2009 Accreditation Requirements: Comparison of CIDA and NAAB

Transcription

1 FROM THE EDITOR This Perspective was based, in part, on a paper presented at the 2009 annual IDEC conference in St. Louis, Missouri Accreditation Requirements: Comparison of CIDA and NAAB Caren S. Martin, Ph.D., University of Minnesota, and Michael D. Kroelinger, Ph.D., Arizona State University Purpose This investigation studied interior design and architecture education with respect to their specialized and shared knowledge areas (KAs). Education, formalized via accreditation requirements, is available to both disciplines. KAs within discipline-specific accreditation requirements content were identified, categorized, and then compared to differentiate the specialized, parallel, and shared knowledge gained by students graduating from accredited programs. The findings of this study could contribute to the dialog about what makes interior design and architecture unique professions. Background As a profession, interior design has a documented body of knowledge (BOK), which defines its professional boundaries (Guerin & Martin, 2001; Poldma, 2008). Like every profession, interior design s BOK includes abstract knowledge that is unique to its practice and other knowledge that it shares with or has gleaned from other professions (Abbott, 1988). Interior design knowledge gained through education and practice, and shared with allied professions, namely architecture, has created challenges. Right to practice issues and advocacy for regulation by the interior design profession have heightened efforts by the American Institute of Architects (AIA), the Institute for Justice, and others to claim that interior design does not possess specialized knowledge and is, therefore, not a unique profession (AIA, 2008; AIA, 2009; Carpenter, 2006). An analysis of formalized education via accreditation requirements could differentiate interior design s specialized knowledge from that of architecture. Education is the initial step in the career cycle for interior designers taking them to entry-level professional practice (Guerin & Martin, 2001). Formal interior design academic programs are accredited by the Council for Interior Design Accreditation (CIDA, 2008; formerly the Foundation for Interior Design Education Research, FIDER). In the CIDA Professional Standards 2009 (Standards) Preamble, the importance of interior design and the role accredited education plays is communicated (CIDA, 2008, p. 2). Similarly, the Boyer and Mitgang (1996) report established a blueprint for architectural education, building on an earlier Boyer (1990) report regarding scholarship. Formal architecture education is accredited by the National Architectural Accrediting Board (NAAB, 2009). In the NAAB 2009 Conditions of Accreditation Journal of Interior Design ix Copyright 2010, Interior Design Educators Council, Journal of Interior Design 35(2), ix xxxii

2 For both CIDA and NAAB, the accreditation process is well established and routinely refined to be reflective of professional practice. (Conditions), the critical influence of accredited education and the role of the architect is communicated within the Response to the Five Perspectives (NAAB, 2009, pp ). CIDA is recognized in the United States and Canada and NAAB is recognized in the United States. The degree level of education on which accreditation is focused varies for interior design and architecture, though this analysis focuses on the first-professional degree by CIDA or a professional degree by NAAB, namely, the degree that is required to enter professional practice. First-professional interior design programs culminate in a bachelor s degree (typically 4- or 5-year undergraduate programs and to a lesser extent master s programs) (CIDA, n.d.). Architecture programs culminate in either 5-year undergraduate programs or 4 + 2, 3+, and less commonly, professional doctorates for architecture (NAAB, n.d.). As the purpose of this study is to determine the KAs required within the accredited program s curriculum for both interior design and architecture, the level of degree, per se, is not addressed. Description of the Accreditation Process For both CIDA and NAAB, the accreditation process is well established and routinely refined to be reflective of professional practice. The accreditation requirements themselves are the outcome of a routinized process that began in 1970 for CIDA (then FIDER) and 1940 for NAAB. Both agencies require a self-study report to be completed by the program to be evaluated and prescribe the composition of the visiting team and the format of the report they write regarding the evidence they review during their visit. Both agencies put the accreditation decision in the hands of highly experienced, vetted volunteers at the agency level (CIDA: Accreditation Commission; NAAB: Board of Directors). The visiting team members are to act as the eyes and ears of the agency, scrupulously documenting their findings. Candidacy status is offered by both agencies for programs working toward first-time accreditation. Table 1 presents overarching characteristics related to the accreditation process; much more information is available from the agencies Web sites ( and Though different in some respects, overall processes for CIDA and NAAB are more similar than they are different. Method Using content analysis, an examination of the educational content requirements for interior design and architecture students, graduating with a first-professional/professional degree was conducted utilizing the CIDA Standards (CIDA, 2008) and the NAAB Conditions (NAAB, 2009). This method was pilot tested by a similar investigation that compared the CIDA 2009 Professional Standards with the NAAB 2004 Conditions of Accreditation, conducted in 2008 (Martin & Kroelinger, 2009). The pilot study and comments from paper presentation attendees at the Interior Design Educators Council (IDEC) 2009 Annual International Conference, including attendees of the Inside/Out: Architecture and Interior Design Curricula II conference session held in conjunction with the Interior Design Educators Council (IDEC) conference, formed the basis of and refinements for this study. Content Analysis The basis of content analysis is the systematic, objective condensation of communication materials. It affords examination of classification of content, an insight to emerging trends, comparisons over time, and replication Journal of Interior Design x

3 Table 1. Description of the Accreditation Process Sources: CIDA (2009; M. Scanlan, CIDA, personal communication) and NAAB (2009; Description/Process Interior Design Architecture Established 1970 (FIDER), 2006 (CIDA) 1940 (NAAB) Accredited Programs 177 (US and Canada) 151 (US; within 117 schools) Professional Degree BS/BFA/BA/BD/BID/BIA (154), BArch (64), MArch (94), DArch (1) MA/MIA/MID/MFA (9), Other (14 ; phased out as structured 1/1/10) Self-Study Report Program Analysis Report (PAR) Architecture Program Report (APR) Site Visit Report Visiting Team Report (VTR) Visiting Team Report (VTR) Accreditation Decision Term of Accreditation Composition of Visiting Team Accreditation Commission Maximum of 6 years; interim visit/ shorter term possible 3 members (the chair is a member of the Evaluation Committee, an experienced site visitor); minimum of one educator and one practitioner; observers can be requested by CIDA; members may/may not have any organizational affiliation Board of Directors Maximum of 6 years; interim visit/ shorter term possible At least 4 members (one is chair) with one representative each from AIA, AIAS, ASCA, and NCARB; team also may include up to 2 observers agreed upon by program/visiting team chair; NAAB may also suggest observers; observers do not participate in formal team decisions Description of Accreditation Qualifiers Standards: 16 standards within four sections: (section 1; 1 standard) mission, goals, and curriculum, (section 2; 6 standards & section 3; 7 standards) interior design, and (section 4; 2 standards) program administration Student Learning Expectations* identified as "awareness," understand/understanding, or apply/ability/able. Conditions: two parts: (1) institutional support and commitment to continuous improvement and (2) educational outcomes and curriculum with three educational realms containing 32 student performance criteria Student Performance Criteria (SPC) identified as ability or understanding * Student Learning Expectations are referenced in this study as Student Performance Criteria (SPC) (CIDA, 2008, p. 8). See the Method for more information. (Berg, 1989; Stemler, 2001). Findings are descriptive, indicating what is present in the material as its focus. The why, how, and to what effect of the meaning of the content is drawn from analysis of the data as they have been categorized (coded) and through additional research methods, such as observation and survey coupled with the findings of the content analysis (Babbie, 2010; Sommer & Sommer, 2002; Stemler, Journal of Interior Design xi

