1. Student achievement: Program Assessment URI Bachelor of Landscape Architecture Degree (BLA)

Transcription

1 1. Student achievement: Program Assessment URI Bachelor of Landscape Architecture Degree (BLA) INTRODUCTION: In late 2012 the LAR Department asked a local landscape architect to review the LAR procedures for evaluating student learning in the BLA. With her assistance we looked at learning outcomes and information previously submitted to the RIBOGHE. Following this review, we decided to change our process and move away from exit tests to a method of evaluating portfolios of students at different levels in the program. It is our belief that we are able to provide a more accurate picture of what our students are learning through an evaluation of what they can apply and display. Because learning is a cumulative process, and each semester builds upon the knowledge of the previous semester, a student s portfolio represents the culmination of knowledge and abilities developed throughout the program. In addition to documenting a learning journey and applied skills, portfolios are real world necessities when looking for work during one s university career and after graduation. Learning to brand and market one s self in a professional manner by displaying a full complement of skills and techniques is a requirement in today s competitive job market. By reviewing sophomore and senior portfolios we will be creating a feedback loop for assessing information, which will help identify strengths and areas in need of improvement. To assist us in this process we have also revised the materials previously submitted and clarified the Outcome Categories included in our Curriculum Map. This map now includes Knowledge, Problem-Solving, Professional Skills, Communication and Graphic Presentation Skills, Ethical Principles, and Personal Growth as key categories highlighted in the curriculum map. BASIS OF ASSESSMENT: Learning Outcomes serve as the basis for assessment and are broken down into subcategories with specific areas of focus. The LAR Curriculum Map indicates the outcomes and in which courses knowledge and skills are Introduced (I), Reinforced (R) and Emphasized (E). The subcategories were adjusted in 2012 and again in 2014 to provide a more consolidated means of assessing certain fundamental concerns in a student s education. Knowledge Design Theory, Historic Landscape Architecture, the Profession Sustainable Design Practices and Materials Design Process and Practice Plants and Cultural Requirements Materials and Precedents Practice, Licensure and Laws Problem Solving and Design Methods and Procedures Creative and Innovative Application Process Drawings (Analysis, Diagrams, Program) Concept and Schematic Design Site Planning Professional Skills / Technical Knowledge Land Surveying Problem Statements and Definition Design and Conceptualization Public Participation and Collaboration Model Building Construction Documentation Layout, Materials Site Preparation and Demolition Grading and Drainage (Calculations) Planting Plans Construction Details Road Alignment Specifications and Bidding Professional Communications: Resumes, Letters and Portfolios) Communication and Graphic Representation Conceptualization and Visualization Oral Presentation Hand Sketching, Drafting and Rendering CAD GIS Digital Technology: Photoshop, Sketch Up, other Writing Ethical Principles Environmental Concerns (conservation, restoration and stewardship) Service Learning and Community Values Social Values and equity Sustainability and Climate Change 1

2 Personal Growth Global Awareness Teamwork and Multi-disciplinary Partnerships Reflecting on Personal growth RANKING for Senior and Sophomore Portfolios: Each of the major Learning Outcomes is a discreet unit, able to be ranked on a scale of 1-5: 5 = Exceptional / Excellent Student work significantly and consistently exceeds goals with originality, creativity and professionalism. Consistently demonstrates exceptional abilities and is able to apply knowledge and skills in a thorough, unique and professional manner. 4 = Good / Highly Effective Student work significantly and consistently exceeds goals with originality, creativity and professionalism. Consistently demonstrates exceptional abilities and is able to apply knowledge and skills in a thorough, unique and professional manner. 3 = Effective / Adequate Student achieves and often exceeds goals while inconsistently demonstrating creativity and innovation. Work is competent, but no more. 2 = Fair Student addresses all or most issues but shows little beyond a minimum level of required competency. There is no evidence of interest or excitement about exploring within the profession. 1= Ineffective / Poor Student achieves some, but not all, goals for applying critical knowledge, demonstrates some skills but not others, or uses critical knowledge base inconsistently. Items are missing and work is poorly demonstrated. SENIOR PORTFOLIO ASSESSMENT 2014: Tech. Digital / Graphic Knowledge Communication Representation Professional Portfolio Communication Problem Solving AVERAGE: Overall the portfolios represented a consistent application of knowledge across the learning outcomes categories being evaluated. In addition, each portfolio received individual comments pertaining to qualitative measures and techniques and methods to be used for improving. 2

