The Architecture Department - Curriculum and Review

Transcription

1 1. Description Of The Program The Cerritos College Architecture Department (ARCH) offers intellectually stimulating preprofessional degree and certificate programs for men and women. The faculty is comprised of individuals actively involved in professional practice, energy conservation, green technology and preservation research. The curriculum consists of two complementary paths: (1) for students who will continue their studies and transfer to a professional school of Architecture, and (2) for students seeking job skills to either enter the work force or to enhance their current employment marketability. Most courses are laboratories allowing students close contact with faculty and other students to further advance the exchange of ideas and intellectual development. The Cerritos College Architecture Department serves the college in three principle areas. First, approximately 250 students per year are classified as Architecture majors with an ultimate goal of obtaining a certificate or degree in Architecture and/or preparing to transfer to a professional school of Architecture. Second, the department provides two general education courses (ARCH 110 and ARCH 112) for approximately 200 students per year in Fine Arts. Third, the remaining students are enrolled in courses for personal enrichment or to obtain new or increase their existing job skills. Results of the Student Survey indicated that 57% of the students stated their educational goal was consistent with the first identified area with the remaining 43% consistent with the second and third identified areas. a. Course And Program Content: The Architecture Department offers a wide range of courses to meet the diverse needs of our student population. The program consists of fourteen courses, two Associate in Arts Degrees, and one Certificate of Achievement all detailed in the Cerritos College catalogue. The fourteen courses can be broken down into the following five areas of study: Building Information Modeling (BIM) ARCH 221 AutoCAD Architecture ARCH 223 Revit Architecture Computer Aided Drafting and Design (CADD) ARCH 123 Introduction To 2D Computer Aided Drafting ARCH 213 Introduction To 3D Computer Aided Drafting Design ARCH 211 Architectural Design, Programming, And Presentation (On hold) ARCH 212 Architectural Design Theory I ARCH 222 Architectural Design Theory II Drafting ARCH 111 Architectural Drafting And Design I ARCH 121 Architectural Drafting And Design II ARCH 122 Architectural Delineation Professional Practice/Survey ARCH 110 Introduction To Architecture And Environmental Design Architecture Program Review: Self-Study Page 1 of 15

2 ARCH 112 Architectural History ARCH 113 Building Codes ARCH 114 Green Architecture And LEED All courses are required in one of the following approved programs of study: Architectural Technology Certificate of Achievement Architectural Technology AA Degree Architecture Transfer AA Degree The suggested sequence of courses within the Architecture Department is planned so the student can complete the certificate/degree requirements in a timely and logical manner. The first digit of the course number reflects the suggested year the course should be taken. The second digit of the course number reflects the suggested semester the course should be taken. The following courses should be taken during the first year, first semester: ARCH 110, ARCH 111, ARCH 112 ARCH 113 and ARCH 114. The following courses should be taken during the first year, second semester: ARCH 121, ARCH 122 and ARCH 123. The following courses should be taken during the second year, first semester: ARCH 211, ARCH 212 and ARCH 213. The following courses should be taken during the second year, second semester: ARCH 221, ARCH 222 and ARCH 223. Results of the Student Survey indicated that 96% of the students felt the Architecture Department s course prerequisites were relevant to the particular course. Courses are constantly updated as the Architecture profession changes their delivery systems and legal requirements. The Department improves its curriculum as recommended by its Industry Advisory Committee, adjunct professors who all currently work in the industry, and by research conducted by the full time faculty member. Course updates and revisions are submitted and approved by the Curriculum Committee on an at most tri-annual schedule. Course development has been on the forefront to include new computer integration into the practice of Architecture and updated accessibility, building, energy and zoning regulations. During the past five years one completely new courses was introduced (ARCH 114), two existing courses were significantly revised (ARCH 213 and ARCH 221), and all other courses were updated to reflect current industry changes. New text books are also evaluated to assure that students are using the best available. Affordability is one criterion used to evaluate text books. b. Student Demographics: Results from Table 1 on the next page indicate that students taking Architecture courses are much younger with a higher percentage of males when compared to the typical Cerritos College student. c. Faculty, Staff And Management Resources: The Architecture Department currently consists of one full-time faculty member, Dr. Edward Rother. Dr. Rother s degrees include; a BS in Architectural Studies and a Master of Architecture from the University of Illinois, an M.B.A from California State University at Fullerton, and an Ed.D from the University of Southern California. He is licensed to practice Architecture in the state of California, has national certification in Architecture, and possesses a Real Estate Broker s license in California. He has taught full-time at Cerritos since Architecture Program Review: Self-Study Page 2 of 15