4 2001). Content analysis can be either qualitative or quantitative or a combination of both, using frequency or non-frequency coding, respectively. Non-frequency content analysis is appropriate when the types of content are the focus of the content analysis versus, say, determining the count or quantity of content (Zeisel, 2006). Analysis of manifest and latent content is often used within a single study. Manifest content is that which is physically present and countable and has strength in its representation of specificity and reliability. Latent content is an interpretative reading of the symbolism underlying the physically presented data (Berg, 1989, p. 107). Guidelines for the process of coding and analysis are established through creation of explicit rules called criteria of selection (Berg, 1989, p. 106). Also termed decision rules (Sommer & Sommer, 2002), they must be rigidly and consistently applied (Berg, 1989, p. 107). Clarifying and documenting the purpose and contextual framework of the study in context with decision rules prior to commencing coding and recording is essential to the validity and reliability of the analysis (Berg, 1989). To increase reliability of the findings, it is recommended that coding and analysis are accomplished independently by multiple raters/coders and coding must create categories that are exhaustive and mutually exclusive (Babbie, 2010; Sommer & Sommer, 2002; Stemler, 2001). Categories are determined once the raters review the data, analyze the content independently, discuss findings, mutually determine final categories, and monitor results for reliability, a process referred to as emergent coding (Stemler, 2001). Pretesting the coding via a pilot study can reduce subjectivity (Sommer & Sommer, 2002). It is essential that content analysis is reproducible; therefore, it is appropriate to code and recode data to ensure inter-rater reliability (Babbie, 2010; Stemler, 2002). Finally, coding decisions that were difficult during the process should be documented in the findings, thereby adding richness and increased validity (Babbie, 1989; Creswell, 2009). Process The process used to conduct this study was guided by content analysis protocol and the decision rules. The two researchers, one a certified interior designer (CID), the other a registered architect (RA), served as the raters/coders. Details related to each step in the process, noted below, can be found in the Decision Rules, contained in the following segment: 1. Reviewed process and protocols of content analysis; established a journal to document all work. 2. Discussed known limitations, scope of analysis, implications, and clarified the purpose of the study. 3. Knowledge gained from the pilot study and comments from presentation of its findings were applied to the process and formation of decision rules. 4. Decision rules were established and documented. 5. The KAs contained within the accreditation requirements were determined to be the unit of analysis. 6. The KAs contained within the NAAB Conditions were aligned as closely as possible with the KAs contained within the CIDA Standards by both researchers using manifest and latent content analyses, working separately. All three steps of the coding process were undertaken independently (see Rules pertaining to analysis: Levels of coding ). 7. Discrepancies/difficult decisions were discussed and final coding decisions were collaboratively identified. 8. At each step of the coding process, decision rules were re-evaluated and others added; interpretations were considered, and documentation guidelines and format (tables) were determined. Data were evaluated multiple times to increase accuracy of the findings. Journal of Interior Design xii

5 Decision Rules Decision rules were created collaboratively by the researchers to guide the coding of the data. A brief description of decision rules applying to scope and analysis follows: Rules Pertaining to Scope Documents used in the examination. A sample limited to the current CIDA 2009 Standards and NAAB 2009 Conditions was selected for coding and analysis. Pre-testing. The researchers pilot study allowed examination of the process and development of subsequent modifications to be applied to this study. For example, findings of the 2008 analysis identified three distinct KA (the unit of analysis) categories: specialized, parallel/equal but different, and specialized to a degree; however, data currently being analyzed vary from the pilot study, causing these categories to be modified, as will be shown. Extent of documents coded for analysis. The process focused on identifying, coding, and aligning KAs to fulfill the study s purpose. These data were identified from within the documents as noted below: Coding of CIDA Standards. The student performance criteria (see explanation below) were only addressed specifically in Sections II and III; section I 1. Mission, Goals, and Curriculum did not specifically address accreditation requirements that had student performance criteria (SPC) as the outcome. Likewise, section IV Program Administration describes institutional and programmatic issues of structure, facilities, resources, and faculty, also not directly relevant to SPC as outcomes. Therefore, only section II Interior Design: Critical Thinking, Professional Values, and Process and section III Interior Design: Core Design and Technical Knowledge (pp ) were examined within this study (see Table 2). Identification of CIDA KAs. The CIDA Standards note, Student learning and program expectations provide the instrument, or performance criteria, for determining whether a program complies with the standard (2008, p. 8, emphasis added). As both the Student Learning Expectations, represented by outcomes evident in various forms of student work... (2008, p. 8) and Program Expectations, represented by learning inputs evident in opportunities, experiences, or information presented to students... (2008, p. 9, italics added for emphasis) contribute KA content via the curriculum; both types of expectations were coded for analysis. Furthermore, as CIDA s categories were indicative of SPC parallel to NAAB s SPC, it was determined that NAAB s term (SPC) would be used when referring to CIDA and NAAB KA content. This convention adds clarity to the discussion by simplifying use of terms. Coding of CIDA guidance information. CIDA provides Guidance information boxes for many expectations (i.e., SPC) within the Standards. They provide illustrative information to assist with understanding the expectation (2008, p. 8). For example, Standard 12c reads, Students understand the principles of acoustical design. 2 It is clarified by this guidance: 2 Examples include noise control, sound distribution, speech privacy (CIDA, 2008, p. 18). In this study, Guidance information was incorporated into the SPC, so that, using this example, the SPC reads, Students understand the principles of acoustical design (e.g., noise control, sound distribution, speech privacy) (see Table 5). Exclusion of the Guidance information would force an increased degree of interpretation (latent content analysis), compromising the findings. Coding of NAAB Conditions. The 46-page document addresses many issues beyond SPC. Mission, goals, the role of the institution in support of the program, administrative structure and governance, reporting requirements, curricular framework, and other assorted information regarding aspects of Journal of Interior Design xiii

6 Table 2. CIDA 2009 Standards Overview as Representative of Knowledge Areas (CIDA, 2008, p.6) Section II. Interior Design: Critical Thinking, Professional Values, and Processes 2. Global Context for Design (a-f) 3. Human Behavior (a-d) Design Process (a-i) Collaboration(a-d) 6. Communication (a-e) 7. Professional and Business Practice (a-j) Section III. Interior Design: Core Design and Technical Knowledge 8. History(a-e) 9. Space and Form (a-c) 10. Color and Light (a-d) 11. Furniture, Fixtures, Equipment, and Finish Materials (a-d) 12. Environmental Systems and Controls (a-h) 13. Interior Construction and Building Systems (a-g) 14. Regulations (a-i) the accreditation process are included. Part Two (II): Educational Outcomes and Curriculum includes in section 1 Student Performance Educational Realms & Student Performance Criteria (pp ) form the basis of the information in the Conditions that addresses accreditation requirements examined in this study (see Table 3). Liberal arts and sciences/general CIDA and NAAB accreditation requirements focus on professional interior design and architecture studies, respectively. Liberal arts and sciences content requirements for both are institutionally governed, and therefore are beyond the scope of this study. Rules Pertaining to Analysis Qualitative examination. Non-frequency, emergent coding was used to focus on an examination of communication content types or themes. Unit of analysis. The KAs contained within the SPC was the unit of analysis. For both CIDA and NAAB, SPC were included verbatim for coding and analysis, with the following types of exceptions as they did not specifically convey KA content: CIDA introductory phrases to Program Expectations. Phrases such as The interior design program includes... (as applied within Standard 4f-4i, 2008, p. 13) and The interior design program includes learning experiences that engage students in... (as applied within Standard 5c-5d, 2008, p. 14). Manifest content analysis. This was the primary form of analysis used to identify the KAs (e.g., color theory, sustainability) within the SPC. Journal of Interior Design xiv

