Being an OSU School of Architecture faculty member is a lot of fun. But like any job, it also has its trials and tribulations. All full-time faculty members must participate in a formalized reappointment, promotion, and tenure process. Young faculty members are normally hired as “Assistant Professors”. An Assistant Professor’s initial appointment is for a period of four years. During this time they are expected to excel in teaching, initiate a rigorous scholarship agenda, and fully participate in the life of the school, college, university and community through service activities. At the end of this four year period, they go through a rigorous review process. If successful, they are awarded an additional three year contract as an Assistant Professor. After seven years, they undergo a second review process which involves assessment by OSU School of Architecture faculty, the Architecture School Head, a college review committee made up of department heads, the Dean, the Provost, the President, the Board of Regents, and at least three independent external reviewers who are experts in their field. This is a very important review process since it involves tenure. Only faculty members who can contribute to the long-term success of the school will be successful past this point. A successful candidate will be promoted to “Associate Professor” with tenure.

As an Associate Professor, faculty members still have expectations for continuous success in teaching, scholarship, and service. They go through a yearly review process which is used to determine raises and also to see if they qualify for promotion to “Full Professor”. Being named a Full Professor is not a given. Faculty might well spend their entire teaching career as a tenured Associate Professor. Only those faculty members who have attained the highest levels of success are named Full Professors.

THE IMPORTANCE OF TEACHING
The nature of a studio-based educational approach such as is the norm in architectural education, paralleled with the School’s mission and studio emphasis, makes teaching the central focus for School of Architecture faculty. School of Architecture faculty are normally hired at 100% teaching appointments. Most faculty are expected to provide instruction in both a typical classroom setting and in the design studio. The close collaboration of the studio environment requires a tremendous amount of one-on-one discussion and instruction. A typical architectural design studio requires from sixteen to twenty-five formal contact hours per week for each faculty member. Architectural engineering studios require from twelve to twenty formal contact hours per week. This places a priority on teaching ability in the studio and classroom, and has an impact on performance expectations in the areas of scholarship, creative activities, and service.

The teaching quality of a faculty member in the architecture or architectural engineering design studio can be measured in many ways. Since the design studio is taught in a team teaching environment, faculty are afforded the opportunity to closely observe the teaching quality of one another. Due to this unique teaching arrangement, peer evaluations conducted by the Reappointment Promotion and Tenure (RPT) committee are a particularly informed and effective measure of teaching performance. Student work developed under the tutelage of the faculty and exhibited in the School of Architecture is regularly reviewed for overall quality by the faculty and the Head of the school. Exhibitions of student work in off-campus locations and student success in design competitions may also be considered an indicator of teaching effectiveness. In studios where members of the profession are engaged in the review of student work, their formal assessment of the work may be utilized as an instrument to measure teaching quality. Recognition of teaching excellence may also be shown in the form of teaching awards and invited participation in instruction at other universities. Practicing professionals serving on the School of Architecture Professional Advisory Committee, or as jurors for studio projects may also evaluate the quality of the instruction as evidenced by the student work. Student evaluations of faculty performance are most relevant in assessing the faculty member’s dedication to teaching, preparation for class, and communication skills. These student evaluations of faculty performance in the design studio are secondary to faculty peer and School Head assessments.

The quality of non-studio classroom instruction is also important. The need to meet specialized accreditation standards for both the architecture and architectural engineering programs requires that all faculty also teach classroom courses. The small size of the faculty, the limited resources of the school, and the large number of required ARCH prefix courses demands that all classroom courses be relevant and contribute to the overall curricula. Annual “Appraisal and Development” reviews should assess the implementation of innovative instruction methods or innovative development or revisions to course content as one means of measuring teaching excellence. Student evaluations of faculty performance are most relevant in assessing the faculty member’s dedication to teaching, preparation for class, and communication skills.