Submission Summary. Faculty of Architecture Summary of Submissions 25 October 2015

Transcription

1 Submission Summary In total there were 26 submissions from students, alumni, staff, faculty members and Departments or groups of faculty members. The 26 submissions represent the input of many more than 26 individuals. The major elements of each of the 26 submissions are summarized in the following section Submission Details. If any major elements in an individual submission have been missed or summarized inappropriately, please accept my apologies and please send me an to correct my misinterpretation. Among the submissions are many worthwhile ideas that deserve further discussion and consideration. Moreover, many of the submissions presented common ideas or concerns and thoughts on possible improvements. The list immediately below attempts to summarize the ideas, concerns and thoughts that appeared in multiple submissions. 1. Faculty Name: Many commented that Faculty of Architecture is the appropriate name, and likewise many commented that this name is not appropriate or causes confusion since a Department has the same name. 2. Faculty Scope: Combination of all disciplines in one Faculty that is distinct in University is a strength and should be further developed. 3. Student Admission: Admission to the undergraduate program should be by Direct Entry with elimination of U1. 4. Major/Minor Designation: Undergraduate degree should at least have a major indicated, as well as the possibility of an identified minor, possibly for students from outside the Faculty. 5. Common Courses: Greater joint presentation of courses between disciplines in both the undergraduate and Master s programs. Utilize courses from other Faculties for some topics. 6. Interior Design: There is support for continuing the Interior Design program at the Master s level. Upcoming CIDA changes for membership in profession should be considered. 7. Interdisciplinary: Consensus that interdisciplinary potential not being realized, suggestions that this is related to governance structure. 8. PhD Program: There is wide interest in re-activating the PhD program. 9. Governance: Many comments focussed on governance structure, often associated with the placement of the ED program in the Faculty. Governance and re-structuring comments/suggestions often related to ED program include (in no particular order): a. eliminate ED options, b. eliminate the ED program, c. ED program administered by Department Heads, d. re-allocate ED program faculty to appropriate Department, e. treat those teaching in ED equitably, f. reduce disciplinary barriers in ED program, g. structure of Faculty and its committees leads to conflict, h. ED program governance is ambiguous, ill-defined curriculum, clarification needed in terms of how students navigate, where teaching staff resides, who is in charge and who delivers content, i. students should declare discipline on admission from high school, j. ED program should return to common ED2 and ED3, k. students and professions are uncertain about professional standing of ED graduates, 1

2 l. ED program is too ample and vague, m. move to 3 year direct entry undergraduate program and 3 years Master s program, n. Departments should have clear curricular, budgetary and hiring oversight of ED3 and ED4, o. re-structure ED program into Architecture option and non-architecture option, and p. give ED a new name, suggest B.Arch. Studies. Submission Details Department or Faculty Group Input Faculty name is confusing: o suggest Faculty of Designed Environment(s) o or Faculty of Architecture, Design and Planning strengthen research capacity through PhD program activation o issues include: space, computer support, teaching/supervision load, international student support, range of courses (from all over campus), funding (UMGF distribution) unrealized potential of L+U option curriculum overlap between undergraduate and graduate programs attract non-faculty students to undergraduate courses (Minor developed for non-faculty students) minimal size of Department makes it vulnerable objective to gain autonomy over curricular and administrative processes undergraduate program provides foundation for Master program interest in PhD program guest scholars and PhD students participate in research and teaching increased disciplinary self-governance to address accreditation concern and better contribute to Faculty structure professional program in concerted manner with other disciplines strengthen ED and Faculty governance restructuring? o No ED options, but instead one program of courses with selection of studio courses in final year o No ED program? o Move out of U1 completely Current Faculty structure is financially strained and has governance difficulties: o Less than optimum student numbers o Large number of courses for number of full-time faculty Currently Faculty is culturally strained: o Sense of inequity in staff/student ratios o Budget allocation and utilization o Allocation of physical space Governance difficulties as each graduate program relies on undergraduate program to deliver accredited program Current professional programs should remain in Faculty MID as graduate program reduces barriers to interdisciplinary work at graduate level Concern about replacement of retirees to maintain program viability 2

