First-Year Assessment

Overview

From the General Catalog:

Admission Requirement to the Second Year: Following the successful completion of the first year in the program, there will be a review of the student’s academic performance, including a portfolio review, prior to admission to the second year of study. The School of Architecture reserves the right to deny admission to any student to the second year of study based on this review.

The School of Architecture has a second admissions review for all students between the Lower Division of Study (1st year) and the Upper Division of Study (2nd-5th years). At the end of the first year of study, students may apply for continued admission into the Upper Division. Benchmarks for this assessment:

  1. Architecture Grade Point Average (ARCH 1001, ARCH 1002/1102 and ARCH 2401)
  2. Overall Grade Point Average
  3. Exhibition Score

Application Requirements

  1. Completed Application Form
  2. Exhibition
  3. Statement of Intention

Wall Exhibition Instructions

Requirements for matriculation to the second year in the School of Architecture include a selective exhibition of work on a designated section of wall in Atkinson Hall displaying work completed for first-year design courses and a written statement explaining your curation (250-word maximum). The intent of the exhibition is to provide the reviewers with a body of work that represents your abilities as a student applying for admission to the second year. The quality of the exhibition and the quality of the work presented and the will be assessed to determine if your work meets required, minimum performance standards.

Notification of Acceptance or Rejection

You will be notified of your Acceptance or Rejection to the Upper Division by mail at the address you have on file with the LSU School of Architecture. Notification will occur prior to the start of the summer session.

Exhibition Assessment

A panel of reviewers will evaluate the exhibition of your work for evidence of knowledge, skills and abilities in four areas: 1) knowledge and abilities; 2) organization; 3) voice; and 4) craft and technical skills.

  1. Knowledge and abilities—involve examining the content of the architectural design studios work for evidence of the capacity to be successful in the Upper Division.
  2. Organization—involves examining the exhibition for evidence of the creation of an organizational structure that systematically arranges and unites the independent projects into a coordinated whole.
  3. Voice—involves examining the exhibition for evidence that the personal expression of the individual is depicted in the overall presentation of the exhibition.  The voice articulates the personality and opinions of the author.
  4. Craft and technical skills—involve examining both the exhibition, and the work presented in the exhibition, for an understanding and development of craft.

Reviewers will examine each exhibition and assess the level of performance for each of the four categories using a four-point scale rubric, where

4 = Exemplary Performance
3 = Meets the Performance Standard
2 = Emerging Performance
1 = Attempt Made, but Result Unsatisfactory.

Reviewers will be composed of faculty who have not instructed the students in their first-year coursework.


Rubric for First Year Exhibition Assessment

Knowledge and Abilities

Evidence of the application of these factors in the studio work presented.

4  The exhibition is engaging and clear. The work shown clearly indicates superior development of the fundamental knowledge necessary to become an Upper Division student. The exhibition contains multiple examples indicating superior graphic and modeling skills.

3   The exhibition is reasonably clear. The work shown clearly indicates acceptable development of the fundamental knowledge necessary to become an Upper Division student. The exhibition contains adequate examples indicating acceptable graphic and modeling skills.

2   The exhibition generally lacks clarity. Some of the work shown does not indicate acceptable development of the fundamental knowledge necessary to become an Upper Division student. The exhibition contains some examples indicating acceptable graphic and modeling skills.

 The exhibition is not clear. Little or none of the work shown indicates acceptable development of the fundamental knowledge necessary to become an Upper Division student. The exhibition contains few examples indicating acceptable graphic and modeling skills.

Organization

Evidence of the creation of an organizational structure that systematically arranges and unites the independent projects into a coordinated whole.

4  Skillful use of layout organization creates a polished effect and enhance the reader’s perception of the exhibition.

3  Layout organizational decisions are noticeable, but do not distract or interfere with the reviewer’s understanding of the work shown in the exhibition.

2  Layout organizational decisions distract and interfere with the reviewer’s understanding of the work shown in the exhibition

1  Limited control of layout skills makes the exhibition difficult to follow.

Voice

Evidence that the personal expression of the individual is depicted in the overall presentation of the exhibition.

4  The exhibition clearly conveys the voice of the student. The quality of the work shown is compelling and clearly conveys design intent.

3  The exhibition generally conveys the voice of the student. The quality of the work shown is  adequate and usually conveys design intent.

2  The voice of the student is generally absent in the exhibition.  The quality of the work shown is weak and without design intent.

The exhibition indicates no student voice.  The work shown indicates no attempt at design.

Craft and Technical Skills

Evidence that both the exhibition, and the work presented in the exhibition illustrates an understanding and development of craft and technical skills

4  The exhibition clearly conveys an understanding of craft and technical skills. The quality of the design work shown is compelling and clearly conveys the development of rigor and precision.

3  The exhibition generally conveys an understanding of craft and technical skills. The quality of the design work shown is adequate and indicates a development of rigor and precision, although not always evident.

2  An understanding of craft and technical skills is generally absent in the exhibition. The quality of the design work shown is weak and indicates a limited understanding of rigor and precision.

1  The exhibition indicates no understanding of craft or technical skills. There is no evidence of rigor or precision in the work shown.