the 3 faculty areas for faculty review.
Oct 13: Faculty Advisory Groups meet with students to suggest readings and precedents – likely
this is not individual but clusters of interests found within the student essays
Oct 7-30: Propractice exercise #2, (GD2 and GD3 student pairs) Students asked to write a
hypothetical studio brief including site, program, method, bibliography, precedents. Feedback
provided in class and through office hours by Gayla
Nov 6: GD3 students submit one page stating proposed thesis title, methodology, project
description
Nov 7-8: Gayla, Renee, Ozayr, Sharon and Dave (in consultation with Steve) sort thesis
statements into 3 groups for faculty review. Additional adjunct faculty needs assessed as we
see range and distribution of student thesis topics.
Nov 10-15: Faculty Advisory Groups (fac only discussion) meet to discuss statements, recategorize as needed and make suggestions for committee members.
Nov 14: Students will file their Graduate Degree Program form with Terry Rafferty; download the
form from the Graduate School under Current Students - Forms;. Turn in a current internal
transcript and a completely filled out School of Architecture Program Plan. Terry will enter
the Chair and Examining Committee member names after the selection is completed on
November 30.
Nov 17: Students given match information on topic area and related chair assignment. Students
given suggestion for committee members with information on why the faculty was suggested
- ideally faculty self-identify that the statement is an area they can make a contribution.
Some switching of chairs can be negotiated at this time.
Nov 30: Students confirm with Gayla and Steve on their chair and committee members.
5-21
APPENDICES
5-22
APPENDICES
A P P E N D I X F: 3
YEAR WORKPLAN FOR FACULTY
The following fold out pages show our working documents for planning faculty teaching,
service and research for 2008-2011. 2008-9 reflects current workload, 09-10 and 10-11 are in
planning stages and may change.
5-23
APPENDICES
5-24
APPENDICES
A P P E N D I X G:
ALUMNI SURVEY
2008
The following pages summarize responses to the recent online alumni survey. There were
312 respondants.
5-25
APPENDICES
5-26
APPENDICES
A P P E N D I X H:
TRANFORMING THE
U
AND COLLEGE OF DESIGN TASK FORCE
6 Wave One Colleges, substantially changed in 2006
College of Agriculture, Food and Environmental Sciences (CoFES); accepts Food Science
Nutrition from CHE
College of Architecture and Landscape Architecture; accepts Design Housing and Apparel
(DHA) from former CHE
College of Education and Human Development; accepts Family Social Science and the
School of Social Work from CHE
College of Human Ecology (CHE); College eliminated, units shifted to other colleges
College of Natural Resources; moved to CoFES
General College: College eliminated, units shifted to other colleges
Overall effort: 34 task forces, 300 faculty and staff
5-27
APPENDICES
5-28
APPENDICES
A P P E N D I X I:
REVIT SUCCESS STORY FOR COMPREHENSIVE STUDIO
University of Minnesota
Education Success Story
Revit ® Architecture
“Using Revit Architecture…
we could cut sections,
move in, move out,
and really understand
what the students were
doing. I found that to be
absolutely delightful—
especially since we were
only eight weeks into a
Studio with a program
many of them had never
seen before the class. It
was amazing.”
Inspire. Educate. Succeed.
University of Minnesota integrates
Revit® Architecture software as part
of its commitment to producing
versatile, skilled architects.
—Bill Blanski, AIA
Architect
Hammel, Green and
Abrahamson, Inc.
Image courtesy of Brady Bussler—University of Minnesota
The School
The School of Architecture at the University of
Minnesota prepares young architects and designers
for successful careers by helping them to build a
foundation in the fundamentals of the profession
and by providing instruction in cutting-edge,
innovative technologies and trends, including
sustainable design and building information
modeling (BIM). That’s why the university began
integrating Revit® Architecture BIM software into
its curriculum more than four years ago—well in
advance of most other architectural programs. “We
decided to teach Revit Architecture in several
distinct ways,” says Renée Cheng, Head of the
School of Architecture. “For example, I co-teach a