3 Skepticism about AMP students getting BED degree BED program serves purpose relatively well o ED students to graduate with major and minor o Coordination of studio times o Co-teach with other disciplines History of Designed Environments, History of Urban Settlement, Principles of Urban Design, Ethics and Aesthetics, Urban Ecology, etc. o Portal for Direct Entry instead of U1 o ED program administered by Dept Heads o Assoc. Dean/Program Director for disciplinary issues Current ED faculty re-allocated to department appropriate to their disciplines Instructor positions converted to tenure-track appointments Separation of ED into options for last 2 years has adverse effects on collegiality and student morale o Return to 2 ED years in common to reduce disciplinary barriers and improve student experience Name of Faculty not appropriate, suggest Faculty of Design Committed interest in developing PhD program o Name of program to reflect distinctive disciplines it represents o Clarify PhD program philosophy and goals o Relationship to CAST and other Faculties o Establish Doctoral Studies Committee o Teaching loads for PhD advisors o Funding for dissemination and promotion & student funding From Faculty Members Change name of Faculty, confusing as it is name of Department, may be discouraging interdepartmental and inter-disciplinary collaboration. Suggest Faculty of Design Needs to be more development of Faculty wide and led initiatives Develop cross-disciplinary programs in urban design, ecological design, universal design and sustainable community design allowing graduate students to enrich main professional degree with extra qualification PhD should be Planning and Design, not Planning or Design Name of Faculty is accurate in terms of what we do ED2 students have Interdisciplinary Faculty teaching team but is this too early in their education for truly interdisciplinary work o What interdisciplinary opportunities should be offered in the last year of ED or graduate program? To begin to establish PhD should it have a selective focus? Four accredited programs in Departments and one shared undergraduate program has led to disastrous erosion of collegiality o Structure of Faculty and its committees leads to conflict. Usually each committee has Dept representative and ED representative, but this means that Dept curriculum changes can be voted down by other disciplines. 3

4 o ED program is supposed to serve all four disciplines but governance model is ambiguous If moving to Schools allows disciplinary autonomy this would make curriculum more nimble, innovative and adaptive. Problem that ED program does not differentiate between disciplinary options o Introduce major/minor designation o Or introduce B.Arch. that is interdisciplinary in the final year with other ED programs and other disciplines such as Civil Engineering o Share courses between disciplines such as History of Culture, Ideas and Environment 1 & 2, shared courses on computing, sustainability, etc. Consider moving to Direct Entry Advantages of changing Faculty name are roughly equal to leaving it the same. Joining Faculty of Engineering might be valuable U1 provides no discipline specific knowledge so just extends the graduation time ED graduates have no professional standing causing confusion in professional practice hiring Limited collaboration between departments, needs to be enhanced to create a common culture Reliance on sessionals due to lack of full time faculty is problem Courses such as Art History, Theory, Building Systems and Structures can be shared among departments Faculty compromised by staffing and administration of ED as a separate and distinct unit. role in foundational teaching has become increasingly disconnected from the professional disciplines and the result has been an ugly power struggle. Faculty damaged by internal strife, renewed configuration should place emphasis on professional programs Students declare the discipline on entry from high school to one year of collaboratively taught foundation year across the disciplines followed by 4 years of graduate programs and final year collaborative team to solve environmental program. Agglomeration of accredited professional disciplines is strength use differences in disciplines to positively restructure the Faculty Disciplines are all equal, but ED is vexed o Students and professions are confused by students graduating from ED programs o Reconstruct ED as collaborative foundation year administered by Depts o ED resources better and more equitably used by grouping professional disciplines more collaboratively o Develop cross-disciplinary streams as electives Important to to create a distinctively designed identity for our undergraduate and graduate programs to attract our best students Need to be open to structural change, open to merge, amalgamate Architecture is the umbrella, overarching discipline within the Faculty ED program is so ample and vague, so hard to consider as a discipline and must be revised Hiring new faculty to maintain programs is a must Necessary to improve climate so that all participate in collective decision making 4

