08.20.04 Conditions for Accreditation
"The National Architectural Accrediting Board (NAAB) is the only agency recognized by registration boards in the United States to accredit professional degree programs in architecture. Because most registration boards require an applicant for licensure to hold an NAAB-accredited degree, obtaining such a degree is an essential part of gaining access to the licensed practice of architecture."
And so begins a document titled, "The Conditions for Accreditation," which describes the basis and standards for professional architecture education in the United States. This document was recently revised through a lengthy process, highlighted by the NAAB Validation Conference held in October 2003. The revised version of the Conditions was approved by the NAAB Board of Directors in July, and sent out to architecture schools as well as posted online late last week. This issue of ArchVoices highlights some of the more substantive changes described in the new NAAB Conditions, which will go into effect one year from now, during the 2005-06 academic year.
This timing, in itself, is a significant change, as it has typically taken NAAB three years to simultaneously implement revised "Conditions" and "Procedures" (a document called "The C&P") following a Validation Conference. With Validation Conferences scheduled every three years, this meant that just as schools were responding to new standards, NAAB was already considering changes to those same standards. In part, by focusing on the Conditions as distinct from the Procedures of accreditation, this latest version has been published in less than a year, with implementation of the Conditions following just two years after the 2003 Validation Conference.
However, one revision to the "Procedures" that is being actively considered by the NAAB Board of Directors involves changing the frequency of Validation Conferences from every three years to every six years. If it goes into effect, this would mean that the next such conference--the only public national discussion about the standards for professional architecture education--would not occur until 2009. The entire United States government would weather two major administration cycles before the architecture community could publicly discuss the standards for professional architecture education again.
While some of the motivations for revising the Validation Conference timing may be laudable, there is already significant institutional memory loss between the conferences held every three years. That NAAB needs to allow today's changes to take effect on an entire class of graduates also needs to be coupled with a clear plan for measuring "results." If NAAB ultimately decides to move to a six-year cycle for its conference on education standards, other public conferences--for starters, conferences focused specifically on the actual standards for IDP and the ARE--should be coordinated during the off years. Less is not more when it comes to dialogue about the registration process.
1. The Super Collateral
2. Studio Culture Condition
3. The D.Arch.: Doctor of Architecture
4. Changes to Required Text for School Catalogs
5. Losing Awareness
6. 37 Becomes 34
7. Participant Commentary on the Revisions & Process
8. ACSA Webpage on the NAAB Process & Actions
1. The Super Collateral
We often refer to "the five collateral organizations" because that's how they refer to themselves. These five "collaterals" are really just four national membership organizations representing architecture schools, practitioners, students, and state licensing boards (ACSA, AIA, AIAS, and NCARB). The fifth "collateral" is the National Architectural Accrediting Board (NAAB), which is composed of representatives from the four other organizations, plus two public members. Without NAAB, the other four organizations would have no reason to call themselves "collaterals."
The accreditation process that has been developed by this Mother of All Collaterals may sometimes be viewed by appropriately skeptical students and faculty as an enemy team of outsiders swooping down from the sky for a few days to somehow evaluate their program requirements and school environment against abstract national standards. In fact, the accreditation process starts with a statement of goals and a self-assessment written by each program's own administration. NAAB evaluates each program's report and then sends a team of outside volunteers to the school for an onsite visit. The teams typically include representatives of the ACSA (an educator), AIA (a practitioner), AIAS (a student), NCARB (a regulator), and often one or two "observers" appointed by the program itself.
The final decision on each program's term of accreditation (2-, 3- or 6-years) is made by the NAAB Board--not by this team--and is based on how well the program meets NAAB's "Conditions & Procedures." However, while this numerical result is often seen as the point of the whole process, is also an important opportunity to provide outside feedback to the entire school community (including the upper administration, alumni, and local practitioners) about how well the school seems to be living up to its own objectives. Additionally, the NAAB teams are now specifically charged with identifying and highlighting those aspects of a particular program that they see as particularly unique or strong in the context of other schools across the country.
Finally, it should also be made clear that NAAB accredits programs, not schools. In fact, individual schools and universities sometimes have more than one NAAB-accredited degree program as well as other architecture degree programs that are not NAAB-accredited.
