Instructional Strategies & Activities
The scope and complexity of the design problem dictated a focus on one project for the 15-week semester. The project location was scouted and documented by students directly on-site. A myriad of verbal, graphic, and photographic data were extracted from the 2013 Uptown Toledo Plan, City of Toledo data hub, and other sources. In line of requirements for the partnership described above an initiative for a “Project Advisory Committee” emerged. This seven-member committee representing primarily the Uptown community emerged to meet with students to discuss work progress and respond to students inquiries. Members of this committee consummated two advising meeting events, but also participated in the three formal design reviews throughout the semester. The final design review was conducted at the premises of the Toledo Design Center in Downtown Toledo permitting wider participation of the intended audience. The two Advisory Committee meetings and the three formal design reviews included architects and planners.
Assessment of Learning Outcomes
Students’ submissions and presentations in the design reviews reflect student learning. However, student learning assessment for this course reached out to more holistic and contextual strategies to “measure” the learning. The table below defines six strategies (also depicted in diagram above, right), explains the timing and frequency of activating the strategies, and most importantly, delineates what was achieved from applying each strategy.
This essay shows that the course plan has capitalized on the interplay of different course design attributes leading, in the end, to satisfying level of student learning. Clear understanding of individual attributes (NAAB SPC, Course Content, Purpose, Learning Outcomes, and Instructional Strategies) and comprehension of the dual-collective relationship of these attributes are bases for arriving at credible assessment of learning outcomes.