5 Possibility to merge architecture, interior design and city planning into School of Architecture and Urbanism, or School of Architecture and Design, or School of Architecture, Interior and Urban Design and Planning, or School of Architecture, Design and Planning or other permutations Architecture and Design are not the same Planning and Urban Design are at times antagonists, but may inform each other Segmented training of technical specialists produce terrible results Urban design, landscape, architecture interior design are all part of architecture at different scales The specificity of different disciplines is required, but first need to offer basic architectural education, with design studios at different scales and perspectives that range from urban design, landscape to interiors, small object design, with technical and theoretical courses on urbanism, planning, history and theory, even civil works Keep, strengthen and celebrate MID ED program needs to be reviewed, history and theory courses need to provide better foundation for graduate program o Foundation survey courses need to be returned o More written assignments to develop critical thinking and communication skills. History and theory graduate courses can be taught in more interdisciplinary manner o Faculty could collaborate and teach in several departments ED program should be returned to two year status of ED2 and ED3 common Those teaching in this program should be treated equitably Use 50 th anniversary of ED program to celebrate how visionary this program was when first creatred Current program structure could be more sustainable by rethinking the way we deliver course content across Faculty o Courses in history, theory, building science could accommodate the accreditation needs of more than one discipline and make more efficient use of teaching staff Faculty of Architecture is the right name to reflect history, ties to alumni Return to original spirit of the school which denotes architecture in the broader sense of designing spaces, places and communities Continue with MID, program plays an important role in educating the future educators for profession Current faculty composition is academic heavy Develop split positions that can attract practitioners, i.e. one or two faculty positions filled by 2 or 4 practitioners Offer an intensive one year post professional degree and 3 year Design Doctorate Move to a 3 year direct entry undergraduate program followed by 3 year Masters programs, with option of 1 year post professional and 3 year doctoral program Undergraduate program to align environmental design from a wide range of perspectives, transdisciplinary o Year 1 design studies in architecture and allied disciplines o Year 2 disciplinary design studies o Year 3- inter/disciplinary design studies Increase enrolment in undergraduate program 5

6 Consider offering a joint BED in Media Studies New governance structure for ED program consisting of Departments having clear curricular, budgetary, and hiring oversight of ED3, ED4 option years and involvement in ED2 content and hiring Allow graduate to declare major on their degree Refine entry process into option years, have an architecture option and an non-architecture option only or develop a new structure Continue all professional programs Expand AMP but make these students part of graduate program Clarify governance of ED program or move it to another Faculty, e.g. Clayton Riddell Faculty of Environment, Earth and Resources to complement Environmental Science and Environmental Studies programs. Prefer to continue ED program but with new name, create new B.Arch. Studies with direct entry. o Allow more direct outreach to high schools o Better achievement of accreditation requirements o Greater interdisciplinary opportunities through open electives, co-taught and/or designbuild studios, internships Current academic structure not serving Faculty well, as the largest program is ED but this is the most ill-defined in terms of governance and curriculum School of Architecture is preferable to Department of Architecture and Departments are preferable to programs, so consider Department of Environmental Design Many opportunities for linking with other Faculties, but best to leave four professional disciplines together which is a strength of our school Faculty of Architecture is right name, with a long history and all disciplines have been intertwined with architecture o Architecture has longest disciplinary history and is most recognizable o If name change is necessary then consider: Faculty of Architecture and Urbanism Faculty of Art and Architecture, that includes existing School of Art and a new Schools of Architecture, Interior Design, Landscape Architecture, and City Planning Faculty of Design, that also includes existing School of Art Faculty of Built Environment to include new Materials Research and Construction Management Pursue a post-professional M.Arch.II degree To suggest a professional design or planning program should not require graduate level studies or not integrate research is moving backwards Lack of technical support for research is hindering research and ability to attract and retain top students Many cultural, administrative and structural barriers to undertaking research Direct interaction and communication between students, faculty, industry partners has been lost by changes to Partners Program Faculty of Architecture should remain a distinct entity in University ED program governance needs clarification in terms of how students navigate, where teaching staff comes from, and who is in charge and who delivers content o Eliminate U1 6