3 Table 1: Student Demographics Architecture Department and Cerritos College ARCH CC ARCH CC ARCH CC ARCH CC ARCH CC Gender Female 22.1% 53.8% 22.3% 52.9% 27.9% 53.2% 24.0% 53.7% 24.1% Male 77.2% 44.6% 74.9% 44.4% 70.3% 44.3% 75.1% 44.0% 74.6% Not listed 0.7% 1.6% 2.8% 2.8% 1.8% 2.5% 0.9% 2.3% 1.3% Ethnicity American 0.2% 0.6% 1.1% 0.5% 0.2% 0.4% 0.0% 0.3% 0.1% Indian Asian 17.3% 12.7% 16.6% 12.0% 12.2% 9.3% 12.1% 10.4% 9.3% Black 3.6% 7.3% 3.7% 7.7% 2.7% 5.6% 3.4% 7.2% 3.9% Hispanic 63.7% 51.8% 63.3% 53.7% 44.7% 44.7% 61.3% 54.7% 65.8% Pacific 0.0% 0.7% 0.7% 0.7% 0.0% 0.4% 0.5% 0.5% 0.1% Islander White 7.1% 13.8% 7.4% 13.4% 4.3% 10.7% 6.3% 11.7% 7.3% Not listed 8.1% 13.1% 7.2% 12.1% 35.9% 28.8% 16.4% 14.2% 13.5% Age % 22.4% 43.4% 23.2% 45.7% 23.6% 22.1% % 33.0% 35.6% 33.0% 34.7% 34.3% 36.7% % 13.5% 8.3% 13.8% 7.3% 13.8% 13.7% % 7.8% 5.5% 7.5% 3.2% 7.1% 7.1% % 5.5% 1.3% 5.3% 2.3% 4.9% 4.7% % 7.5% 3.1% 7.5% 3.2% 7.1% 6.8% % 9.9% 2.8% 9.5% 3.6% 9.0% 8.9% The Architecture Department currently has four adjunct faculty who receive regular teaching assignments. All adjunct faculty have professional degrees in Architecture, a majority are licensed to practice Architecture in California, and currently work in the profession. Their diverse professional careers benefit students because of the wider career exposure brought to the classroom. Results of the Student Survey indicated that 85% of the students felt the Architecture Department faculty were generally accessible to help solve student needs. Table 2: Full-time and Part-time Comparison Semester FT Faculty PT Faculty FT Hours PT Hours Ratio of PT/FT Hours Fall : 1 Spring : 1 Fall : 1 Spring : 1 Fall : 1 Spring : 1 Fall : 1 Spring : 1 Average : 1 The ratio of part-time to full-time teaching units during the past four years has been approximately 1.26 to 1.00 see Table 2 above. This situation is undesirable as a majority of Architecture Program Review: Self-Study Page 3 of 15