7 Table 3. NAAB 2009 Conditions Overview as Representative of Knowledge Areas (NAAB, 2009, p ) Realm A: Critical Thinking and Representation A.1 Communication Skills A.2 Design Thinking Skills A.3 Visual Communication Skills A.4 Technical Documentation A.5 Investigative Skills A.6 Fundamental Design Skills A.7 Use of Precedents A.8 Ordering Systems Skills A.9 Historical Traditions and Global Culture A.10 Cultural Diversity A.11 Applied Research Realm B: Integrated Building Practices, Technical Skills and Knowledge B.1 Pre-Design B.2 Accessibility B.3 Sustainability B.4 Site Design B.5 Life Safety B.6 Comprehensive Design B.7 Financial Considerations B.8 Environmental Systems B.9 Structural Systems B.10 Building Envelope Systems B.11 Building Service Systems B.12 Building Materials and Assemblies Realm C: Leadership and Practice C.1 Collaboration C.2 Human Behavior C.3 Client Role in Architecture C.4 Project Management C.5 Practice Management C.6 Leadership C.7 Legal Responsibilities C.8 Ethics and Professional Judgment C.9 Community and Social Responsibility Journal of Interior Design xv

8 Latent content analysis. This type of analysis was used on a limited basis to assist in the classification of unclear or complicated data, often due to the language used (see Language Issues within Implications later in this paper for additional information regarding consequences of language use). Examples of latent content requiring interpretation are documented in the findings. Levels of coding. Coding was applied to analyze the KA content in three distinct, sequential process steps: Step 1: KAs (e.g., color theory, sustainability) within the SPCs (from CIDA and NAAB) were identified, considered/interpreted (see Latent Content Analysis, above), and aligned. Sorting of KAs was also required in several instances using latent content analysis in instances where KAs from one set of accreditation requirements were divided or combined in different ways from one agency s (i.e., CIDA, NAAB) accreditation requirements as compared to the other agency s accreditation Also, initial coding of KAs found occurrences when the same KA was presented within multiple SPCs from either or both agencies accreditation Step. 2: Student achievement qualifier levels, manifest content within CIDA s Standards and NAAB s Conditions, were recorded relative to their respective KAs. CIDA refers to this form of classification as Student Learning Levels (CIDA, 2008, p. 8) and NAABrefersto themas Levels ofaccomplishment (NAAB, 2009, p. 21). They both describe the extent to which a SPC is achieved as a requirement of accreditation. The researchers have included the qualifier level in the text of the SPC and that level is graphically represented, in both instances to aid comprehension. Qualifier levels and how they were coded within the study are indicated in Table 4. However, there were some SPC not assigned qualifier levels by CIDA, but assigned by the researchers. They are discussed below: KAs contained within CIDA s Program Expectations (see previous discussion under Extent of Documents Reviewed for Analysis: CIDA Standards ) were not categorized by CIDA relative to student achievement qualifier levels. Therefore, qualifier levels were assigned and identified Table 4. Student Achievement Qualifier Levels: Comparison and Alignment Achievement Level Lower Level Median Level Upper Level Qualifier Alignment CIDA level aware had no NAAB equal; as a unique qualifier, it was retained through the analysis. CIDA s use of understand/understanding and NAAB s use of understanding was common and was retained through the analysis. CIDA s use of terms apply, ability, and able and NAAB s use of ability were determined by the researchers as equivalent, and were therefore retained through the analysis. Journal of Interior Design xvi

9 by an asterisk (*) in Table 5. This mark identifies them as coding decisions, based on latent content analysis. Examples of how qualifier levels were assigned to Program Expectations (aka SPCs) are indicated below (italics have been added for emphasis): 2d:...exposure to contemporary issues... ; qualifier level: awareness (p. 11) 2f: opportunities for developing knowledge of other cultures ; qualifier level assigned: understanding (p. 11) 4f: opportunities to solve simple to complex design problems ; qualifier level assigned: able (p. 13) 5c: engage students in collaboration, consensus building... ; qualifier level assigned: able (p. 14) 7g:...exposure to the role and value of legal recognition for the profession ; qualifier level assigned: understanding (p. 15). Step 3: Comparison and stratification coding of KAs were based on the (1) manifest KA content analysis and (2) the CIDA/NAAB qualifier levels discussed above. To accomplish this final level of coding, five distinct types and/or levels of KAs were identified (the pilot study contained three): shared/common KA requirements shared/common KA but unequal qualifier level of requirements (CIDA or NAAB noted as higher level, more comprehensive, or both) parallel (but different) KA, equal qualifier level requirements parallel (but different) KA requirements, unequal qualifier levels (e.g., NAAB ability, CIDA understanding ) specialized KA requirements (CIDA or NAAB). Findings and Conclusions Findings The findings of this content analysis research are summarized in Table 5. The researchers conducted the content analysis following the decision rules described earlier in the Method segment of this paper. The organization of the table is based on an identification of each SPC as sequenced by CIDA with NAAB SPC aligned to them. Both the text of the SPC and reference numbers assigned by the accreditation agencies are noted. Results of the comparison and stratification by the five distinct types and/or levels of KAs, which served as the third and final level of coding for the study, are noted in the far right-hand column, labeled Analysis Remarks. The SPC discussed below represent primarily manifest content analysis and to a lesser extent latent content analysis, based on the decision rules discussed earlier. CIDA s SPC 5c is an example of coding where latent content analysis was applied; it is described below. Student achievement qualifier levels are keyed in the header of Table 5. As explained in Step 2 of the levels of coding segment of the method, they are visually identified by font variations: lower (awareness), median (understanding)., and upper (ability) levels (see Table 4 for further explanation). Examples of application of the five coding decisions as findings of the study are identified in the following descriptions. This discussion is not exhaustive due to limitations of space but presents a sampling of the findings. Journal of Interior Design xvii