7 o End compartmentalization of sessionals and instructors in ED program Comments for Support Staff Little collaboration between units aimed at understanding their connections. Program structures provide little opportunity for interdisciplinary work ED program structure does not allow undergraduate students to apply to more than one degree at the end of their ED program. Some foundational ED knowledge could be from other Faculties, e.g. GIS, ecology Administrative responsibilities of Heads is unclear Support staff reductions resulted in loss of corporate memory Program structure is dysfunctional and has been for many years Steps taken to meet accreditation have only exacerbated the overall situation be seeming to benefit individual programs at the expense of others Imbedded lack of trust and respect among academic staff Unnecessary workplace stress among administrative staff who are used as pawns Low admission numbers and high cost of programs lead to lack of experts in some fields leading to high sessional costs Too many positions filled by those that do not have professional degree AMP offerings are not well understood, but is resource intensive ED program is cumbersome and convoluted History of administrative responsibility of ED program has not served the Faculty well. Those teaching ED2 not given respect Many academics are well suited to teach course in programs outside their home program but these opportunities are lost Faculty name being the same as a Department name is confusing Promoting collegiality is most critical Student and Recent Alumni Input Multidisciplinary aspect of Faculty did not positively contribute to my education o Did not enhance social or political environment o Administrators and professors connive and squabble over funding, students and power o Students learn to be equally unprofessional o Achieve success in spite of school culture Students have to run the gambit of meager multidisciplinary undergraduate degree before entering architecture No benefit for Department of Architecture to be tied to greater Faculty o Needs autonomy to rise above mediocrity Theoretical nature of MID enhances understanding of design Master s program should include student to student mentorship program Why no designation of ED option on degree? Only one interdisciplinary studio after ED2 but degree advertised as interdisciplinary 7

8 3 stages of application prior to ED degree o Acceptance to University o After one year, apply for ED program o Following year apply for option and order of preference o Without right ED3, ED4 courses additional time needed to complete Master s program Introduce major/minor with more interdisciplinary experience Reduce stress of applying into program options Students hesitant to return for Master s program that they have essentially been a part of in their ED degree Move away from vertical studios, ED student benefits from working alongside a Master s students, but Master s student does not get benefit Where is balance between artistic value and practicality of projects Lack of interdisciplinary interaction o Little opportunity to make interaction a reality even though website states: four departments in constant interaction, excellent platform for discussing issues Less Recent Alumni Faculty of Architecture should not be joined to Faculty of Engineering Constant overhaul of Faculty means that students lose sight of what degree means Students need stability not more changes Name of Faculty needs upgrading, in favour of Faculty of Designed Environments Suggest a B.Arch.Studies followed by an M.Arch. within a Faculty of Architecture, Landscape and Design o More instructional based learning less discovery learning as in BED program o Profession expects young architects to be computer literate, but not at expense of learning core technical courses and researching design through case studies Links with engineering are essential Communications skills are essential Name Faculty of Architecture is appropriate Establish an Institute for Design and Construction based in CAST to connect architecture, interior design and engineering with construction industry, manufacturers and suppliers Input from Professional Organizations ED program is not recognized, but many ED graduates are practising Starting Jan CIDA will require 4 year accredited degree for membership in Provincial Associations o May cause decline in UofM ID enrolment Profession supports MID degree, but salary level of graduates not congruent with education Consider a way for ED graduates to return for bridge program to get CIDA accredited equivalency 8