Reference:
2004 NAAB Conditions for Accreditation:
http://www.naab.org/usr_doc/2004_CONDITIONS.pdf
1998 NAAB Conditions & Procedures (with 2002 Addendum):
http://www.naab.org/usr_doc/Guide_to_SPC_with_addendum.pdf
Other ArchVoices issues regarding the NAAB:
"Accreditation," explaining 2002 Addendum (9/6/02) http://www.archvoices.org/issue.cfm?n=240
"Validation Conference Observations" (10/31/03) http://www.archvoices.org/issue.cfm?n=317
2. Studio Culture Condition
With the addition of a condition on studio culture, there are now 13 Conditions for Accreditation, those being: 1) Program Response to the NAAB Perspectives on Architectural Education and the Academic, Context, Students, Registration, the Profession, and Society; 2) Program Self-Assessment Procedures; Public Information; 4) Social Equity; 5) Studio Culture; 6) Human Resources; 7) Human Resource Development; 8) Physical Resources; 9) Information Resources; 10) Financial Resources; 11) Administrative Structure; 12) Professional Degrees and Curriculum; and, number 13, which includes the 34 individual Student Performance Criteria. The Studio Culture condition reads:
"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 [school's Architecture Program Report] 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 the students. The document on studio culture policy should be incorporated in the APR as Section 4.2"
This new Condition was inspired by the AIAS Studio Culture Taskforce report, released in December 2001, which encouraged the profession to be more explicit about the pedagogical benefits and purpose of the most unique and memorable aspect of architecture education. To download the AIAS report, go to click here
3. The D.Arch.: Doctor of Architecture
"The NAAB accredits the following professional degree programs: the Bachelor of Architecture (B.Arch.), the Master of Architecture (M.Arch.), and the Doctor of Architecture (D.Arch.). The curricular requirements for awarding these degrees must include professional studies, general studies, and electives. Schools offering the degrees B.Arch., M.Arch., and/or D.Arch. are strongly encouraged to use these degree titles exclusively with NAAB-accredited professional degree programs."
The D.Arch is a new addition that was formally approved following the 2003 Validation Conference. ArchVoices has written previously about the D.Arch in general, and specifically about the Arch.D. (Architectural Doctorate) program at the University of Hawai`i that sparked much of the current discussion. NAAB does not have different substantive requirements or distinctions between the three degrees. NAAB exists simply to determine a single minimum standard for education pursuant to professional licensure, and each university has to make a decision about whether the degree merits a B, an M or a D, given their own graduate school requirements and the requirements of their regional accrediting agency. NAAB has, however, created specific credit hour requirements for each degree:
B.Arch.: 150 semester credit hours
M.Arch.: 168 semester credit hours, including 30 at the graduate level
D.Arch.: 210 semester credit hours, including 90 at the graduate level
Additionally, for each degree, at least 45 semester credit hours must be outside of architectural studies, either as general studies or as elective courses with "other than architectural content."
4. Changes to Required Text for School Catalogs
In order to help ensure that prospective students understand the importance of accreditation, NAAB requires that schools incorporate standard language into their catalogs about the accreditation process and the various accredited degrees available. While this seems like the simplest of the NAAB requirements, printing schedules are often out of sync with NAAB changes, and small changes can easily go unnoticed. This year, there is a relatively big change with the addition of the D.Arch. as an accredited degree:
"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), 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 preprofessional undergraduate degree and a professional graduate degree that, when earned sequentially, constitute an accredited professional education. However, the preprofessional degree is not, by itself, recognized as an accredited degree."
5. Losing Awareness
The Student Performance Criteria discussed below make up the primary basis for discussion about what architecture education is, even though they are technically just one of now thirteen separate requirements for programs. These criteria were traditionally ranked on three different levels of accomplishment: "awareness", "understanding", and "ability".
In the 2004 Conditions, "awareness" has been eliminated, meaning students will have to demonstrate either "understanding" or "ability" for all 34 performance criteria. This change, while significant in many ways mostly to do with how schools present their curricula to the accrediting teams--including, for anyone who's been on or prepared for a visit, redoing the dreaded "matrix"--will probably have little effect on the actual requirements or team assessments.
6. 37 Becomes 34
In 1998, as a result of the 1996 Validation Conference, the 56 separate statements about which schools had to demonstrate various levels of student performance were narrowed to 37. Following the 2003 Validation Conference, there are now 34 Student Performance Criteria, reduced from 37. Many of the criteria were simply reworded or combined. If you are a student, you should take some time to review all 34 statements, which describe what the national accrediting body thinks you should be getting for your tuition dollars.
One important point that NAAB has continued to emphasize is that, "[w]hile 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." Accordingly, NAAB attempts to apply "standards without standardization," giving programs the opportunity to innovate so long as they can produce results in accordance with NAAB's prescribed minimum standards.