10 Table 5: Comparison of CIDA and NAAB Student Performance Criteria Knowledge Areas CIDA 2009 NAAB 2009 Student Performance Criteria (SPC) No. No. Student Performance Criteria (SPC) Analysis Remarks Demonstrates understanding of the concepts, principles, and theories of sustainability as they pertain to building methods, materials, systems and occupants. 2a B.3 Sustainability: Ability to design projects that optimize, conserve, or reuse natural and built resources, provide healthful environments for occupants/users, and reduce the environmental impacts of building construction and operations on future generations through means such as carbon-neutral design, bioclimatic design, and energy efficiency. Font Notes: Ability; Understanding ; Awareness. (* = Interpretation) Understand globalization and implications of conducting the practice of design within a world market. Understand how design needs may vary for different socio-economic populations. Exposure to contemporary issues (e.g., social, political, economic, ecological) affecting interior design.* 2b A.10 Cultural Diversity: Understanding of the diverse needs, values, behavioral norms, physical abilities, and social and spatial patterns that characterize different cultures and individuals and the implication of this diversity on the societal roles and responsibilities of architects. 2c A.9 Historical Traditions and Global Culture: Understanding of parallel and divergent canons and traditions of architecture, landscape and urban design including examples of indigenous, vernacular, local, regional, national settings from the Eastern, Western, Northern, and Southern hemispheres in terms of their climatic, ecological, technological, socioeconomic, public health, and cultural factors. 2d A.9 Historical Traditions and Global Culture (see CIDA 2c for complete text of NAAB A.9) more comprehensive and 2: Global Context for Design Exposure to a variety of business, organizational (e.g., for-profit, non-profit, publicly vs. privately held, hierarchical, flat, or others), and familial (e.g., cohousing, nuclear, extended family, or others) structures.* 2e -- [None] Specialized knowledge area Opportunities for developing knowledge of other cultures (e.g., study abroad, on-campus cultural exchanges and interaction with visiting professors).* 2f A.10 Cultural Diversity (see CIDA 2b for complete text of NAAB A.10) Understand that social and cultural norms may vary from their own and are relevant to making appropriate design decisions. 3a A.10 Cultural Diversity (see CIDA 2b for complete text of NAAB A.10) Understanding and the ability to appropriately apply theories of human behavior (i.e., how interior design impacts occupant well being and performance). Ability to select, interpret, and apply appropriate ergonomic and anthropometric data. Understanding and the ability to appropriately apply universal design concepts (i.e., design for all people including those with special needs physical, cognitive, or emotional which may be present from birth, acquired through illness or injury, or unique to children or the elderly). 3b C.2 Human Behavior: Understanding of the relationship between human behavior, the natural environment and the design of the built environment. 3c -- [None] Specialized knowledge area 3d B.2 Accessibility: Ability to design sites, facilities, and systems to provide independent and integrated use by individuals with physical (including mobility), sensory, and cognitive disabilities. Parallel (but different) knowledge area requirements, unequal levels (NAAB accessibility, CIDA universal design). 3: Human Behavior Journal of Interior Design xviii

11 Table 5: Continued CIDA 2009 NAAB 2009 Font Notes: Ability; Understanding ; Awareness. (* = Interpretation) Student Performance Criteria (SPC) No. No. Student Performance Criteria (SPC) Analysis Remarks Able to identify and define relevant aspects of a design problem (goals, objectives, performance criteria). 4a A.2 Design Thinking Skills: Ability to raise clear and precise questions, use abstract ideas to interpret information, consider diverse points of view, reach well-reasoned conclusions, and test alternative outcomes against relevant criteria and standards. Able to gather appropriate and necessary information and research findings to solve the problem (evidencebased design). Able to evaluate, select, and apply information and research findings to design. Able to synthesize information and generate multiple concepts and/or multiple design responses to programmatic [Mike can you get rid of the border line under 4d? I tried ] Able to demonstrate creative thinking and originality through presentation of a variety of ideas, approaches, and concepts. Opportunities to solve simple to complex design problems.* 4b B.1 Pre-Design: Ability to prepare a comprehensive program for an architectural project, such as preparing an assessment of client and user needs, an inventory of space and equipment requirements, an analysis of site conditions (including existing buildings), a review of the relevant laws and standards and assessment of their implications for the project, and a definition of site selection and design assessment criteria. A.5 Investigative Skills: Ability to gather, assess, record, apply, and comparatively evaluate relevant information within architectural coursework and design processes. A.11 Applied Research: Understanding the role of applied research in determining function, form, and systems and their impact on human conditions and behavior. 4c A.5 Investigative Skills (see CIDA 4b for complete text of NAAB A.5) 4d A.2 Design Thinking Skills (see CIDA 4a for complete text of NAAB A.2) B.1 Pre-Design (see CIDA 4a for complete text of NAAB B.1) 4e A.3 Visual Communication Skills: Ability to use appropriate representational media, such as traditional graphic and digital technology skills, to convey essential formal elements at each stage of the programming and design process. 4f B.6 Comprehensive Design: Ability to produce a comprehensive architectural project that demonstrates each student s capacity to make design decisions across scales while integrating the following SPC. A.2. Design Thinking Skills; A.4. Technical Documentation; A.5. Investigative Skills; A.8. Ordering Systems; A.9; Historical Traditions and Global Culture; B.2. Accessibility; B.3. Sustainability; B.4. Site Design; B.5. Life Safety; B.7. Environmental Systems; B.9. Structural Systems. 4:Design Process Exposure to a range of design research and problem solving methods.* 4g A.11 Applied Research: Understanding the role of applied research in determining function, form, and systems and their impact on human conditions and behavior. Opportunities for innovation and creative thinking.* 4h A.2 Design Thinking Skills (see CIDA 4a for complete text of NAAB A.2) Opportunities to develop critical listening skills (i.e., evaluate what they are hearing from several points of view, including but not limited to: speaker credibility, logic and meaning of the message, underlying assumptions of the message, and value of the message).* 4i A.1 Communication Skills: Ability to read, write, speak and listen effectively. Journal of Interior Design xix

12 Table 5: Continued CIDA 2009 NAAB 2009 Font Notes: Ability; Understanding ; Awareness. (* = Interpretation) Student Performance Criteria (SPC) No. No. Student Performance Criteria (SPC) Analysis Remarks Awareness of team work structures and dynamics. 5a C.1 Collaboration: Ability to work in collaboration with others and in multidisciplinary teams to successfully complete design projects. Awareness of the nature and value of integrated design practices. Collaboration, consensus building, leadership, and team work.* [Mike, cannot get out the border line under middle of 5c. Help!] Interaction with multiple disciplines representing a variety of points of view and perspectives (e.g., multidisciplinary team projects, or involving experts in other disciplines to consult on projects or serve as guest critics).* Apply a variety of communication techniques and technologies appropriate to a range of purposes and audiences. Able to express ideas clearly in oral and written communication. Able to use sketches as a design and communication tool (ideation drawings). Able to produce competent presentation drawings across a range of appropriate media. Able to produce competent contract documents including coordinated drawings, schedules and specifications appropriate to project size and scope and sufficiently extensive to show how design solutions and interior construction are related. Able to integrate oral and visual material to present ideas clearly. 5b C.1 Collaboration (see CIDA 5a for complete text of NAAB C.1) 5c C.1 Collaboration (see CIDA 5a for complete text of NAAB C.1) C.6 Leadership: Understanding of the techniques and skills architects use to work collaboratively in the building design and construction process and on environmental, social, and aesthetic issues in their communities. 5: Collaboration 5d C.1 Collaboration (see CIDA 5a for complete text of NAAB C.1) 6a A.1 Communication Skills: Ability to read, write, speak and listen effectively. 6b A.1 Communication Skills (see CIDA 6a for complete text of NAAB A.1) 6c A.3 Visual Communication Skills (see CIDA 4e row for complete text of A.3) 6d A.3 Visual Communication Skills (see CIDA 4e row for complete text of A.3) 6e A.4 Technical Documentation: Ability to make technically clear drawings, 6f write outline specifications, and prepare models illustrating and identifying the assembly of materials, systems, and components appropriate for a building design. 6: Communication A.1 Communication Skills (see CIDA 6a for complete text of NAAB A.1) A.3 Visual Communication Skills (see CIDA 4e for complete text of NAAB A.3) Journal of Interior Design xx