4 classes are taught by adjunct faculty. The Department s enrollment statistics fully support the hiring of another full-time instructor and it has made this request yearly however, the college has not been in the financial situation to support such a move. In 2010 the Technology Division listed an additional Architecture full-time instructor as the number one hiring priority but the state budget crisis reduced total new hires and stopped that plan. In 2011 hiring priorities changed to replace the large numbers of faculty who elected to retire due to the college s Golden Handshake offer. An additional Architecture full-time instructor was not on the Technology Division s list at all. The Department will continue to request the hiring of another full-time faculty member. There has been some discussion about hiring another full-time faculty member who would teach both Art History and Architectural History classes, but the specifics for such an assignment require approval from the Fine Arts Division, which has not been forthcoming. In 2011 the Art Department filled a position for a new full-time Art History instructor essentially terminating this option. All Architecture Department faculty maintain current knowledge in the profession through membership in professional societies (the most respected is the A.I.A. The American Institute of Architects), attendance at workshops and symposia associated with these societies, professional continuing education courses, and learning seminars on teaching strategies. The Technology Division has been very supportive of utilizing Perkins funding to allow Dr. Rother to attend the annual week-long AutoDESK University, an advanced computer-aided drafting training seminar provided by the manufacturer of the leading CAD programs, AutoDESK. The Architecture Department is a small department with only one full-time faculty member, Dr. Edward Rother, who teaches as many overload classes as the college will permit. To serve the remaining student demand, the department employs five adjunct faculty. Results of the Student Survey indicated that 96% of the students felt the Architecture Department s faculty were knowledgeable about current Architectural trends. d. Scheduling Patterns: Instructors are assigned classes based on their availability and subject mastery. Adjunct faculty all receive the number of classes they request. Scheduling classes to meet student needs has been difficult due to the college s class load reduction and increased student demand for classes. Once a student begins the Architecture coursework required for an AA degree or Certificate of Achievement, normally it takes two to three years to complete the necessary coursework. The actual time table for completion of a certificate or degree depends on the abilities, employment status and motivation of the student. Results of the Student Survey indicated that 45% of the students were employed. For these students, especially those who work full time and are taking only one or two classes per semester, they can expect to complete the coursework in four to five years. The Architecture Department offers sections of most courses to serve both day and evening students. Results of the Student Survey indicated that approximately 63% of the students took courses before 4:00 PM (classified as the day), but that 75% of the students wanted to take day courses. Because of the lack of available classrooms and staff, the Department can not practically offer more courses to 4:00 PM. Despite these restrictions, results of the Student Survey indicated that 80% of the students felt there were an adequate number of courses Architecture Program Review: Self-Study Page 4 of 15

5 offered, and 80% of the students felt the courses were offered in a manner that allowed completion of their educational objectives in a reasonable amount of time. While 80% approval is high, these results were the lowest of any on the Student Survey. Students are instructed to modify their desires to accommodate the availability of existing courses and to enroll in required courses whenever offered as future scheduling is uncertain. The class schedule varies between each semester to meet the needs of as many current students as possible. e. Advisory Boards: The Architecture Department s Advisory Committee is comprised of members from the local Architecture community and related disciplines. Committee members represent a variety of disciplines including; accessibility consultants, Architects, carpenters, CAD Managers, Civil Engineers, educational advisors from professional schools of Architecture, Structural Engineers, and students. These members provide the Department with the most current and important information regarding industry needs and how the Department can modify its curriculum in order to best prepare its students for the future. The Department conducts a minimum of two advisory meetings each year. f. Facilities: The Architecture Department uses one lab classroom for all laboratory based classes, PST-230. This classroom is equipped with 32 combination computer/drafting work stations, two overhead projectors, and access to three black and white laser printers, two color laser printers, and two large plotters. The classroom is a year old and contains all state-of-the art equipment. The department also has access to the year old drafting lab classroom PST-227, if needed. The Architecture Department uses one classroom for all lecture based classes, the year old PST-233. This smart classroom is equipped with 40 seats. All faculty members share one office, PST-228, with one desk for the full-time faculty member and another dedicated for the use of all adjunct faculty. Results of the Student Survey indicated that 94% of the students felt that the classrooms and labs were well equipped and provided a suitable learning environment, and that 95% of the students felt the classrooms were clean and well maintained. g. Equipment: Computers are updated when college funding is available. The school standard is satisfactory for the department needs although occasionally the software demands have caused hardware crashes. Realistically the department requires higher-end computers than the college standard but this is unlikely to happen. Maintaining and upgrading existing computer hardware is mandatory to maintain the level of student success (Mid-Range Goal #2 and Long-Term Goal #4). Results of the Student Survey indicated that 96% of the students felt the instructional equipment (such as computers and drafting facilities) within the Architecture Department encouraged student learning. Computer Services is responsible for servicing the departmental computers. Unfortunately, Computer Services is understaffed and often can not provide repairs for weeks. The possibility Architecture Program Review: Self-Study Page 5 of 15

