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:
- Overall University Grade Point Average
- Architecture Major Grade Point Average (ARCH 1001, ARCH 1002/1102 and ARCH 2401)
- Portfolio Score
Application Requirements (Portfolio)
- Student Design Work Submission
- Statement of Intent
Requirements for matriculation to the Upper Division in the School of Architecture include a selective submission of design work AND a written statement of intent explaining your curation (300-word maximum). The objective is to provide the reviewers with a body of evidence that represents your abilities as a student applying for admission to the second year. The work presented will be assessed to determine if the quality meets required performance standards. You will upload a portfolio of images (15 max) jpeg or pdf files AND one file (pdf, word or text) containing your statement of intent to a portal on your ARCH 1002/1102 Moodle page by the deadline.
Notification of Acceptance or Rejection
You will be notified of your Acceptance or Rejection to the Upper Division by email prior to the start of the summer session.
Students’ portfolio of work will be reviewed and evaluated as evidence of performance achievement in four areas: 1) knowledge and ability; 2) voice; and 3) craft and technical skill.
- Knowledge and ability—involve examining the content of the architectural design studios work for evidence of the capacity to be successful in the Upper Division.
- Voice—involves examining the portfolio for evidence that the personal expression of the individual is depicted in the overall presentation of the portfolio, including the written statement. The voice articulates the personality and opinions of the author.
- Craft and technical skill—involve examining both the work presented in the portfolio, for an understanding and development of craft.
The Review Panel, composed of faculty who have not instructed the students in their first-year coursework, will examine each portfolio, and assess the level of performance for each of the three categories described above using a five-point scale rubric:
4 = Distinguished Performance
3 = Meets the Performance Standard
2 = Limited Performance
1 = Unsatisfactory Performance
0 = No Attempt Made
Rubric for First Year Portfolio Assessment
Knowledge and Ability
Evidence of the application of developed knowledge and ability in the design work exhibited.
4 The work displayed indicates advanced development of fundamental knowledge necessary to become an Upper Division student. The portfolio contains examples of worthy production abilities.
3 The work displayed indicates anticipated development of the fundamental knowledge necessary to become an Upper Division student. The portfolio contains examples of adequate production abilities.
2 The work displayed indicates insubstantial development of the fundamental knowledge necessary to become an Upper Division student. Though the portfolio does contain some appearances of acceptable production abilities.
1 The work displayed is absent of the fundamental knowledge necessary to become an Upper Division student. The portfolio contains no meaningful examples of acceptable production abilities.
0 No attempt made.
Evidence that individual expression is articulated through design work and in the written statement.
4 The voice of the student is unique and purposeful. Effective level of intent in the statement.
3 The voice of the student is apparent. Adequate evidence of intent.
2 The voice of the student is insubstantial. Ineffective evidence of intent.
1 The voice of the student is absent. The written statement is missing or presented in an ambiguous manner.
0 No attempt made.
Craft and Technical Skill
Evidence of understanding and development of craft and technical skills in the design work exhibited.
4 The work displayed conveys an advanced understanding of craft and technical skills. The quality of graphic (drawing) and modeling work indicates progressed development of rigor and precision.
3 The work displayed conveys a nascent understanding of craft and technical skills. The quality of graphic (drawing) and/or modeling work indicates adequate development of rigor and precision.
2 The work displayed conveys insubstantial understanding of craft and technical skills. The quality of graphic (drawing) and/or modeling work indicates ineffective development of rigor and precision.
1 The work displayed conveys no understanding of craft or technical skills. The quality of graphic (drawing) and/or modeling work indicates no development or regard for rigor and precision.
0 No attempt made.