Roe Draus, Courtney Hoffeller, and Maxwell Hunt, “SARUP and Long-Term Efficacy”
Mentors: Mo Zell and Trudy Watt, Architecture
The Department of Architecture currently offers three degree programs: a Bachelor of Science in Architectural Studies, a Master of Architecture, and a PhD in Architecture. Our research initially focused on the steps it would take to implement a new 5-year Bachelor of Architecture (B.Arch) program at SARUP. To best understand the student and alumni perspective on certain critical areas of SARUP, we conducted extensive surveys, group discussions, and interviews. Through these methods of research, we discovered that the school lacked a clear identity. This stemmed from a multitude of issues such as race, curriculum management, accountability, standards of work, and student voices. After analyzing the data, we shifted the research on the B.Arch program to focus on creating a stronger school identity. To do this, we proposed a new student committee. This student coalition will create a consistent feedback loop between students, alumni, organizations, faculty, and administration to address greater issues in the school. In turn, the purpose of the student committee will nurture the SARUP identity of student efficacy, collaboration, transparency, and quality. The structure of the committee will be informed by precedent research, via interviews, into existing organizational structures found in architecture programs across the country. Our proposed structure will create a sense of community through interacting, collaborating, as well as establish and utilize a network between various organizations and students throughout all programs at the school.
Click the thumbnail below to open the full sized poster in a new tab.
Nice job Roe, Courtney and Max!
Hello! I am Roe Draus, a senior in the undergraduate program within the School of Architecture and Urban Planning. I would be happy to answer any questions you may have about my team’s research project, “SARUP and Long-Term Efficacy”.
Roe, Courtney and Max,
Thanks for developing a pathway towards a better future.
I have found over my 30 years at SARUP that periodically both faculty and students yearn for a more singular identity for SARUP. And while this would seem logical, I think I can speak to why a singular identity has never been established beyond the SARUP diploma that ties all students together with an identity.
Our state is fairly unique at the university level with “faculty governance”, meaning it is a horizontal leadership among the tenure track and tenured faculty, as opposed to top down singular leadership at most schools. And I’ve come to believe this is a superior model as it allows each faculty member to teach to their strength, which ultimately means a highly motivated teaching model. The downside is the identity can straddle many disparate areas and not appear cohesive.
A senior faculty once described SARUP as a visit to great zoo. The public learns about many areas of the animal kingdom and leaves with a formidable impression of the zoo experience, but most of the animals are isolated from other species. It is up to the zoo user to seek out the information it prefers across the animal kingdom, with no intentional focus on one area. The diaspora of global life is viewed the same way around the world at zoos, each with various specialists supporting the Zoo.
I hope you are now trying to identify which faculty is which animal.
The faculty at SARUP consists of specialists and generalists, and everything in between, but we all love coming to work and enrich the minds of future architects and designers of the natural and built environmental.
SARUP, like all schools, are trying to teach you to think for yourselves, as your education is life long in architecture. As long as you enjoy the work and worked to the best of your abilities, we have done our jobs. A more prescriptive code of curriculum that is lock step would stultify the students as well as the faculty.
We will build out the new B Arch and over time make adjustments to the curriculum, but in the end, it will reflect who is teaching here, what they love to teach, and what they want to learn. And that is in the best interest of every student. In the long run, your greatest singular asset towards architectural employment is prior SARUP students in the workplace who excel in practice, sharing the same UWM SARUP degree as you. There are now 50 years of alumni who have burnished that degree at a high standard across many continents.
Lastly, while a new student group is a great idea, I wonder if the current groups of NOMAS, AIAS, etc… might be charged with the same agenda as I have seen it very difficult for students to regularly engage in service positions over time with funding or credit due to the workload of school and perhaps a job. I routinely offer posts to the PCC over the years, and rarely generate interest from the student body, and if so, they cannot commit to all the meetings.
Also, can you share the number of current students and alumni who responded to your surveys over the research period?
Thanks again