3 Surprisingly, performance in each category was very similar, although there were considerable differences between individuals. There were students producing exceptional/excellent work and a few students who were in the lower performance categories. The rubric can be revised to improve its applicability and accuracy. Third party reviewers who are working professionals contribute to a rigorous process which has also led to meaningful discussions with faculty about changes in the curriculum. In addition, the question arises whether portfolios at two moments in time are a good indicator of what students learn. When one considers that students are asked to develop two portfolios during their university careers and that we also collect data on summer internships, class performance and post-graduation job hiring, we have a multi-faceted approach to evaluating student achievements and outcomes. SOPHOMORE PORTFOLIO ASSESSMENT 2014: Tech. Digital / Graphic Knowledge Communication Representation Professional Portfolio Communication Problem Solving AVERAGE: LIMITATIONS: One drawback to using portfolios as a means of assessment is that portfolios rely on a mostly graphic representation of work, with little emphasis on using text to explain the finer points of design, design development, and construction documentation. One possible way to remedy this is to have students provide a page at the end of their portfolio with short explanatory information on each project. We might also ask students to include a major written assignment, a reading list of texts found to be most useful and inspirational and a more detailed list of required drawings. A written assignment or two provides students a way to showcase interests in the discipline or outside of the discipline. We could also require students to prepare a written landscape assessment; however, we are not looking to require additional assignment as the portfolios take up a considerable amount of time to prepare. Also, although these assessment areas are common to BLA programs, differences in definitions, ranking and assessment methods will not allow a direct comparison to BLA programs at other universities. The methods however, are applicable to any LA program and may be used with any Learning Outcomes desired. 3

4 SUGGESTIONS: There are several additions to the portfolios that would provide a greater depth to rating the BLA program as a whole: 1. Ask students to write a short (1-page) paper of their thoughts on the program. Is the program what they thought it would be? Did they learn what they expected from the program? What did they like most/least? What would they have changed? What did they want to learn more of? Do they feel prepared for what happens after graduation? 2. Require each student to provide a self-assessment based upon the Learning Outcomes. It would be an interesting exercise to see how students rank themselves versus how a professor ranks them. 3. Add a Bio page with resume/cv summarizing past work and describing what type of work the student would like to pursue upon graduation. 4. Have students provide short summaries of major papers produced throughout their studies (core curriculum and electives), possibly including a reading list of texts and books they found most influential. 5. Review the suggested order of projects within a portfolio and how to best prioritize projects to show a progression of knowledge combined with marketable skills. 6. Encourage students to credit work within their portfolio; i.e., be specific about who prepared the drawings and if it was a group effort. 7. Consider adding a project at a community scale (several block radius) with an exploration of different types of zoning and planning codes and integration of mixed uses. Most projects seemed to focus on small to mid-size sites. CONCLUSION: The URI BLA program offers a consistent education across all of the Learning Outcomes. Refinement of the Learning Outcomes into more distinct categories would help identify areas in need of work, instead of using the general categories; the more specific the assessment criteria, the greater the level of detail assessment. Hopefully the assessment rubric above serves as an adequate starting point for the development of a more comprehensive and valuable tool for the advancement of the BLA program at URI. Prepared with Lauren Dean Colunga, CNU-A, CDT (2013) Lauren is an experienced landscape designer with a Masters in Landscape Architecture and over 10 years of international design and entrepreneurial experience in the U.S., Germany, Japan and England. 4

5 2. Estimated Annual Tuition and Fees Undergraduate, Academic Year Instate Outstate Regional Tuition $ 11,128 $27,118 $19,474 Required Feeds $1,734 $1,734 $1,734 Total $12,862 $28,852 $21,208 Additional Required Fees for Specific Student Groups: 1 st Year Student Fees Course Fee $155 (1 st semester only) $25 75 per course Estimated Annual Dorm/Meal Plan Fees Meal Plan Fees Campus Standard $4,300 Campus Plan $4,500 Campus Premier $4,900 Dormitory Fees Freshman Double Room $7,400 Rooms, suites, apts $6,746 - $9,940 Communications Fee (Required for all Dormitory Residents $256 5

6 3. Student Retention and graduation rates. Students spend much of freshmen year taking classes in General Education. They do take 3 classes in landscape architecture. The design studio sequence begins in the fall of the sophomore (2 nd ) year with a full class enrollment of 20. This group is comprised of students who entered the university as freshmen and who declared landscape architecture as their major. It also includes students transferring into landscape architecture from other majors. Academic year Sophomore gateway studio LAR 243 enrollment Retention rate Graduated with BLA Graduated within 3 years % (94%) % 16 ** 14 (87.5%) * 20 65% (92%) * Anticipated May graduation ** Student graduated 4 years after cohort group. 4. Employment following graduation Graduates Total number of students Design firms 9 5 Design build/construction 3 4 Graduate school 0 3 Nursery 1 0 Don t Know 3 6

7 Student Program composition: Race/Ethnicity American Indian/Alaska Native 0 0 Asian 1 3 Native Hawaiian/Other Pacific Islander 0 0 Black/African American 2 1 Hispanic/Latino 7 7 White/non-Hispanic Mixed (Two or more races) 1 1 Unknown 8 11 Total Gender Total Male Female Total Student Type Total Domestic International 1 1 Total Degrees Awarded Total Female Degrees 6 6 Male Degrees 9 9 Total