13 Table 5: Continued CIDA 2009 NAAB 2009 Font Notes: Ability; Understanding ; Awareness. (* = Interpretation) Student Performance Criteria (SPC) No. No. Student Performance Criteria (SPC) Analysis Remarks Understand the contributions of interior design to contemporary society. Understand various types of design practices (e.g., sole proprietor, partnerships, etc.). 7a C.9 Community and Social Responsibility: Understanding of the architect s responsibility to work in the public interest, to respect historic resources, and to improve the quality of life for local and global neighbors. 7b C.5 Practice Management: Understanding of the basic principles of architectural practice management such as financial management and business planning, time management, risk management, mediation and arbitration, and recognizing trends that affect practice. Parallel (but different) knowledge area, equal level Understand the elements of business practice (business development, financial management, strategic planning, and various forms of collaboration and integration of disciplines). Understand the elements of project management, project communication, and project delivery methods. 7c C.5 Practice Management (see CIDA 7b for complete text of NAAB C.5) 7d C.4 Project Management: Understanding of the methods for competing for commissions, selecting consultants and assembling teams, and recommending project delivery methods. Understand professional ethics. 7e C.8 Ethics and Professional Judgment: Understanding of the ethical issues involved in the formation of professional judgment regarding social, political and cultural issues in architectural design and practice. Exposure to various market sectors and client types (i.e., client organization structure and facility type).* The role and value of legal recognition for the profession.* 7f C.3 Client Role in Architecture: Understanding of the responsibility of the architect to elicit, understand, and reconcile the needs of the client, owner, user groups, and the public and community domains. 7g C.7 Legal Responsibilities: Understanding of the architect s responsibility to the public and the client as determined by registration law, building codes and regulations, professional service contracts, zoning and subdivision ordinances, environmental regulation, and historic preservation and accessibility laws. 7: Professionalism and Business Practice The role and value of professional organizations.* 7h -- [None] Specialized knowledge area The role and value of life-long learning.* 7i -- [None] Specialized knowledge area The role and value of public and community service.* 7j C.9 Community and Social Responsibility (see CIDA 7a for complete text of NAAB C.9) Journal of Interior Design xxi

14 Table 5: Continued CIDA 2009 NAAB 2009 Font Notes: Ability; Understanding ; Awareness. (* = Interpretation) Student Performance Criteria (SPC) No. No. Student Performance Criteria (SPC) Analysis Remarks Understand the social, political, and physical influences affecting historical changes in design of the built environment. 8a A.9 Historical Traditions and Global Culture: Understanding of parallel and divergent canons and traditions of architecture, landscape and urban design including examples of indigenous, vernacular, local, regional, national settings from the Eastern, Western, Northern, and Southern hemispheres in terms of their climatic, ecological, technological, socioeconomic, public health, and cultural factors. Parallel (but different) knowledge area, equal level Able to identify movements and periods in interior design and furniture. Able to identify movements and traditions in architecture. 8b -- [None] Specialized knowledge area 8c A.9 Historical Traditions and Global Culture (see CIDA 8a for complete text of NAAB A.9) 8: History Able to identify stylistic movements and periods of art. 8d -- [None] Specialized knowledge area Able to use historical precedent to inform design solutions. Apply the elements, principles, and theories of design to two-dimensional design solutions. 8e A.7 Use of Precedents: Ability to examine and comprehend the fundamental principles present in relevant precedents and to make choices regarding the incorporation of such principles into architecture and urban design projects. 9a A.6 Fundamental Design Skills: Ability to effectively use basic architectural and environmental principles in design. A.8 Ordering Systems Skills: Understanding of the fundamentals of both natural and formal ordering systems and the capacity of each to inform two- and three-dimensional design. Parallel (but different) knowledge area, equal level Parallel (but different) knowledge area, equal level Parallel (but different) knowledge area requirements, unequal levels (CIDA "ability," NAAB " understanding"). Apply the elements, principles, and theories of design to three-dimensional design solutions. Able to analyze and discuss spatial definition and organization. 9b A.6 Fundamental Design Skills (see CIDA 9a for complete text of NAAB A.6) A.8 Ordering Systems Skills (see CIDA 9a for complete text of NAAB A.8) 9c A.8 Ordering Systems Skills (see CIDA 9a for complete text of NAAB A.8) Parallel (but different) knowledge area, equal level Parallel (but different) knowledge area requirements, unequal levels (CIDA "ability," NAAB "understanding"). 9: Space and Form Parallel (but different) knowledge area requirements, unequal levels (CIDA "ability," NAAB "understanding"). Journal of Interior Design xxii

15 Table 5: Continued CIDA 2009 NAAB 2009 Font Notes: Ability; Understanding ; Awareness. (* = Interpretation) Student Performance Criteria (SPC) No. No. Student Performance Criteria (SPC) Analysis Remarks Understanding of color principles, theories, and systems. Understanding of the interaction of light and color and the impact they have on one another and interior environments. Appropriately select and apply color with regard to its multiple purposes (e.g., functional, behavioral, aesthetic, perceptual, cultural, and economic). Able to apply color effectively in all aspects of visual communication (presentations, models, etc.). Awareness of a broad range of materials and products. Awareness of typical fabrication and installation methods, and maintenance Select and apply appropriate materials and products on the basis of their properties and performance criteria, including environmental attributes and life cycle cost. Able to layout and specify furniture, fixtures, and equipment. 10a -- [None] Specialized knowledge area 10b -- [None] Specialized knowledge area 10c -- [None] Specialized knowledge area 10d -- [None] Specialized knowledge area 10: Color and Light 11a B.12 Building Materials and Assemblies: Understanding of the basic principles utilized in the appropriate selection of construction materials, products, components, and assemblies, based on their inherent characteristics and performance, including their environmental impact and reuse. 11b B.12 Building Materials and Assemblies (see CIDA 11a for complete text of NAAB B.12) 11c B.7 Financial Considerations: Understanding of the fundamentals of building costs, such as acquisition costs, project financing and funding, financial feasibility, operational costs, and construction estimating with an emphasis on life-cycle cost accounting. higher level and higher level and Parallel (but different) knowledge area requirements, unequal levels (CIDA "ability," NAAB "understanding"). 11d -- [None] Specialized knowledge area 11: Furniture, Fixtures, Equipment, and Finish Materials Understand the principles of natural and electrical lighting design (e.g., color, quality, sources, use, control). 12a B.8 Environmental Systems: Understanding the principles of environmental systems design such as embodied energy, active and passive heating and cooling, indoor air quality, solar orientation, daylighting and artificial illumination, and acoustics; including the use of appropriate performance assessment tools. Competently select and apply luminaires and light sources. Understand the principles of acoustical design (e.g., noise control, sound distribution, speech privacy). Understand appropriate strategies for acoustical control (e.g., material selection; white noise; space planning; floor, wall and ceiling systems). Understand the principles of thermal design (e.g., mechanical system design, airflow, occupant reaction to thermal variables). Understand how thermal systems impact interior design solutions. Understand the principles of indoor air quality (e.g., pollutant source control, filtration, ventilation variables, CO 2 monitoring, mold prevention). Understand how the selection and application of products and systems impact indoor air quality. 12b -- [None] Specialized knowledge area 12c B.8 Environmental Systems (see CIDA 12a for complete text of NAAB B.8) 12d B.8 Environmental Systems (see CIDA 12a for complete text of NAAB B.8) 12e B.8 Environmental Systems (see CIDA 12a for complete text of NAAB B.8) 12f B.8 Environmental Systems (see CIDA 12a for complete text of NAAB B.8) 12g B.8 Environmental Systems (see CIDA 12a for complete text of NAAB B.8) 12h B.8 Environmental Systems (see CIDA 12a for complete text of NAAB B.8) 12:Environmental Systems and Contols Journal of Interior Design xxiii