required construction systems lecture that includes
a one-credit, complementary BIM course taught
by an architect from a local design firm, Hammel,
Green and Abrahamson, Inc.” HGA architects
also teach BIM in upper-level graduate courses. In
response to strong interest from students in the
Bachelor of Science program, the department offers
an undergraduate lecture that carefully introduces
Revit in the broader context of the digital
environment of contemporary design.
5-29
The Challenge
“We were interested in introducing Revit
Architecture across the curriculum in just one or
two years in a way that leverages our approach to
design,” says Cheng. “That’s why we started with a
two-pronged approach—a crash course for upperlevel graduate students who had never worked
with the software, and introductory courses for
undergraduates and first-year graduate students.”
Gradual Introduction of BIM
“For example, using a series of tutorials I created,
I taught a one-credit Revit Architecture class
that went hand-in-hand with a graduate-level
construction methods and materials class,” says
Scott Davidson, AIA, at HGA. “Throughout the
curriculum, the goal is to teach a little bit at a time,
so that the students can really get into the theory
behind BIM later at the end of their second year of
graduate study.”
APPENDICES
The Inquiry
This year, the students designed an annex for a
Minnesota Public Radio (MPR) project site. “Using
Revit Architecture, they were able to create
buildings that not only looked good, but were also
buildable if taken to the next level,” says Davidson.
A Digitally Fluent Generation
“Our students grew up using computers,” says Cheng.
“They are incredibly fluid about moving between
software applications. On one project, they can go
from Revit Architecture to Photoshop to Illustrator
and back to Revit Architecture.” Unfortunately,
this approach can sometimes be inefficient but, as
Cheng says, “we believe it is possible that the BIM
environment can provide opportunities for better
interaction between Autodesk products and other
analysis tools.”
Work Faster
In the studio, Davidson had the students create
a Revit Architecture model of the MPR site and
the 15 surrounding city blocks. “It was a very
complicated site,” says Davidson. “Yet, using Revit
Prepare for Sustainable Practice
Architecture, we could sit down with the students
and simultaneously look at their preliminary designs, “We’re also very committed to sustainable design,”
says Cheng. “In fact, our M.S. in architecture—
plans, sections, elevations, and perspectives all at
sustainable design track has been cited as a model
the same time.”
program by AIA COTE. With Revit Architecture and
its parametric, data-based milieu, we see a huge
“We could cut sections, move in, move out, and
opportunity to use performance-based analysis as a
really understand what they were doing,” says
design tool with Revit and IES or other applications
Blanski. “I found that to be absolutely delightful—
we are currently using.”
especially since we were only eight weeks into a
Studio with a program many of them had never seen
before the class. It was amazing.”
The Result
“We first introduced Revit Architecture into the
curriculum four years ago,” says Cheng. “We
Understand Better
understand better now its strengths and
Better still, with the increase in speed also came
weaknesses, and, after seeing the results in the
greater understanding. “In the Revit Architecture
first studio, we have a great deal of confidence that
model, every line means something,” says Cheng.
by introducing it early in the curriculum, we will
“More than pure geometry, it actually shows us a lot
produce highly skilled, critical-thinking architects.”
of information during the design process. We are
hopeful that this will help create better architecture
and more versatile, skilled architects.”
Better-Prepared Students
“Many of the firms in town are using Revit
Architecture software,” says Cheng. “That’s partly
Design for the Real World
why our undergrads really want to learn Revit
“The students also talked about an increased level
Architecture. They can see the demand. With Revit
of specificity,” says Cheng. “For example, Revit
Architecture, we not only meet the demands of the
Architecture enabled them to see what was not
market but create the next generation of architects