6 that a software related issue could render the computer lab nonfunctional is real. The department has been fortunate that this has not happened yet. h. Technology: Students are required to use computers and the internet to conduct research for various topics pertaining to architectural careers, architectural history, architectural licensing, building codes, energy conservation, green technology, historical preservation, etc. Courses are provided utilizing the dominant computer aided drafting and design (CADD) software, AutoCAD and the dominant building information modeling BIM software, AutoCAD Architecture and Revit Architecture. These programs are updated on a yearly basis requiring continuing expenditures for the Department to maintain currency (Mid-Range Goal #2). Additionally, students have access to the Microsoft Office suite and other audio-visual programs and have incorporated Microsoft Excel, PowerPoint, Word and a variety of audio-visual software in their class assignments. i. External Agencies: The Architecture Department has a working relationship with the International Code Council (ICC). The ICC publishes the building codes used in California and offers student the codes and membership at a reduced rate. The ICC also offers student memberships at a reduced rate. The American Institute of Architects (AIA) offers student memberships at a greatly reduced rate, although their level of membership benefits is proportionally reduced. Fields trips are offered to local architectural masterpieces such as buildings designed by Frank Lloyd Wright, Frank Gehry and the Greene Brothers. Many students also attend the WESTEC Exposition sponsored by the Society of Mechanical Engineers. 2. Instructional Improvement a. Evaluation of Teaching Effectiveness: Peer evaluation, student evaluations and the student survey are used to evaluate the quality of instruction. The peer evaluation process evaluates full-time and part-time faculty every three years. Students evaluate full-time faculty yearly and part-time faculty every semester they teach. Results of the Student Survey indicated that 93% of the students felt the Architecture Department s faculty were effective instructors. The Architecture Department assesses student needs through the Self-Study Survey completed by students, communication with professional schools of Architecture regarding articulation of courses, and communication with the profession through advisory committee meetings. The Self-Study Survey was developed to determine student needs and their satisfaction with the Architecture Department. The survey was administered in the Spring 2012 semester to all students enrolled in Architecture courses. Students in multiple Architecture courses were asked to complete only one survey. The Survey and its results are provided in Appendix A and through-out this report. Architecture Program Review: Self-Study Page 6 of 15

7 b. Assessment Of Student Learning Outcomes: Five Student Learning Outcomes (SLOs) have been identified for all Architecture courses. These SLOs are available on-line and are included in all course outlines given to students. During the Fall 2011 semester the department administered the short-form SLO survey prepared by the Cerritos College SLO Committee to six of the nine course sections offered. Three sections were for courses taught by the full time instructor and three sections were taught by adjunct faculty so this was a comprehensive review of the Department s SLOs. The Survey and its results are provided in Appendix B and summarized in the Table 3 below. Table 3: Student Assessment of Student Learning Outcomes Student Rating Number Percent Strongly Agree % % % % % Strongly Disagree % These results indicate that a large majority of the students felt they had mastered the SLOs for the Architecture classes. Despite these overall positive results, the department prepared a SLO Improvement Plan for all courses and identified the SLOs classified as less strong and implemented minor changes in the curriculum to assist those students who were struggling (Mid-Range Goal #6). When students are found to be falling behind in their educational endeavors, faculty meet with them to discuss possible methods to improve their educational success. Faculty adhere to the course outlines approved by the department and curriculum committee. All faculty use the same SLO s, assignment sheets, and textbooks to ensure that all students have received the same instruction for the class regardless on when they completed the course or who the instructor was. c. Course Grading And Retention Patterns: Grading methodologies are standardized among faculty, as are all assignments and evaluation tools. This maintains course continuity for students and instructors regardless of when they take the course or who the instructor is. Results of the Student Survey indicated that 96% of the students felt the syllabus for their class clearly outlined grading procedures, subject matter, and course requirements. Recognizing that students have diverse learning and test taking abilities, the Department uses several methods to evaluate student mastery. These include: Traditional tests with multiple choice, matching, fill-in, and short answers Practical laboratory exercises Class presentations Anonymous peer evaluations of presentations by the entire class Collaborative group projects Architecture Program Review: Self-Study Page 7 of 15

