“Our goal is to establish an interconnected teaching culture”

How was the process organised? Who was involved in the revision?

Vera Kaps: It was very important to us to organise the revision process in a participatory manner. At the beginning of the process, we therefore set up the ‘extra UK’ (teaching commission) format, to which all levels of the department are invited to participate. Here we share the current status of the revision, discuss curriculum topics, present new teaching formats and provide space for informal dialogue. We have also set up working groups on topics such as workload, internships and assessment. Our goal is to establish an interconnected teaching culture: fostering more dialogue between lecturers and creating synergies between professorships.

What are the most important changes for students?

Steffen Hägele: The curriculum is now structured into three phases: Foundations, Positions and Explorations. This sequence enables a gradual build-up of competences. The aim is to create a competence-oriented degree programme. It is no longer a question of accumulating as much knowledge as possible, but of linking architectural subject and method-specific competences with social and personal competences.

The changes are manifold and concern a strengthening of the architectural foundations and the possibility for individual profile development, as well as a better connection to practice and research. An integrative learning environment will additionally promote the personal and professional development of students and - we hope - better prepare them for the complex demands of the professional world.

What does this mean in concrete terms? How has the revised Bachelor's programme been restructured?

Vera Kaps: We are structuring the Bachelor's programme into four streams: Architecture & Art, Histories & Building Culture, Environment & Society and Building & Technology. These streams run across institutes. In addition, the three years build on each other incrementally: In the first year, ‘Foundations’, students learn the basics of design from a multidisciplinary perspective. In the second year, ‘Positions’, they learn about different architectural approaches and how to position themselves within them. During the third year, ‘Explorations’, they design their individual learning path by being given more choices.

In detail, we have spread art across all three years, unlike today where it is taught in the first year. We are now strengthening landscape architecture to prepare our Bachelor's students for the Master's in Landscape Architecture as well as the Master's in Architecture. The architecture internship will also be declared a ‘course’ with 8 credit points, which means that students will now have to write an internship report. And we have moved Electives to the Master's degree, in which students will be able to specialise even more.

In the “Studio Foundations” in the first year, eight professors will teach together. What is the idea behind it?

Steffen Hägele: The “Studio Foundations” replaces the existing first-year course of Andrea Deplazes, who is retiring. The new first-year course is a novelty that we are very proud of: For the first time, architectural design will be taught collectively by an interdisciplinary team from all disciplines in the department. We are convinced that this is the only way for design to develop its full potential. Students will learn design in all its complexity right from the start - but they will be accompanied step by step considering this challenge.

This understanding of design also corresponds to a changed understanding of roles. Previously, one or two autonomous design professors set the tone in the first year. In the future, there will be a polyphony of different perspectives and approaches right from the start. The design studio will also be given more space with three days a week; this will strengthen the design and, at the same time, the integrated disciplines are more present and can be experienced concretely in the design.

Which topics will be emphasized more in the curriculum?

Elli Mosayebi: Overall, we have strived for a moderate reorientation towards social and ecological challenges and technological upheavals. The focus of the degree programme continues to include design and construction, expanded and strengthened in the direction of the department's strategic goals. I also believe it is important to expand and strengthen personal and social skills. At best, future graduates will be both architecturally adept designers and, at the same time, educated, capable actors.

In the future, various competences will be assessed in teaching. How will these be graded?

Vera Kaps: We could fill an entire podcast with this topic! We aim to assess students' performance in a more holistic and differentiated way. This is difficult to achieve with just a single grade at the end of the semester. Instead, lecturers should assess how successfully students apply newly acquired knowledge - so it's always about the combination of specialised knowledge and skills. An example: In the first-year course ‘Studio Foundations’, students learn to apply integrated disciplines such as architectural history, energy & climate design or structural design directly in their design project. Their performance is then also graded in combination and not separately. And, of course, there are always partial grades during the semester, which are added up to an overall grade at the end.

It is also important to us that students know which competences they are learning in which courses. This creates orientation and transparency. To this end, we have developed a competency grid, our ‘Competency Chart’, which also serves as the basis for assessment. We are also currently developing the ‘Competency Compass’. This is a visual assessment tool that shows students their strengths and weaknesses. On the one hand, lecturers mark the students' performance and on the other hand, students should use it for self-reflection. We see great opportunities here, especially for the design studios.

In the past, some students were overwhelmed by the time and work pressure. How does the revision address this issue?

Steffen Hägele: The fact is that the workload and pressure are too high, particularly during lecture and design periods, and the peaks are poorly coordinated. We are convinced that a certain level of intensity is part of studying architecture, but we are making concrete improvements here.

The starting point is a monitoring of the current situation and a recalculation of the future workload based on better distributed credit points. In this way, we hope to be able to better evaluate and manage the workload. An important structural change is the reduction in subjects and examinations through the integration into “Studio Foundations” and a reduction in courses in the higher semesters. End-of-semester examinations will replace the end-of-year examinations, creating a more direct link between lessons and examinations. It also results in smaller blocks and therefore a better rhythm of workload and recovery throughout the year.

One noticeable result of the participatory revision process is that lecturers are talking to each other much more and not just focussing on their own teaching format. This insular thinking was one of the main reasons for unwanted workload peaks. Thanks in particular to the “Studio Foundations”, in the first year all teachers are jointly responsible for balancing the workload throughout the year.