realistic in their designs.”
that will use these tools in innovative ways and
bring the profession into the future.”
To learn more about Revit Architecture, visit www.
autodesk.com/revitarchitecture. To learn more
about the Autodesk Student Engineering and Design
Community, visit www.students.autodesk.com.
To learn more about the School of Architecture,
College of Design, University of Minnesota, visit
http://arch.cdes.umn.edu.
“By using Revit Architecture, students were able to create
buildings that not only looked good, but were also buildable
if taken to the next level.”
—Scott Davidson, AIA
Architect
Hammel, Green and Abrahamson, Inc.
Image courtesy of Brady Bussler—University of Minnesota
Autodesk and Revit are registered trademarks or trademarks of Autodesk, Inc., in the USA and/or other countries. All other brand names, product
names, or trademarks belong to their respective holders. Autodesk reserves the right to alter product offerings and specifications at any time without
notice, and is not responsible for typographical or graphical errors that may appear in this document.
© 2007 Autodesk, Inc. All rights reserved. 000000000000118206
5-30
APPENDICES
A P P E N D I X J:
GRADUATE STUDENT HANDBOOK
5-31
APPENDICES
5-32
APPENDICES
A P P E N D I X L:
ADJUNCT FACULTY POLICIES AND PROCEDURES
Included in this appendix are three documents relevant to adjunct and term faculty: 7.12
Promotion Procedures, Term faculty compensation rates, Professor in Practice policy.
College of Design
Supplement to the Standards for Promotion and Tenure Required by
Section 7.12 of
Regulations Concerning Faculty Tenure
(Adopted by vote of the regular faculty on 12 January 2005, updated 10, October 2008 to reflect
College name change and change from Dept to School)
I. Introductory Statement
This document describes with greater specificity the indices and standards which will be used to
evaluate adjunct faculty for promotion.
II. Promotion Criteria
The School of Architecture’s policies on promotion follow those of other departments, with one
notable exception. It has long employed adjunct faculty drawn from the professional and
scholarly community in the Twin cities to contribute to its school mission. The contributions of
its adjunct faculty are recognized by the school in the promotion of their members according to
the Criteria outlined below. The final review of their candidacy for promotion is made by the
Dean of the College.
Although no specific form of teaching or number of scholarly or creative work is mandated, the
clear expectation is that adjunct faculty members show qualitative distinction in their
achievements and evidence of continuous and active contributions to the School’s mission.
Unless specified otherwise in this document, the 7.12 document for regular faculty establishes
guidelines for the presentation of evidence and its evaluation in the promotion of adjunct faculty.
A. To Assistant Professor
For adjunct faculty, the change in status from Lecturer to Adjunct Assistant Professor comes after
an initial period of service when faculty are evaluated by the Head for their teaching and potential
for advancement.
B. To Associate Professor
Promotion to Adjunct Associate Professor can be made at a time when there is a body of evidence
demonstrating achievements in the following areas: effectiveness in teaching; professional
5-33
APPENDICES
distinction in scholarship and research, artistic creation, or professional achievement; and
contributions in service. The criteria used in adjunct faculty promotion differs from those used
for regular faculty. The primary criterion is effectiveness in teaching. Those criteria related to
scholarship and research, artistic creation, professional achievement, or service (as defined in the
7.12 document) may be considered. It is assumed that a candidate's distinction and pattern of
activity in these areas promise to continue into the future.
C. To Professor
For adjunct faculty, promotion to Adjunct Professor normally comes after a period when a
candidate has demonstrated continuous and significant contributions to the mission of the School.
The decision is based on continued distinction and productivity in the three criteria for promotion.
The criteria used in adjunct faculty promotion differs from those used for regular faculty. The