16 Table 5: Continued CIDA 2009 NAAB 2009 Font Notes: Ability; Understanding ; Awareness. (* = Interpretation) Student Performance Criteria (SPC) No. No. Student Performance Criteria (SPC) Analysis Remarks Demonstrates understanding that design solutions affect and are impacted by structural systems and methods (e.g., wood-frame and steel-frame). Demonstrates understanding that design solutions affect and are impacted by non-structural systems including ceilings, flooring, and interior walls. Demonstrates understanding that design solutions affect and are impacted by distribution systems including power, mechanical, HVAC, data/voice telecommunications, and plumbing. Demonstrates understanding that design solutions affect and are impacted by energy, security, and building controls systems (e.g., energy management including HVAC, safety, and security). Demonstrates understanding that design solutions affect and are impacted by the interface of furniture with distribution and construction systems. Demonstrates understanding that design solutions affect and are impacted by vertical circulation systems (e.g., stairways and elevators). 13a B.9 Structural Systems: Understanding of the basic principles of structural behavior in withstanding gravity and lateral forces and the evolution, range, and appropriate application of contemporary structural systems. 13b B.10 Building Envelope Systems: Understanding of the basic principles involved in the appropriate application of building envelope systems and associated assemblies relative to fundamental performance, aesthetics, moisture transfer, durability, and energy and material resources. 13c B.8 Environmental Systems (see CIDA 12a for complete text of NAAB B.8) 13d B.11 Building Service Systems: Understanding of the basic principles and appropriate application and performance of building service systems such as plumbing, electrical, vertical transportation, security, and fire protection systems. 13e -- [None] Specialized knowledge area 13f B.11 Building Service Systems (see CIDA 13d for complete text of NAAB B.11) 13: Interior Construction and Building Systems Able to read and interpret construction drawings and documents. 13g A.1 Communication Skills: Ability to read, write, speak and listen effectively. Journal of Interior Design xxiv

17 Table 5: Continued CIDA 2009 NAAB 2009 Font Notes: Ability; Understanding ; Awareness. (* = Interpretation) Student Performance Criteria (SPC) No. No. Student Performance Criteria (SPC) Analysis Remarks Awareness of sustainability guidelines (e.g., LEED, CHPS, Energy Policy Act 2005, California 01350). 14a C.7 Legal Responsibilities: Understanding of the architect s responsibility to the public and the client as determined by registration law, building codes and regulations, professional service contracts, zoning and subdivision ordinances, environmental regulation, and historic preservation and accessibility laws. Awareness of industry-specific regulations (e.g., health codes, regulations for government projects, regulations for education projects including daycare, and regulations governing work in historic districts or on historic properties). Demonstrates understanding of laws, codes, standards, and guidelines that impact fire and life safety, including compartmentalization: fire separation and smoke containment. Demonstrates understanding of laws, codes, standards, and guidelines that impact fire and life safety, including movement: access to the means of egress including stairwells, corridors, exitways. Demonstrates understanding of laws, codes, standards, and guidelines that impact fire and life safety, including detection: active devices that alert occupants including smoke/heat detectors and alarm systems. Demonstrates understanding of laws, codes, standards, and guidelines that impact fire and life safety, including suppression: devices used to extinguish flames including sprinklers, standpipes, fire hose cabinets, extinguishers, etc. Select and apply appropriate federal, state/provincial, and local codes (e.g., International Building Code and the National Building Code of Canada). 14b C.7 Legal Responsibilities (see CIDA 14a for complete text of NAAB C.7) 14c B.5 Life Safety: Ability to apply the basic principles of life-safety systems with an emphasis on egress. Parallel (but different) knowledge area requirements, unequal levels (NAAB "understanding," CIDA "awareness"). more comprehensive, NAAB higher level). 14d B.5 Life Safety (see CIDA 14c for complete text of NAAB B.5) more comprehensive, NAAB higher level). 14e C.7 Legal Responsibilities (see CIDA 14a for complete text of NAAB C.7) 14f C.7 Legal Responsibilities (see CIDA 14a for complete text of NAAB C.7) 14g C.7 Legal Responsibilities (see CIDA 14a for complete text of NAAB C.7) 14: Regulations more comprehensive and Select and apply standards (e.g., flammability and American National Standards Institute). 14h C.7 Legal Responsibilities (see CIDA 14a for complete text of NAAB C.7) more comprehensive and Select and apply accessibility guidelines. 14i B.2 Accessibility: Ability to design sites, facilities, and systems to provide independent and integrated use by individuals with physical (including mobility), sensory, and cognitive disabilities. [None] [Mike, we need a heavy line separating row 90 (B.4) from row above] -- B.4 Site Design: Ability to respond to site characteristics such as soil, topography, vegetation, and watershed in the development of a project design. Specialized knowledge area requirements (NAAB). Journal of Interior Design xxv

18 Shared/common KA requirements CIDA SPC 4g and NAAB SPC A.11 are shared/common KAs. CIDA requires Exposure to a range of design research and problem solving methods while NAAB requires Applied Research: Understanding the role of applied research in determining function, form, and systems and their impact on human conditions and behavior. Both SPC are required to be at the same understanding level. Shared/common KA but or NAAB noted as higher level, more comprehensive, or both) Three variations of coding are documented within this type and/or level of analysis of findings. An example of each is offered. Shared/common knowledge but unequal qualifier levels of An example of KAs that have shared/common knowledge but unequal qualifier levels of requirements are CIDA s 5b and NAAB s C.1. CIDA requires Awareness of the nature and value of integrated design practices, while NAAB requires Collaboration: Ability to work in collaboration with others and in multi-disciplinary teams to successfully complete design projects. NAAB requires a higher level in this SPC ( ability ), whereas CIDA is at a lower qualifier level ( awareness ). This comparison illustrates a situation where the researchers used latent content analysis in Step 2 of the coding to assign a qualifier level to CIDA s SPC, as it was categorized as a Program Expectation and therefore was not identified by a qualifier level by CIDA (see discussion of this protocol in the Decision Rules ). Shared/common knowledge with unequal comprehension levels Comparisons of CIDA s 12d to NAAB s B.8 and of CIDA s 13a to NAAB s B.9 illustrate how frequently differing accreditation requirements occur in SPC that are shared/common knowledge with equal qualifier levels (awareness, understanding, etc.) of KA but unequal comprehension levels. CIDA s 12d requirement to Understand appropriate strategies for acoustical control (e.g., material selection; white noise; space planning; floor, wall and ceiling systems) is a more comprehensive requirement than NAAB s B.8 acoustical KA requirement, Environmental Systems: Understanding the principles of environmental systems design such as embodied energy, active and passive heating and cooling, indoor air quality, solar orientation, daylighting and artificial illumination, and acoustics; including the use of appropriate performance assessment tools. It is also important to note that the comparison of KAs within CIDA s 12d and NAAB s B.8 is illustrative of the sorting challenges presented by the nature of both agencies SPC. NAAB s B.8 is applicable to all SPCs of CIDA s Standard 12 (a through h). The opposite situation regarding comprehension is true when comparing CIDA s 13a to NAAB s B.9. CIDA s 13a SPC requires that the student Demonstrates understanding that design solutions affect and are impacted by structural systems and methods (e.g., wood-frame and steel-frame) whereas NAAB s B.9 requires Structural Systems: Understanding of the basic principles of structural behavior in withstanding gravity and lateral forces and the evolution, range, and appropriate application of contemporary structural systems. In this instance, NAAB s SPC requires a more comprehensive understanding of principles of structural behavior and systems while CIDA s SPC expects an understanding that design solutions affect and are impacted by structural systems and methods. Journal of Interior Design xxvi

