Heads' Meetings 2003
Agenda
Session 1: Shaping the Curriculum in the European Higher Architectural Education Area
Thursday morning, 4 September 2003 , 9:00-10:30 introductory panel, 11:00-13:30 workshop
From the 2002 Hania Meeting it became apparent that there is significant divergence as far as the priorities of school curricula, the study systems and the diplomas awarded are concerned.
It was agreed that a common basis has to be established on which the European profile of each School will be shaped. It was also supported that the particularities and special features of every school curriculum have to be protected and preserved.
For this reason it became evident that there is a need for: generating a more systematic knowledgebase of the differences, dynamics and the state of the art of architectural education, in relation to the different types of architectural undergraduate and postgraduate studies in Europe; identifying the typologies of diplomas in architecture awarded by various institutions and their characteristics; finding out the directions adopted by schools of architecture that have recently restructured their curricula, and their priorities; articulating the intentions of the schools that have not altered their curricula; examining the possibility for constructive grouping of schools on the basis of their similarities or differences.
Session 2: Shaping the Academic Assessment and the Quality Assurance in the European Higher Architectural Education Area
Thursday afternoon, 4 September 2003 , 15:00-16:00 introductory panel, 16:30-18:30 workshop
The first attempt to collect information on assessment revealed at Hania last year the existence of polymorphic systems, methods, techniques and procedures implemented in schools of architecture in order for their curricula to be assessed. The EAAE, in its Hania Statement 2001, committed itself to undertake initiatives in the direction of the development of a quality assurance and assessment system tailored to the needs of architectural education while respecting its diversity.
As a result of this information, the perspective for the creation of a European system of evaluation is a challenge despite the obvious difficulties it entails and worth investigating further. This system may refer to the ‘academic' assessment of the educational programs by means of a peer review and not to the ‘professional/governmental' assessment of the diploma leading to the accreditation and the validation by the professional/governmental bodies of the member states.
Further work was proposed to shed more light on assessment by finding out more about the various methods and techniques applied by schools in order to control and improve the quality of their education. The work will elaborate further on recording and discussing the various methods employed by schools of architecture and will assess their efficiency given the particularities of architectural education and its divergence in the structure and organization of studies in different schools of architecture in Europe . This record will also target at identifying the key points which should be subject to assessment.
Session 3: Shaping the Exchanges and Mobility in the European Higher Architectural Education Area
Friday afternoon, 5 September 2003 , 14:30-16:00 introductory panel, 16:30-18:30 workshop
From the 2002 Hania Meeting it became apparent that all Schools pursue mobility. It was accepted that mobility has developed so far on the basis of personal contacts and acquaintances. Schools have not adopted very clear policies on exchange and mobility in order to enhance their curricula.
It was agreed that exchanges constitute an essential mechanism for the creation of the European Higher Architectural Education Area. It was also pointed out that the ECTS is an important tool for the development of mobility and comparability of different educational environments. It was suggested that there have to be clearer strategies adopted by the schools with regard to mobility and exchange for a more direct and effective impact, of these collaborations, on school curricula. Finally, it was suggested that there is a need for structuring collaborations, between schools, respecting and appreciating the particular identity of each school.
To exhaust the investigation in the effectiveness of mobility and exchange, we need to understand the ways in which a school defines an ECTS credit. It is similarly important to identify the policies of schools on student and staff mobility. The question that emerges is whether it is possible for a common type of credit to be invented, which can cover various types of modules. Proposals on policies and strategies for the development of exchanges should be put forward so that they can contribute significantly to the improvement of architectural education.
Session 4: Shaping the relations between the European Higher Architectural Education Area and the Professional Bodies
Saturday Morning, 6 September 2003 , 9:00-10:30 introductory panel, 11:00-13:00 workshop
In the 2002 Hania debate, it became clear that the funds for education are progressively cut, a phenomenon that pushes schools to seek funding from, and therefore become dependent on, external bodies which may threaten their academic freedom. Moreover, the relationship of schools of architecture with professional bodies degenerates to a relationship of control and interference of the profession in school curricula, which may threaten their academic liberty.
It was agreed that schools have to preserve their close links with the professional bodies in order to follow the tendencies of the profession, while however protecting and maintaining their academic nature and freedom.
It is crucial to find out ways to redefine the grounds of this relationship at European level, and the initiatives that have to be taken in order to ensure the conditions for the successful generation of the European Higher Education Area.
Session 5: Proposals for Future Actions and Strategies
Saturday afternoon, 6 September 2003 , 14:30-16:30
This session will attempt to synthesize the discussions and suggestions made in the previous days with the ambition to draw useful and constructive conclusions, as well as to generate a framework of agreements on the various themes, and to decide on ways forward.
