The ARForum19 Steering Committee is composed of representatives from each of the five collateral architectural organizations: ACSA, AIA, AIAS, NCARB, and NAAB. NAAB president Kevin Flynn, FAIA, chairs the steering committee while NAAB president-elect Barbara Sestak, FAIA, chairs the ARForum19 Task Force.
The ARForum19 Steering Committee has held three in-person meetings—in Washington, DC, and Annapolis in 2018, and Pittsburgh in 2019—and continues to meet virtually. The group began by identifying the big ideas and themes that would drive the future of architecture education and the accreditation process., It has now moved into considering future versions of the NAAB
Conditions for Accreditation
The immediate goal is to discover and build consensus among the five collaterals regarding the educational and professional continuum in architecture. The intent is to establish productive pathways for advancing the discipline of architecture as a significant contributor to the enrichment of human culture and society in 2019 and beyond.
After establishing a process for preparing for ARForum19 in Chicago in July 2019, the committee engaged in lengthy discussions to establish the larger themes and ideas. The representatives from the five collaterals have provided (and continue to provide) feedback from their constituents through focus group sessions, which will continue until the forum.
Based on numerous exercises regarding the big ideas and discussion with accreditation experts from other disciplines, including engineering, law, and public health, the ARForum19 Steering Committee began considering the current NAAB
. The committee divided into three working groups to develop an approach/scenario for the future NAAB
. Each approach offers slight differences, but all point to consensus among the collaterals about the future of architecture accreditation and the professional continuum.
The three proposals streamline the accreditation process by allowing flexibility for schools to build their strengths while achieving competency in required areas. They evolved from the previous revisions to the Student Performance Criteria and offer some variety in the area currently referred to as “perspectives.”
At its recent meeting, the steering committee determined that one model embodies the best thinking of the group. This model may be characterized as offering variety in accreditation condition structures while maintaining both a minimum standard and aspirational encouragement.