19 The study determined that interior design and architecture share or have parallel knowledge but often require either unequal qualifier levels or unequal comprehension levels of Shared/common knowledge with unequal comprehension and unequal qualifier levels A final set of KAs demonstrate shared/common knowledge with one accrediting agency expecting a more comprehensive SPC while the other agency required a KA at a higher qualifier level. CIDA s 14c, Demonstrates understanding of laws, codes, standards, and guidelines that impact fire and life safety, including compartmentalization: fire separation and smoke containment, and NAAB s B.5, Life Safety: Ability to apply the basic principles of life-safety systems with an emphasis on egress both address life safety. CIDA requires a greater degree of comprehension but at the understanding qualifier level, whereas NAAB requires application ( ability level) of life-safety systems with emphasis on egress. (CIDA s language for this SPC is similar to 2a, which is discussed in Language Issues within Implications for the Future. ) Parallel (but different) KA, Equal Qualifier Level Requirements CIDA s 7a requirement, Understand the contributions of interior design to contemporary society is a parallel, but different KA as compared to NAAB s C.9, requirement, Community and Social Responsibility: Understanding of the architect s responsibility to work in the public interest, to respect historic resources, and to improve the quality of life for local and global neighbors. Both these KAs have equal requirements at the understanding level. Parallel (but different) KA requirements, unequal qualifier levels (e.g., NAAB ability, CIDA understanding ) CIDA s 9a requirement to Apply the elements, principles, and theories of design to two-dimensional design solutions is a parallel, but different KA as aligned with NAAB s A.8 requirement, Ordering Systems Skills: Understanding of the fundamentals of both natural and formal ordering systems and the capacity of each to inform two- and three-dimensional design. CIDA s KA is expected at the higher qualifier level, ability, while NAAB s KA is at a median qualifier level ( understanding ). Specialized KA requirements (CIDA or NAAB) CIDA s 3c requirement, Ability to select, interpret, and apply appropriate ergonomic and anthropometric data is a specialized KA not identified in the manifest or latent content analysis of NAAB s SPC. This specialized KA is unique to CIDA s SPC requirements and represents one example of many CIDA KAs that are not required within NAAB s SPC. A review of Table 5 identifies these specialized KA findings within CIDA s SPC: 2e, 7h, 7i, 8b, 8d, and 10a through 10d. Conversely, NAAB s B.4 requirement, Site Design: Ability to respond to site characteristics such as soil, topography, vegetation, and watershed in the development of a project design is a specialized KA that is unique to NAAB s SPC. Content contained within the Analysis Remarks of Table 5 indicate findings resulting from coding the SPC within the five distinct types and/or levels of KAs. Readers are encouraged to review and compare the researchers interpretation of the content analysis to obtain additional insight about the findings. Conclusions An understanding of the specialized, shared, and parallel KAs contained within the CIDA and NAABaccreditation requirements will inform the current discussion among educators, interior designers, architects, legislators, code officials, and the public. The study determined that interior design and architecture share or have parallel knowledge but often require either unequal qualifier levels or unequal comprehension levels of In other cases,shared knowledge is at the same level. Conversely, both professions accreditation agencies require specialized knowledge that is clearly unique to each profession. Journal of Interior Design xxvii

20 Categorization of these types of knowledge illuminates to what degree and how these professions differ from an educational standpoint, the initial attainment of KAs that comprise the basis of the profession s BOK (Guerin & Martin, 2001). Further exploration of the findings could contribute to the delineation of interior design and architecture as unique, but related, professions. This content analysis study has found that each is unique due to specialized and parallel but different KAs and both are related due to the shared knowledge identified. The findings also help clarify differences in approach between CIDA s Student Expectations and Program Expectations versus NAAB s Student Performance Criteria. NAAB defines outcomes within educational Realms and specific SPC, without defined requirements about how each SPC is achieved or how the experience is provided. As noted in the NAAB Conditions (NAAB, 2009, p. 21), The school must provide evidence that its graduates have satisfied each criterion through required coursework. CIDA is more prescriptive. For example, CIDA (2009, p. 8) indicates Student learning and program expectations provide the instrument, or performance criteria, for determining whether a program complies with the standard. An example of this is CIDA 4i versus NAAB A.1 (see Table 5). CIDA requires Opportunities to develop critical listening skills (i.e., evaluate what they are hearing from several points of view, including, but not limited to: speaker credibility, logic and meaning of the message, underlying assumptions of the message, and value of the message. This shared/common KA for NAAB states: Communication skills: Ability to read, write, speak, and listen effectively. Only outcomes are described; processes by which to achieve them are not. Coding content was complex in some instances when sorting requirements for KAs or identifying categories, within the CIDA and NAAB SPC. Three classification issues offer evidence of this difficulty: overlapping data, combined data, and double-dipping (Sommer & Sommer, 2002). Overlapping data in CIDA 4g creates difficulty in content analysis. CIDA requires Exposure to a range of design research and problem solving methods. A shared/common SPC for NAAB is A.11: Applied Research: Understanding the role of applied research in determining function, form, and systems and their impact on human conditions and behavior. The researchers analysis is based on the keyword research and not on other keywords in each agency s SPC. The combined data issue is illustrated by CIDA s 10b requirement: Understanding of the interaction of light and color and the impact they have on one another and interior environments. The overlapping data are light and color. Likewise, NAAB s B.8, Environmental Systems, or NAAB s C.7, Legal Responsibilities are so all-inclusive that analysis required segregating each by its multiple KAs during coding to enable alignment with CIDA KAs. Double-dipping also occurs within the SPC. CIDA 10b, noted above, is double-dipped with CIDA 12a, which requires: Understand the principles of natural and electrical lighting design (e.g., color, quality, sources, use, control). Both 10b and 12a include color. One focuses on interaction (10b) and the other on principles (12a). This issue is more evident in CIDA SPC than in NAAB SPC in part due to CIDA s SPC organization methods. These coding issues should be considered by both accrediting agencies as they further define SPC. While these data issues are problematic for content analysis researchers, these issues also might increase the difficulty for program administrators and faculties to anticipate compliance with accreditation Finally, the task for the accreditation team member is also more complex. Journal of Interior Design xxviii