8 Table 4: Student Retention and Completion Architecture Department and Cerritos College School Year ARCH Retention CC Retention ARCH Statewide ARCH Completion CC Completion ARCH Statewide % 80.6% 76.7% 65.3% % 80.5% 84.6% 71.7% 66.0% 70.6% % 81.8% 86.0% 81.8% 66.5% 71.6% % 83.8% 84.7% 74.0% 69.4% 70.3% % 84.1% 85.6% 78.5% 70.4% 71.2% Average 86.4% 82.0% 85.2% 76.6% 67.5% 70.9% The average retention rate for the past five years in the Architecture Department was 86% with an average student success rate of 77% - see Table 4 above. Both numbers exceeded the campus wide average of 82% and 68%, respectively. Both numbers also exceeded the State- Wide average of all Community College Architecture programs of 85% and 71%, respectively. The substantial improvement for the completion rate is reflective of the commitment of both faculty and student to student success. d. Course And Program Completion: Table 5: Architecture AA Degrees and Certificates Awarded School Year ARCH Deg ARCH Cert CC Deg ARCH/CC Deg ARCH/CC Students % 0.56% % 0.53% % 0.58% % 0.57% % 0.56% Average % 0.56% The number of AA Degrees awarded in Architecture has been negatively impacted by the ultimate goal of the advanced Architecture students, to transfer as soon as possible. These students complete just enough courses to transfer to a professional school of Architecture without completing the certificate or degree requirements. Results of the Student Survey indicated that 32% of the students stated their educational goal was to transfer without completing courses required for an AA Degree. Although 57% of the students planned on obtaining an AA or Certificate in Architecture, many will transfer early if possible. Despite this obstacle, the number of AA Degrees awarded during the past five years compares favorably with other majors on campus. Results from Table 5 above indicate that on average Architecture students represent 0.56% of the total number of Cerritos College students while obtaining 1.13% of the total AA Degrees awarded twice the expected amount. A future concern for the Department, which is shared by the college, is that course reductions due to the state budget financial crisis will reduce the number of degrees awarded in the future. Prior to transferring, many students just completed their Architecture courses but then left Cerritos College prior to completing the General Education courses. These students finished their Cerritos College studies without any formal recognition of their academic achievements. In Architecture Program Review: Self-Study Page 8 of 15

9 response, the Department of Architecture created a Certificate of Achievement option for the school year. 16% of those students who stated their ultimate goal was obtaining a certificate or degree in Architecture and/or preparing to transfer to a professional school of Architecture identified the Certificate as their primary choice. e. Program Outcomes: The department has attempted different methodologies to track students who leave the program but without some automated system and assistance from the Cerritos College Research and Planning department this task is difficult (Mid-Range Goal #8). The department has a Facebook page for former students and has surveyed those students who are in their last course prior to graduating to determine which universities these students are transferring to. Although not scientific, students listed a variety of universities including (but not limited to): Boston Architectural College, California Polytechnic University at Pomona, California Polytechnic University at San Luis Obispo, California State University at Long Beach, New School of Architecture, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Southern California School of Architecture (SCI-ARC), University of Arizona, University of California at Berkeley, University of Southern California, and Woodbury University. f. Core Indicators Of The Program: Table 6: Perkins IV Core Indicators Core Indicator College Goal College Goal College Goal 1 Skill Attainment 93.33% 93.00% *91.04% 93.50% *92.31% 93.00% 2 Completions 83.33% 60.00% 85.42% 72.00% 95.12% 75.00% 3 Persistence 85.33% 84.00% 86.57% 85.96% 90.32% 85.86% 4 Employment *53.57% 80.33% 82.35% 75.00% *69.57% 81.48% 5 NT Participation 29.33% 19.05% *17.91% 20.37% 23.08% 21.00% 6 NT Completion 34.00% 20.00% 26.09% 25.00% 30.00% 26.00% * Denotes indicator is below performance goal The only two core indicators where the department s average has lagged the performance goal during the past three years are Core 1 Skill Attainment (92.33% vs 93.17%) and Core 4 Employment (68.50% vs %). For Core 1 the shortfall is less than one percent plus it is difficult to judge a 92% success rate as a failure. For Core 4 the recent economic downturn has had a devastating effect on the construction industry (particularly housing) which in turn is directly related to architecture. During the past three years the state average for Core 4 was 70.14% so the department s shortfall is expected. For all other core indicators the department has exceeded the performance goal. The Core Results are provided in Appendix C and summarized in the Table 6 above. g. Student Feedback: The Department administered a survey in preparation for this report during the Spring 2012 semester. The purpose of this survey was to determine student satisfaction with the Architecture Program Review: Self-Study Page 9 of 15

