Royal Institute of British Architects. Report of the RIBA exploratory board to Hull School of Art and Design, Hull College

Transcription

1 Royal Institute of British Architects Report of the RIBA exploratory board to Hull School of Art and Design, Hull College Date of visiting board: 12 & 13 October 2017 Confirmed by RIBA Education Committee: 9 February 2018

2 1 Details of institution hosting course/s Hull School of Art and Design Hull College Queens Gardens Wilberforce Drive Hull HU1 3DG 2 Subject Group Leader Chris Dimmack 3 Course/s offered for candidate course status Master of Architecture (MArch) 4 Awarding body The Open University 5 The visiting board Matt Gaskin (Chair) Angie Pascoe (Vice-Chair) One board member was unable to attend due to ill-health. The Board proceeded as constituted with the agreement of the School, the Chair and the RIBA Director of Education. Stephanie Beasley-Suffolk RIBA Validation Manager was in attendance 6 Procedures and criteria for the visit The visiting board was carried out under the RIBA procedures for validation and validation criteria for UK and international courses and examinations in architecture (published July 2011, and effective from September 2011); this document is available at 7 Recommendation of the Exploratory Board The Board was invited by the Hull School of Art and Design at Hull College to consider its Master of Architecture (MArch) for candidate course status for RIBA Part 2. The designation candidate course for recognition implies that the programme is considered to have the potential to meet RIBA criteria, if implemented as anticipated. On 9 February 2018 the RIBA Education Committee confirmed, by circulation, that the following programme be awarded Candidate Course Status for Part 2: Master of Architecture, MArch A full visiting board to consider the programme for initial validation and full RIBA recognition of Part 2 will take place in October 2018 at the same time as the BA (Hons) Architecture, Part 1 revalidation visit. 8 Standard requirements for continued recognition Continued RIBA recognition of all courses and qualifications is dependent upon: 2

3 i ii iii iv v external examiners being appointed for the course any significant changes to the courses and qualifications being submitted to the RIBA any change of award title, and the effective date of the change, being notified to the RIBA so that its recognition may formally be transferred to the new title submission to the RIBA of the names of students passing the courses and qualifications listed In the UK, standard requirements of validation include the completion by the institution of the annual statistical return issued by the RIBA Education Department 9 Academic position statement (written by the school) The Hull Architectural Gene is developing. The offer to Study Architecture at Hull is an invitation to join a community of enthusiastic people who are committed to enhancing lives through an exploration of the potential that architecture can offer. Current architectural practice at the urban scale is dominated by developer led regeneration which has had a negative impact on the public realm of many UK Cities. Architecture at Hull is concerned with People and Place. We aim to explore how the reintegration of people with architecture and the built environment can be achieved. The City of Hull, because of its geographical position has not attracted the inward investment enjoyed by other urban centres of Northern Britain. Many sites have remained derelict since the last war, and there are large areas of wasteland and dereliction interspersed with a sprinkling of fine architectural gems which offer a link to our more prosperous past. Our Academic Focus is multi layered and aims to benefit our Students, our Staff, our School and our City. The Portfolio should demonstrate what can be achieved as well as what has been achieved. Our community of designers will try to demonstrate through creative thinking more sustainable alternatives to developer led regeneration. Using the City as a test bed of ideas, the developing Hull Gene has its origins in the wider European Context, it is nurtured here in the School and reinforces the architectural debate within the City. The results will feed back into the wider European Context, cyclic, making our offer symbiotic with the wider architectural education communities in existence. In addressing real issues, we are minded that new solutions need to be found which offer excellent student experience and learning, as well as contributing social, environmental and economic benefit. Our aim is to produce responsible designers who engage with the community they inhabit. Our Community wants to make a difference and have a positive impact on the communities that support us. 3

