CIDA Accreditation Workshop
March 16, 2011
Susan Ray-Degges, Ph.D., ASID, CID
Interior Design Program Coordinator
North Dakota State University
Minute Paper
 Can you list items you
think will be covered in
the “self-study process”
presentation?
Setting the Stage
Why are we doing this?
What do we get out of the process?
Getting Everyone On Board
 Closing the Loop and Getting
Everyone On Board…Faculty
Buy-In
 Making self-study meaningful
without “overkill”…
University Assessment
Program Self-Study for
Accreditation
 Yearly reports
 Site Visit every 6 years
 Assessment of every class
 Identification of projects that
on a three-year rotation
 Sophomore/Senior
Portfolio Review
 Internship Review
 General Education Course
Review
meet accreditation
standards/program outcomes
 Maintenance of student
project archives
 Retain all elements of a
course for archives
 End of Semester/Year
course review
Program Self-Study
Standard 1. Mission, Goals, and Curriculum
The interior design program has a
Mission statement that
describes the scope and
purpose of the program.
Program goals are derived from
the Mission statement and the
curriculum is structured to
achieve these goals.
Setting the Mission

to evaluate the success
of meeting specified program outcomes and current CIDA
Standards.
 In preparation of the ID program’s Fall 2009 CIDA Site Visit, all
program faculty participated in bi-weekly ID program meetings
over the last two academic years (2007/2008; 2008/2009) to
to reflect present
and future program direction and outcomes, and 2009 CIDA
Standards.
 The following Mission statement was approved in December of
2008…….
Setting the Mission
Program Mission. Optimizing human potential (of
individuals, families, and communities) in the
built environment through the application of
sustainable and universal design standards,
global awareness and diversity, ethical
judgment, and technical proficiency. (approved by
the ID Faculty, December 2008)
Setting our Program’s Outcomes
ID program outcomes evolved from this discussion, resulting in
three broad educational outcomes that demonstrate an
integrated program.
Outcome 1: Educate students though an integrated
comprehensive study of the theoretical and
practical concepts of interior design, building systems,
and interior components and construction.
Setting our Program’s Outcomes
Outcome 2: Develop student ability to synthesize and
effectively communicate information, develop
critical thinking skills, and initiate lifelong learning
skills.
Setting our Program’s Outcomes
Outcome 3: Instill in students the desire to practice
professional ethics to create socially responsible design
solutions.
Program Outcomes – Tangible Results
of Student Performance
Evidence of learning revealed in student performance…
included….
 Student interviews & presentations
 Employer/Peer/Client/Self - evaluations
 Completed Student Work






Matrixes
Bubble diagrams/schematics
Drafting, construction documents
Research papers
Design programming/proposals
Presentation materials
“Big Picture”
Successfully
Preparing for the
Self-Study Process
Reviewing across the
curriculum & across a
period of time
Assessment Instruments
Assessment for Learning & Accountability
The assessment instruments are designed to measure the curriculum’s success, based on
program outcomes and CIDA standards. A diagram is provided below to
demonstrate the process the program has developed and effectively implemented.
Assessment for
Learning
The Dual Purposes of Assessment
Rubrics
Assessment for
Accountability
(Student, Faculty)
CIDA Standards
Self-Assessment
(Student)
Peer Assessment
(Classmates, Faculty,
Employers, Clients)
Sophomore
Portfolios
(Faculty)
Senior Comprehensive
Project
(Faculty, Professionals)
Assessment for Learning & Accountability
Outside Review & Feedback
Clients, Service Organizations,
Employers, Professionals
• Freshman-Level
Courses
• (Self/Peer Assessment)
Freshman
Sophomore
• Sophomore-Level
Courses
• (Self/Peer/ Sophomore Review)
• Junior-Level Courses
• (Self/Peer/Internship)
• Senior-Level Courses
• (Self/Peer/Professionals/Seni
or Review)
Junior/Senior
Assessment for Learning & Accountability
 As the program evolved to address new challenges
experienced in the profession and the 2009 CIDA
Standards, course work had been assessed at all
levels of the program using different
assessment tools.
 Faculty felt that the assessment results in previous
years indicated the need for greater
consistency in project evaluations and
assessment tools to improve student
understanding in the evaluation and
assessment process used to measure the
effectiveness of curriculum objectives and
outcomes  ultimately program outcomes
Lessons Learned
Preparing and Completing the Self-Study Process
What did we learn & do?