10 department s facilities, teachers, course offerings as well as the department at large. Surveys were collected from each course offered. Students in multiple classes were asked to fill out only one survey. The Department collected a total of 193 surveys. The data was collected and the results were very positive and supportive of the Department. Results from this survey are reported in the appropriate sections of this report. h. Institutional Data: Table 7: Architecture Enrollment and Efficiency Report Semester Enrollment FTES WSCH FTIE WSCH/FTIE Fall Spring Fall Spring Fall Spring Fall Spring Fall Spring Average During the past five years the Architecture Department had a WSCH/FTIE of 514. During the preceding five years the WSCH/FTIE was 456. This represents an increase of over 11% in operating efficiency. Most of this increase is a direct result of the 26% increase in WSCH from the to the school years. The WSCH/FTIE for Cerritos College and the Technology Division increased by 13% and 9%, respectively, during the same time periods. Although the yearly WSCH for the past year was at an all-time high for the department, it is impossible for the WSCH to increase much from current levels because most classes were completely filled. Adding classes has not been possible due to budgetary restraints and the college has strongly advised against overfilling courses. The Architecture Department s WSCH/FTIE for the past three years of 544 compares favorably with the Technology Division s WSCH/FTIE of 394 and Cerritos College s WSCH/FTIE of 510. The Architecture Department s WSCH/FTIE cannot improve much from current levels due to the fact that enrollment in all computer courses is limited by the number of available workstations, currently twenty-eight. 3. Strengths And Weaknesses Of The Program a. Strengths: The greatest strength of the Architecture Department is student success. This success has been detailed though out this report by the following results: (1) a large majority of students felt they had mastered the SLO s for all classes which were assessed, that represented two-thirds of all Architecture classes, (2) student retention exceeds the campus average by 4 percentage points - student success exceeds the campus average by 9 percentage points, (3) student Architecture Program Review: Self-Study Page 10 of 15

11 retention exceeds the state-wide program average by 1 percentage point - student success exceeds the state-wide program average by 6 percentage points, (4) the department s performance for a majority of the Perkins Core Indicators exceeded the state negotiated level, (5) Architecture students are awarded AA Degrees at twice the expected number compared to the campus average, and (6) the department serves a variety of student needs by providing classes for architecture majors, those completing the Fine Arts general education requirement, and for personal enrichment. Student success can be attributed to efforts from the Architecture Department s outstanding faculty. They are highly professional and dedicated to assisting students with a variety of needs. All faculty, including adjuncts, maintain currency in the profession by attending workshops and seminars, and by maintaining Architectural Practices. This had led to student success - results of the student survey indicated that 94% of the students felt courses in the Architecture Department helped them develop reasoning and analytical skills, 95% of the students felt the overall qualities and resources available in the Department provided them with an environment conducive to learning, and that 94% would recommend a course in the Architecture Department to a friend. The Department also provides students with information concerning their options in Architecture past their Cerritos College experience. Faculty members have reached out to educational advisors from local professional schools of Architecture to make class room presentations about what their schools offer, their specific transfer requirements, and financial aid (Mid-Range Goal #8 and Long-Term Goal #2). Two or three presentations have been made each year for the past five years. Results of the Student Survey indicated that 81% of the students felt the Architecture Department provided them with information regarding university transfer requirements and that 89% were provided information about career opportunities in Architecture. The lower percentage for transfer requirements may be impacted by the fact that many students rely solely on counselors for this information and did not request any from the Architecture Department. Through a special educational subscription program with AutoDESK, the Department is able to offer the latest versions of all CAD software. Students are typically trained on programs that many in the industry will adopt in the future. The Technology Division has been very supportive of the continued development of the Architecture Department. This support has been evident in the upgrading of computer equipment, maintenance of the expensive AutoDESK yearly-subscription program (Mid-Range Goal #2) and curriculum development (Mid-Range Goal #6). b. Weaknesses: The building industry is developing new materials and methods to construct buildings that are safer, more cost-effective, and more environmentally sensitive. The Architectural profession is developing more advanced computer-based methods of project delivery including Building Information Modeling (BIM) led by the AutoCAD Architecture and Revit Architecture computer programs. The regulatory agencies are developing new legal requirements to protect the public health, safety, and welfare. Many of these regulations are updated to reflect new knowledge obtained after natural disasters, i.e. earthquakes, hurricanes, and tsunamis. Results of the Architecture Program Review: Self-Study Page 11 of 15