4 We want to develop people who can think independently with imagination, have an ability to analyse the potential of things. Our approach engenders authenticity through exploration. We encourage experimentation and we promote confidence through doing and through making, developing a methodology that prevents predetermined solutions which have resulted from the application of generic conclusions to building typology. Within this context, the differing and developing position of the staff and students will encourage a variety of working methods and approach beneath the larger umbrella of real concern for providing useful and rich space designed to enhance everyday life. We are excited by the potential of reinforcing the offer of Architectural Education for the City and see opportunities to develop new modes of delivery to address the increasing costs to students. However, we acknowledge that our vision needs to be set within a strong school context and our partnerships with all stakeholders including our validation Partners, ARB and the RIBA is essential to our development. 10 Action points The visiting board proposes the following action points. Failure by the institution to satisfactorily resolve action points may affect the future validation of the MArch programme The institution must clarify the management and academic leadership of the Subject Area of architecture for the MArch The Subject Group Lead and course teams must ensure the Academic Position Statement captures the distinctive academic features and the agenda of the architecture programmes (section 4.2, Procedures for Validation, 2011) In preparation for the full visiting board in October 2018 the institution should adhere to the requirements regarding documentation as explicitly outlined in section 4 of the 2011 Procedures for Validation The Board notes the comments of the external examiners which proved very useful and would remind the institution to ensure that all work is retained in preparation for the October 2018 visiting board. The institution is referred to section 4.7 of the 2011 Procedures document which describes the RIBA s requirements for the presentation of complete academic portfolios and the portfolio sample. The institution s attention is drawn to section 6 of the Procedures document, which refers to grounds for suspension of visiting boards The institution must consolidate and rationalise the programme mapping and clarify length of modules and times of assessment both for full-time and part-time routes on the MArch. 4

5 10.6 The course team must ensure that the provision of technology for the student cohort conforms with level 7 and can be clearly articulated and demonstrated in the work presented to the full visiting board The course team must ensure that the provision of cultural context and critical theory for the student cohort conforms with level 7 and can be clearly articulated and demonstrated in the work presented to the full visiting board The course team must develop the breadth and specialist knowledge of the teaching provision to ensure current and innovative practice is offered to the student cohort The Board recommends that the institution engage an experienced external advisor from another validated school of architecture to support the institution in the preparation of documentation and portfolios for the full visiting board in October The institution must address the shortfall in architecture provision in the College library The course team must ensure that the student cohort are aware of the Part 2 graduate attributes and criteria for validation and how these align to their individual learning contracts. 11. Advice The board offers the following advice to the school on desirable, but not essential improvements, which, it is felt, would assist course development and raise standards The Board advises that the institution and course team establish a means for current MArch students to feed back on their learning experience to inform future course development The Board advises that the institution and Subject Group Lead explore opportunities for collaboration between FE and HE provision; this is a unique situation with significant potential The Board advises the institution to ensure that the high level of provision, such as the individual student workspaces, is maintained and remains commensurate with student numbers. 12. Delivery of academic position Please refer to action point Delivery of graduate attributes It should be noted that where the visiting board considered graduate attributes to have been met, no commentary is offered. Where concerns were noted (or an attribute clearly not met), commentary is supplied. Finally, where academic outcomes suggested a graduate attribute was particularly positively demonstrated, commentary is supplied. 5

6 12.1 Graduate Attributes for Part 2 The Board confirmed that the MArch demonstrated the potential to meet Part 2 graduate attributes if implemented as anticipated. However, please refer to action points 10.6, 10.7 and 10.8, 13. Review of work against criteria It should be noted that where the visiting board considered a criterion to have been met, no commentary is offered. Where concerns were noted (or a criterion clearly not met), commentary is supplied. Finally, where academic outcomes suggested a criterion was particularly positively demonstrated, commentary is supplied. Criteria for validation The Board confirmed that the MArch demonstrated the potential to meet the criteria for validation if implemented as anticipated. However, please refer to action points 10.6, 10.7 and 10.8 and action points referring to the presentation of complete academic portfolios and clear mapping (10.3, 10.4, 10.5 and 10.9.) 14. Other information 14.1 Student numbers MArch: Documentation provided Please refer to action points 10.2, 10.3, 10.4, 10.5 and 10.9 which will help the School to prepare for the full visiting board. 15. Notes of meetings On request, the RIBA will issue a copy of the minutes taken from the following meetings. These notes will not form part of the published report but will be made available on request Meeting with the Chief Executive 15.2 Meeting with the Assistant Principal for Higher Education and the Architecture Subject Lead 15.3 Meeting with students 15.5 Meeting with staff 6