primary criterion is effectiveness in teaching. Those criteria related to scholarship and research,
artistic creation, professional achievement, or service (as defined in the 7.12 document) may be
considered. Promotion to the rank of Adjunct Professor also assumes qualitative and quantitative
achievements in addition to those justifying the promotion to Adjunct Associate Professor. It is
understood that a candidate's pattern of activity in these areas promises to continue well into the
future.
D. Procedures
For the promotion of adjunct faculty, to Adjunct Associate Professor or Adjunct Professor all
regular and adjunct faculty at a rank higher than that of the candidate are eligible to vote on
decisions.
E. Documentation
The minimum requirements for the promotion dossier of adjunct faculty are three external letters
of evaluation (solicited by the School Head), student evaluations for all courses taught in the
previous five years, and a portfolio containing personal work (scholarly, creative, or professional
practice as applicable to the candidate) and student work (as applicable to the courses taught by
the candidate). Refer to the 7.12 document for a list of what may be considered.
2
5-34
APPENDICES
Term Faculty Compensation Policy
(June 2008)
Adjunct Studio Faculty calculated at FLAT RATE per studio
•
•
•
$9,500 - Newly hired, limited or no teaching experience
$10,500 - At least three semesters teaching in our curriculum and proven leadership
$12,000 - Teaching experience and/or established national reputation
Adjunct Three-Credit Small Lecture or Three-Credit Drawing Course
calculated at FLAT RATE per course
•
•
•
$5,500 - Newly hired, limited or no teaching experience.
$6,100 - At least three semesters teaching in the curriculum and proven leadership.
Adjunct Four-Credit Drawing Course calculated at FLAT RATE per course
•
•
•
Adjunct Three-Credit Large Lecture or Required Graduate Course
calculated at FLAT RATE per course
•
•
•
Adjunct Four-Credit Workshop
•
•
•
$5,500- Newly hired, limited or no teaching experience.
$6,100- At least three semesters teaching in the curriculum and proven leadership.
$6,500- Teaching experience and/or established national reputation
5-35
APPENDICES
Adjunct Two-Credit Workshop
•
•
•
$3,000- Newly hired, limited or no teaching experience.
$3,500- At least three semesters teaching in the curriculum and proven leadership.
$4,000-Teaching experience and/or established national reputation
Adjunct Catalyst
•
•
•
$2,500 – Newly hired, limited or no teaching experience
$3,500 – At least three semesters teaching in the curriculum and proven leadership
$4,000 – Teaching experience and/or established national reputation
Modules
Project Based Tech – ET ! semester
•
•
•
9,500 – Newly hired, limited or no teaching experience
10,500 – At least three semesters teaching in the curriculum and proven leadership.
12,000 – Teaching experience and/or established national reputation
Project Based Tech – Comp or Elective ! semester – 3 credit
•
•
•
4,500 – Newly hired, limited or no teaching experience
5,500 – At least three semesters teaching in the curriculum and proven leadership.
6,500 – Teaching experience and/or established national reputation
Seminar Based Elective ! semester
•
•
•
$4,500 – At least three semesters teaching in the curriculum and proven leadership.
Lecture Based Elective ! semester
•
•
•
Final Project
•
•
•
5-36
APPENDICES
“Cass Gilbert Professor in Practice” and “Professor in Practice”, Position Descriptions
approved by vote of the Governing faculty (May 18, 2005).
We are looking for candidates that will meet the following criteria for Professor in Practice positions:
•
•
•
national reputation for design excellence as an individual or associated with a firm
ability to contribute to the curriculum following guidelines set by the department
established leadership role in a firm and in the profession sustained for significant amount of time.
This would be measured in terms of the number of design awards received, articles or books published about or by
them, widely recognized expertise in an area of design, and prior experience teaching here or in other schools.
In addition to the above criteria, Cass Gilbert Professor in Practice candidates are nominated by faculty in the
Department, and asked to supply a letter of interest along with a CV and brief portfolio of work. The governing