12 Student Survey indicated that 96% of the students felt the Architecture Department s faculty were knowledgeable about current Architectural trends, however changes in these trends are occurring at an ever increasing rate requiring constant monitoring of curriculum and potentially modifications (Mid-Range Goal #7). When funding is available, the department s students would benefit by hiring an hourly lab assistant to provide laboratory access and to assist instructors, particularly the adjuncts as these instructors are often on campus at different times than the one full time instructor. A majority of the Architecture classes require completion of laboratory based projects. A lab assistant could provide more lab working time for those students who are unable to complete their projects during the designated class time, thereby increasing student learning and success. Architecture students also require access to specialized software that is only located in the department s laboratories, but can only be used when proper college personnel are present (Long-Term Goal #3). The ENGT Department would also benefit from the hiring of an hourly lab assistant for the same reasons. The department was a forerunner when Dr. Rother initially developed a web site for Architecture students that provided complete program details including degree requirements, course descriptions, and class handouts. This was over a decade ago and although the web site was maintained it is now obsolete and needs to be brought into compliance with the campus standard for all department web sites (Mid-Range Goal #3). Additionally, the department has been slow to incorporate the ifalcon and TalonNet web sites into its procedures (Mid-Range Goals #4 & #5). 4. Opportunities And Threats Of The Program A campus wide threat which affects the Architecture Department is the compensation rate for adjunct faculty. Although the rate has increased in recent years it still lags behind many of the local community colleges. Of particular concern to the department is the lack of adjunct faculty to teach the Architectural History course. Traditionally Architects are well-prepared to teach design and construction courses, however history was an elective and those who specialized in Architectural History did not enter the profession. Finding qualified adjuncts in this area of expertise has been challenging and ideally the department would like to have a pool of adjunct faculty to choose from instead of relying on existing faculty whose specialty is not history (Mid- Range Goal #1). A future concern of the department is that computer programs are expanding in their complexity at a rate far greater than student s abilities and the campus standard computer technology. The Architecture profession s future direction is Building Information Modeling (BIM) Systems. These computer systems are far more complex than the current CAD programs, but will certainly be the norm in the not too distant future. It is possible that many students who struggle but succeed with current CAD programs may not succeed with BIM systems. Computer software developers have responded by making their programs more intuitive and user friendly but the department will monitor their future efforts to ensure student success. Additionally, in order to fully learn their capabilities, these programs require computers with much more computing power, more memory, and higher-end graphic capabilities than the campus standard (Long-Term Goal #4). Architecture Program Review: Self-Study Page 12 of 15