7. Participant Commentary on the Revisions & Process
The following commentary was written for ArchVoices by Thomas McKittrick, FAIA, a former AIA appointee to the NAAB Board of Directors who was involved throughout the Condition revision process. Biographical information about the writer follows.
"As the new Conditions for Accreditation were finalized, many of the existing criteria have been strengthened or clarified, and other criteria were added.
Entirely new criteria:
--'Sustainable Design' (#15) includes the conservation of finite resources and culturally important buildings and sites. It also seeks the creation of healthful buildings and communities to counteract the automobile-oriented development and sedentary lifestyles that have caused near epidemic obesity and heart disease among Americans.
--'Client Role in Architecture' (27) makes the architect responsible for eliciting, understanding, and resolving the needs of the client, owner, and user.
--'Legal Responsibilities' (33) addresses the architect's responsibilities as required by building codes, zoning and subdivision ordinances, environmental regulations, historic preservation laws, and accessibility laws. Other significant changes:
--Two-way verbal communication (1) and presentation skills (3) have been emphasized.
--'Critical Thinking Skills' (2) now emphasize the ability to make sound arguments and judgments based on a rational process.
--'Collaborative Skills' (7) now relate to the kinds of interdisciplinary teams formed in practice.
--The ability to apply precedents (11) learned in architectural history to current studio projects relates to what architects do every day.
--'Architect's Administrative Roles' (29) addresses marketing, negotiating contracts, managing personnel, and other management tasks.
--'Architectural Practice' (30) includes understanding of legal and financial aspects of practice, time and project management, mediation and arbitration, and trends such as globalization, outsourcing, diversity, and others.
--'Professional Development' (#31) replaces 'Professional Internship,' and includes understanding of licensure and registration requirements.
--'Leadership' (#32) now includes issues of growth, development, and aesthetics in their communities, not just leadership of the design and construction process.
What is left for the next Validation Conference to do?
Nowhere in the Conditions is the word "creativity" used. I proposed that it be added to 'Fundamental Design Skills' (#6), which would have read: 'Ability to use creativity and basic architectural principles in the design of buildings, interior spaces, and sites.' Why do we continue to think that creativity is an innate skill, rather than one that can be taught and honed?
An issue identified in an AIA survey conducted in preparation for the Validation Conference was graduates' lack of understanding of the design process, rather than just product. This ability is a key to time management, and was proposed as part of the comprehensive design project. It could be taught in every studio.
And last, but not least, a new criterion is again proposed: 'Innovation and Knowledge Generation: Awareness of the profession's responsibility for expanding the body of architectural knowledge through peer-reviewed research and/or published case studies that document innovation in design and practice.' Some architects believe that a rising tide raises all ships, while others protect innovation as a competitive edge. Future architects should be concerned about creating and claiming a unique body of knowledge that is the domain of architecture.
About this contributor
Thomas L. McKittrick, FAIA is Professor Emeritus at Texas A&M University. In 1957, he earned his Bachelor of Science in architecture from Rice University. Following Navy service and apprenticeship, he co-founded McKittrick Richardson Wallace Architects in 1963. The firm achieved broad recognition for the design of schools and institutional buildings. In 1990, he left practice to teach at Texas A&M University, where he was awarded a Master's degree in 1991 and tenure in 1992. In 1992, he received the Llewellyn W. Pitts Award, the highest honor of the Texas Society of Architects. He served as an AIA representative on the National Architectural Accrediting Board from 2000 to 2003. In community service, Tom served as President of the Association of Rice University Alumni, President of River Oaks Rotary, Deacon and Elder of his church, and Mayor of Hilshire Village. He now practices with American Construction Investigations as a forensic consultant. Finally, Tom is a member of our ArchVoices Board of Advisors.
8. ACSA Webpage on the NAAB Process & Actions
Earlier this year, the ACSA launched a dedicated webpage (http://www.acsa-arch.org/naab/) to chronicle their leaders' correspondence with the NAAB Board and leadership. Among other statements, the webpage reports: "Despite repeated requests from ACSA, NAAB did not provide more documentation that links the Validation Conference outcomes with the proposed revisions to the SPC. ACSA remains very concerned that there is no process or information justifying changes to the C&P."
Beyond noting the ACSA's ongoing concerns, we want to highlight and commend their efforts to document and communicate the many steps in this process for the benefit of their membership and the public.
 As always, we welcome your thoughts by email at editors@archvoices.org.
ArchVoices is an independent, nonprofit organization and think tank on architecture education and internship... 
|