faculty will review the submissions and make recommendations to the Department Head decision and negotiation
with candidates.
Cass Gilbert Professors in Practice and Professors in Practice will serve on an advisory board, meeting with the
Department Head on a regular basis (approximately 3 times per year). The advisory board would have input on overall
direction of the department, curricular changes and the relationship between the department and the profession.
Appointments and workload assignments for both positions will be for a one to three-year period, with renewal
possible as long as mutually agreeable to both parties, based on a review process similar to post-tenure review at the
end of each appointment period. It is expected that the workload will need to be worked out individually with the
Department Head. Some Professor in Practice or Cass Gilbert Professors in Practice would teach one course per year;
others would teach one course every three or four semesters. Some will teach a studio and others only seminar, but
likely not both during the same semester.
Base pay for a Professor in Practice for a 6-credit studio (graduate or undergraduate) is $11,000. Cass Gilbert
Professor in Practice have additional salary, for the duration of their term, of $2,000-5,000 per studio.
Cass Gilbert Professor in Practice positions will be promoted with an individual lecture and an exhibit with a small
publication of the work. All Professors in Practice will be invited to participate in a bi-annual panel discussion and
exhibition. Announcement of the positions will occur in late Spring semester 2006 or early Fall 2007, with the first
starting in Fall 07 or Spring 08.
5-37
APPENDICES
5-38
APPENDICES
A P P E N D I X M:
M.ARCH ADMISSIONS STANDARDS
For all students except the 3+ students, the standards of admission require 24-27 credits of
architecture undergraduate credits. This leaves approximately 63-66 credits for nonarchitecture courses
SCHOOL OF ARCHITECTURE
Applicants applying to the M. Arch Program are technically applying to the Graduate School of the University of Minnesota. Thus, all application materials are submitted through the Graduate School except for the Portfolio which is sent
directly to the School of Architecture as described below.
CHECKLIST OF APPLICATION MATERIALS
1.
Graduate School Application Form
Complete the application online at:
http://www.grad.umn.edu/prospective_students/
2.
Transcripts
Official transcripts of all college/university coursework. Transcripts must be forwarded directly to the Graduate School at the
address below.
3. Essay
Upload the essays to your online application at the “personal statement” button. (Upload them together as one document at
the same button .)
Please write two brief essays, each one no more than 500 words, selecting from two of the following three options:
A. Write about a formative personal experience that helped to inspire your interest in pursuing the professional study of architecture and the built environment.
B. Describe a place that is meaningful and state why you find it meaningful.
C. Describe an object (at any scale) that you find sublime, grotesque or culturally significant and state why.
4.
Graduate Record Examination (GRE)
Applicants should take the general test and submit scores for verbal, quantitative and analytical skills. The UMN-Twin Cities
Graduate School code is 6874.
5. TOEFL (International Applicants)
Submit scores from one of the four English language tests. Applicants must have a minimum score of 550 (TOEFL paper test);
213 (TOEFL computer test); 6.5 (IELTS Test); or, 80 (MELAB test). Preference is given to applicants with an equivalent TOEFL
paper test score of 600 or higher.
6.
Three Letters of Recommendation
Letters of recommendation are processed through the online application. For details, visit web site listed above.
Applicants are encouraged to submit 2 of the 3 letters from faculty members who are familiar with their aptitude for academic
work. If an applicant majored in architecture as an undergraduate, then faculty letters should be from design studio faculty.
7.
Portfolio
Applicants to the standard 3-year program and those for advanced standing should submit a portfolio that indicates an ability