13 The Department will continue to look for ways to improve the quality of instruction, particularly in response to students ratings of teachers and student learning outcomes, and assist students in transferring to professional schools of Architecture (Mid-Range Goal #8 and Long-Term Goal #2). Unfortunately most local Public Universities Architecture Programs are heavily impacted meaning it is nearly impossible for most students to transfer. Students often complain that these schools receive over 1,200 applications for less than 50 available spaces. Private Universities are less impacted but are cost prohibitive for many of our students. At this point in time the Architecture Department does not offer any internet or web based interactive courses. The only classes that do not require hands-on practice to develop the necessary skills and are candidates for Distance Learning include: Introduction to Architecture (ARCH 110), History of Architecture (ARCH 112), and Building Codes (ARCH 113). A majority of the department s instructors and advisory committee do not believe that student learning for on-line courses is equal to in-class instruction. Results of the Student Survey indicated that 79% of the students preferred taking a traditional course instead of an on-line course. This was the same result as that from the 2005 Student Survey indicating students have not changed their preferences despite the fact that they have become much more reliant on electronic devices such as smart phones and computers. These results have to be considered before any distance learning course is offered. The Department, with strong student support, sponsors the Architecture and Technology Club. This club has monthly meetings, fundraising activities, and enters design competitions against other local schools of Architecture, where they often win. This club increases its member s enthusiasm for Architecture, involvement in all educational activities, transfer student resume, and makes them better representatives for the Department. 5. Accomplishment Of Previous Goals The most significant goal accomplishment by the Department has been the replacement of the old worn-down classrooms in the Technology Building. The primary classroom, TE-5, was converted into a combination computer/manual drafting classroom through an economical remodel of the 40 year old manual drafting tables creating an undesirable learning environment for all students. The Department is now located in the year-old Physical Science and Technology building that is equipped with brand new tables specifically designed for both computer and manual drafting courses. Students also benefit from upgraded audio-visual instructional systems, new computers, upgraded printers, and new full size plotters. A new course in Green Architecture and LEED (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design) has been approved by the curriculum committee and offered to students. Technologies from this developing field have been incorporated into other classes and textbook authors have added coverage of this topic into new editions of their books. All department performance and student success data have improved, most notably, the number of students receiving degrees and certificates is at record levels. The hiring of new adjunct professors (Mid-Range Goal #1) and the hiring of a second full time instructor has not gone well. Architecture Program Review: Self-Study Page 13 of 15

14 6. Program and/or Course Modifications Made Since The Program s Last Self-evaluation The two primary program modifications since the last self-evaluation have been better course scheduling and SLO development. Course scheduling improved as the Department was permitted to increase its course offerings and was able to find qualified personal to teach the expanded schedule. The day-time program was increased by almost two-fold which led to an increase in students completing the program and higher efficiency ratios. The development of SLOs led to the Department re-considering the topics taught in each class. Through collaborative efforts from the advisory committee, adjunct faculty, and students many classes were revised to include and emphasize learning objectives that were determined to be more relevant for the current environment. SLO assessment has also led to changing pedagogy for existing classes (Mid-Range Goal #6). 7. Goals Of The Program Instructional Program Review Goal Establishment Form Goals Action(s) to be taken Timeframe Person Assigned Mid-Range Goals 1. Create a pool of qualified Architectural History adjunct faculty candidates. 2. Determine current CAD software and hardware industry standards and requirements. 3. Migrate department website to new college server. 4. Incorporate ifalcon into the Architecture program. 5. Incorporate all Architecture classes into TalonNet. Evaluate current hiring standards in consultation with Advisory Committee members and faculty at other colleges and advertise for position as needed. Renew yearly subscription to AutoDESK computer products and address issue in yearly unit plan as part of budget requests. Meet with Samuel Chavez for instruction. Complete migration. Obtain ifalcon training. Determine best methods to incorporate into Architecture classes. Upload all course materials. Utilize the on-line Grade Book Edward Rother Every September September, 2013 November, 2013 January, 2014 Edward Rother Division Dean Edward Rother Edward Rother Edward Rother Adjunct faculty Architecture Program Review: Self-Study Page 14 of 15

15 6. Update course outlines to incorporate SLO assessment results. 7. Update course outlines to incorporate changing industry trends. 8. Advise students about transfer opportunities. Long-Term Goals 1. Develop a tool to track students who complete the Architecture Program. 2. Evaluate efforts and activities regarding student transfer opportunities. 3. Develop a justification for the hiring of an hourly lab assistant. 4. Upgrade classroom computer hardware. Review courses for areas that require updating based on SLO assessment results. Evaluate courses for areas that require updating based on changing industry trends in consultation with Advisory Committee members. Continue and expand outreach programs to local professional schools of Architecture. Consult with the College Research and Planning staff and enhance social networking outreach programs. Adjust outreach programs to local schools of Architecture as necessary. Prepare and submit justifications supporting hiring a new hourly assistant to Division Dean. Prepare and submit justifications supporting upgrades to Division Dean. Every February Every November and April Every February and September Edward Rother Adjunct faculty Edward Rother Adjunct faculty Edward Rother Adjunct faculty 2015 Edward Rother Division Dean 2014 Edward Rother Adjunct faculty 2014 Edward Rother Adjunct faculty Division Dean 2016 Edward Rother Division Dean Architecture Program Review: Self-Study Page 15 of 15