 A primary goal during the 2008/2009 academic year was to
develop a single assessment rubric that could be
shared across the curriculum to better document
student learning.
 After many revisions/rewrites, the faculty approved a
single rubric for assessing each course (Freshman Senior) more closely aligned with the 2009 CIDA Standards.
It is important to note that sections of the assessment rubric may not
be assessed in a given class, depending on the courses outcomes.
Section II - Interior Design: Critical Thinking,
Professional Values, and Processes
Standard 2. Global Context for Design
 Entry-level interior designers have a global view and weigh design decisions within
the parameters of ecological, socio-economic, and cultural contexts.
Student Learning Expectations
Student work demonstrates understanding of:
a) the concepts, principles, and theories of sustainability as they
pertain to building methods, materials, systems, and occupants.
Students understand:
b) globalization and the implications of conducting the practice of design within a world market.
c) how design needs may vary for different socio-economic populations.
Program Expectations
The interior design program provides:
d) exposure to contemporary issues1 affecting interior design.
e) exposure to a variety of business, organizational, and familial structures. 2
f) opportunities for developing knowledge of other cultures. 3
2009 Standards
Example of Assessing A Standard
Evaluation
Criteria
Level
5
Level
4
Level
3
Level
2
Level
1
Global Context for Design: (Standard 2a)
Interior designers need to have a global view and weigh design decisions within the
parameters of ecological, socio-economic, and cultural contexts
Any Value
Varies depending on
project/assignment
criteria
The concepts,
principles, and
theories of
sustainability as they
pertain to building
methods, materials,
systems, and
occupants has been
thoroughly applied
throughout the
project with great
ingenuity
The concepts,
principles, and
theories of
sustainability as
they pertain to
building methods,
materials,
systems, and
occupants has
been applied
throughout the
project
The concepts,
principles, and
theories of
sustainability as they
pertain to building
methods, materials,
systems, and
occupants has been
considered and
somewhat applied
throughout the
project
The concepts,
principles, and
theories of
sustainability as they
pertain to building
methods, materials,
systems, and
occupants has been
considered but
minimally applied
throughout the
project
The concepts,
principles, and
theories of
sustainability as they
pertain to building
methods, materials,
systems, and
occupants has not
been applied
throughout the
project
Additional columns provide areas for faculty/peer/self evaluation
rankings comments
Now it’s your turn!
 Think of a project/assignment that you could apply this to
What did we learn?
 Through the use of assessment rubrics the self-assessment
process allowed faculty to see a clearer pattern of
student understanding across the curriculum and
newly implemented 2009 Standards.
 In some instances students have requested rubrics for
specific assignments so that they may better understand
what they are completing and why it plays a role in their
educational development.
CIDA Standard Challenges
 During the self-study and assessment processes there were
two areas the faculty struggled to assess and clearly define.
 The faculty did not feel Standard 2 – Global Context for
Design was clearly defined or that any assessment technique
could adequately capture lifelong learning as required by the
“Program Expectation (Standard 7-i)” for Standard 7 –
Professionalism and Business Practice.
Standard 2.
 Global Context for Design - Entry-level interior
designers have a global view and weigh design
decisions within the parameters of ecological,
socio-economic, and cultural contexts.
Standard 7.
Professionalism and Business Practice - Entry-level interior
designers use ethical and accepted standards of practice, are
committed to professional development and the industry, and
understand the value of their contribution to the built
environment.
Program Expectations - The interior design program provides
exposure to the role and value of: i) life-long learning.
 To best capture data for measuring lifelong learning,
program alumni will be contacted in the future to identify
“lifelong” learning through established professional
credentialing including job rank/title, advanced degree,
certification, and licensure.
Concluding Remarks
 Data collected from these assessment instruments
and the self-study process:
 Allow faculty to see student areas of weakness that need to
be addressed in upcoming semester.
 Hold faculty members accountable for various areas
of content he or she is responsible for teaching.
 Permit the faculty to adjust and make changes course
materials to insure that the students leave with an integrated
and timely educational experience.
 Creates an opportunity for the program to
consistently review how well CIDA Standards are
being addressed.
Concluding Remarks.
 One of the greatest benefits
the combined self-study and
assessment process has provided
the program is the opportunity
to track trends across several
academic years and to compare
student growth/learning as
cohort groups move through
program.
Questions?
Manage your time, be explicit and open, and be willing to start over if
it doesn’t work!
“Final Assessment”
1. What is the most important point you learned
today?
2. What point remains unclear?
Additional questions? Contact me by email at
Susan.ray-degges@ndsu.edu