to produce drawings of architectural form and space, as well as a broader design sensitivity. Architectural drawings and design studio work should be included. Other work showing artistic or design ability or facility with digital technology may also
be included. The portfolio must be bound and no larger than 8.5 x 11 inches. Please do not send slides or CDs.
3+ Option Portfolio Applicants for the 3+ Option Program should submit a portfolio of 5-15 pages. The portfolio should indicate
design ability through drawing, painting, sculpture, graphic art, industrial design, or photography (2 pages of photographs
maximum). The portfolio must include a hand-drawn self portrait. The drawing must not be copied from a photograph. The
portfolio must be bound and no larger than 8.5 x 11 inches. Please do not send slides or CDs.
Send portfolio directly to the School of Architecture at the address below. Portfolios will be returned to applicants only if a
self-addressed mailer and sufficient postage is included.
Page One
5-39
APPENDICES
5-40
APPENDICES
A P P E N D I X N:
LIST OF PRACITIONERS TEACHING COMPREHENSIVE STUDIO
comprehensive studio teaching by professors in practice 2003-2008
Note that studios taught by faculty from the same office in the same semester are co-taught, each faculty
attends at least 2/3 of the class meeting times. Official title of Professor in Practice not in use until Fall 2005,
given to those senior practitioners with regional or national reputation.
Fall 2003
Mic Johnson, AIA, Principal, RSP Architects, Adjunct Assistant Professor
Fall 2004
Mic Johnson, AIA, Principal, RSP Architects, Adjunct Assistant Professor
Spring 2005
Kara Hill, AIA, Senior Design Architect, HGA Architects and Engineers, Adjunct
Assistant Professor
Robert Lundgren, AIA, Senior Project Architect, HGA Architects and Engineers,
Adjunct Instructor
Mohamad Lawal, AIA, RAIC, Principal and Senior Associate, KKE Architects,
Adjunct Instructor
Wynne Yelland, AIA, Principal, Locus Architects, Professor in Practice
Paul Neseth, AIA, Principal, Locus Architects, Professor in Practice
Fall 2005
Mic Johnson, AIA, Principal, RSP Architects, Professor in Practice
John Cook, AIA, Senior Project Architect HGA Architects and Engineers, Professor
in Practice
Joan Soranno, AIA, Senior Design Architect HGA Architects and Engineers,
Spring 2006
Tom Meyer, FAIA, Principal Meyer, Scherer & Rockcastle, LTD, Professor in Practice
Fall 2006
Mic Johnson, AIA, Design Principal, Ellerbe Becket, Professor in Practice
Bill Blanski, AIA, Senior Design Architect, HGA Architects and Engineers, Professor
in Practice
Scott Davidson, AIA, Project Architect, HGA Architects and Engineers, Adjunct
Instructor
Spring 2007
Christian Dean, AIA, Principal, CityDesk Studio, Adjunct Assistant Professor
Todd Rhoades, AIA, Principal, Cermak Rhoades Architects, Adjunct Associate
Professor
5-41
APPENDICES
Fall 2007
Julie Snow, FAIA, , CEO, Principal, Julie Snow Architects, Professor in Practice
Loren Ahles, FAIA, Senior Design Architect, HGA Architects and Engineers,
John Dwyer, AIA, Principal, Shelter Architecture, Adjunct Assistant Professor
Spring 2008
Christian Dean, AIA, Principal, CityDesk Studio, Adjunct Assistant Professor
Todd Rhoades, AIA, Principal, Cermak Rhoades Architects, Adjunct Associate
Professor
Fall 2008
Spring 2009
Steve Dwyer, Design Architect, HGA Architects and Engineers, Adjunct Instructor
Eric Amel, Design Architect, HGA Architects and Engineers, Adjunct Instructor
Victor Pechaty, AIA, Partner, BKV Group, Professor in Practice
5-42
APPENDICES
A P P E N D I X O:
DOCUMENTS RELEVANT TO PROMOTION AND TENURE
Documents related to promotion and tenure of regular faculty include University Promotion
and Tenure Policy, for which sections 9.2 and 7.11 are specifically on tenure and promotion.
The School follows a departmental 7.12 document for promotion and tenure.
5-43
APPENDICES
5-44
APPENDICES
A P P E N D I X P:
FACULTY HANDBOOK INCLUDING STUDIO POLICIES
5-45
APPENDICES
5-46
APPENDICES
A P P E N D I X Q:
GRADUATE ADVISORY CHARGE AND LIST OF STUDENTS
5-47

architecture program report - School of Architecture

Transcription

Similar documents

protint 751 update

Work at the Gateway Arch This Summer!

The control room of Deutsche Welle

Acrosonic Baldwin Spec Sheet

Alejandro Press Kit

Studio, Boezemstraat in Rotterdam (Crooswijk)

PDF - Creative Sound Studios

December 00/January 01

Launch Control XL FL Studio Guide.indd