21 How can [interior design and architecture] embrace and enhance collaboration and still empower future design professionals with a specific [Body of Knowledge]? Limitations Based on the backgrounds and experience of the researchers, the findings could be biased as these characteristics have shaped their interpretations of the data (Creswell, 2009). However, it is hoped that having both interior design and architecture professions represented by the researchers and the CID s experience as a CIDA site visitor and the RA s experience as a program administrator involved in CIDA and NAAB site visits at various institutions have created a balance and minimized inherent biases. Coding decisions in some instances were difficult; the researchers have made every effort to identify those areas in the findings. Specifically, only the CIDA and NAAB SPC were analyzed. so no other portions of the accreditation requirements or procedures were considered. The findings cannot be generalized beyond these data. Also, this study does not describe the SPC KA content of any specific interior design or architecture program s educational curriculum. Moreover, these SPC define the minimum levels of learning necessary to meet accreditation requirements; how individual programs meet and/or exceed these requirements was not studied. It is possible that CIDA s and NAAB s abilities to communicate what they require students to learn and how they qualify levels of learning (via language/terms used) through these accreditation requirement documents could be limiting in context of this study s purpose and might have skewed the findings relative to what is actually required to be learned as interpreted by program faculty and accreditation site visitors. And, though the findings are descriptive in nature, understanding the effects of the findings a desirable outcome of qualitative research (Babbie, 2010) has been undertaken. Through interpretation of the findings, the researchers biases are influencing the discussion. Topics Not Covered There were numerous tangential research questions that were not addressed by this study due to the complexity of the comparison that was the focus of this inquiry, though many of them could have added significantly to this topic. This study did not focus on assessment aspects regarding institutional mission, economics, facilities, or faculty or details of the accreditation process per se. Also, this study did not go into depth describing the various and different degrees and their structures, which has been done by others, as the focus was on the accreditation requirements that culminate in first-professional/professional interior design and architecture degrees, respectively. Additionally, there was no consideration or discussion of other components of curriculum (i.e., liberal studies requirements) outside of the KAs required via these professional accreditation requirements, though their contributions to education are significant. And finally, the philosophical underpinnings of interior design and architecture professional practice beyond how they were manifest in the accreditation requirements were not addressed. Implications for the Future Broad Issues There are key implications for the future resulting from the findings of, and method used in, this research study that may be of importance to the accrediting agencies and to the professions. The findings identify and add definition to the foundation of the BOK for each profession. Respective foundations are a combination of distinctly Journal of Interior Design xxix

22 This study has afforded the researchers a unique perspective of the [CIDA and NAAB] accreditation requirements that will hopefully be considered, discussed, and debated... different, shared/common, and parallel but different KAs that might define how each evolves and, at the same time, form the basis of amplified collaboration. These BOKs are not mutually exclusive, nor are they the same. However, for either an interior designer or an architect to engage in the educational or professional setting, enrich the conversation, and enhance the dialog, each must bring a depth of understanding (i.e., specialized or unique knowledge), which is developed and understood at a level beyond a casual or limited exposure. How can the two professions embrace and enhance collaboration and still empower future design professionals with a specific BOK? Findings from this study could also be used as a basis of additional conversations about collaboration across and among the faculties teaching interior design or architecture. Accreditation requirements need to continue to evolve to best serve the professions. Since most accreditation processes are primarily based on analysis of practice, are the requirements then, by design, reactive? Should requirements be proactive, since education is the foundation of KAs comprising the BOK for each/both profession s practice? Language Issues The purpose of this study differs in critical ways from the purpose of accreditation. Therefore, the language issues described below did present issues of concern regarding the researchers ability to identify KAs within both CIDA and NAAB documents, but may not be issues of operational concern to those agencies in how requirements are applied by accredited programs and evaluated by site visitors. Thus, these comments are presented solely in light of the purpose of this study. In many cases, specificity of language used by CIDA and NAAB is critical in identifying and applying requirement qualifier levels. For example, use of the phrase demonstrates understanding seems to be a confounding and unclear statement, as evidenced, for example, in CIDA s 2a, Demonstrates understanding of the concepts... For clarity, it could be more appropriate and accurate to state Applies the concepts... Via the analysis, it seems that the qualifier level of 2a has the same meaning as that of 4e, Able to demonstrate creative thinking..., which represents the ability qualifier level. 2a and 4e also represent examples of overlapping data, discussed earlier. Also, CIDA s combination of multiple significant KAs (11a through 11d) as contained in Standard 11. Furniture, Fixtures, Equipment, and Finish Materials serve to diminish the distinct aspects of finishes and materials used in interior furnishings, fixtures, and equipment versus the finishes and materials used in the construction of the building. NAAB s SPC also contain confounding or unclear language usage. An example of unclear language from NAAB is C.3, which requires Client Role in Architecture: Understanding of the responsibility of the architect to elicit, understand, and reconcile the needs of the client, owner, user groups, and the public and community domains. This SPC appears to be describing the architect s responsibilities to the client and other noted entities. Also, NAAB s C.7 is not clear in its intent, as written: Legal Responsibilities: Understanding of the architect s responsibility to the public and the client as determined by registration law, building codes and regulations, professional service contracts, zoning and subdivision ordinances, environmental regulation, and historic preservation and accessibility laws. It is not clear to the researchers, after they conducted latent content analysis, whether this SPC means that the student will understand law, codes, ordinances, etc., but rather that the student understands the concept that he/she has responsibility for applying them. These interpretations, via latent content analysis, yield two, very different meanings, and subsequently impacted the qualifier level in addition to the comprehensive level when analyzing this SPC in comparison to the CIDA Journal of Interior Design xxx

23 SPC. Therefore, identifying the KAs contained within this SPC is difficult for these researchers and perhaps for programs applying this requirement as well as site visitors gathering evidence of learned KAs. Other examples of potentially confusing language exist in both CIDA s and NAAB s SPC. Additionally, are the CIDA requirements too prescriptive or are they prescriptive enough? This latter question was beyond the scope of the present study but is an area worthy of future research and discussion. Note The NAAB 2009 Conditions incorporate studio culture in a more comprehensive way than previous conditions, in part, a result of a study by the American Institute of Architecture Students (AIAS) Studio Culture Task Force (AIAS, 2002). While CIDA considers studio culture, perhaps more comprehensive incorporation into the Standards is needed. In recent history, NAAB has articulated a requirement to set goals and increase diversity of faculty and students. CIDA has not taken a similar action and should more concretely address the requirements in this area. This study has afforded the researchers a unique perspective of the accreditation requirements that will hopefully be considered, discussed, and debated in the coming months in discussion of accreditation requirements, professional education and practice, and the professions respective BOKs as both interior design and architecture move forward in their important roles to society. References Abbott, A. (1988). The system of professions: An essay on the division of expert labor. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. American Institute of Architects. (2008). Interior design law causes lawsuit in Oklahoma. AIA Angle, 6(21). Retrieved October 23, 2008, from current. American Institute of Architects. (2009). AIA Tennessee volunteers for tough legislative duty. AIA Angle, 7(15). Retrieved August 25, 2009, from angle_nwsltr_ &archive=1. American Institute of Architecture Students. (2002). The redesign of studio culture: A report of the AIAS studio culture task force. Washington, DC: Author. Babbie, E. (2010). The practice of social research (12th ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth. Berg, B. (1989). Qualitative research methods for the social sciences. Needham, MA: Simon & Schuster. Boyer, E. (1990). Scholarship reconsidered: Priorities of the professoriate. Princeton, NJ: The Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching. Boyer, E., & Mitgang, L. (1996). Building community: A new future for architecture education and practice. Princeton, NJ: The Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching. Carpenter, D. M., II. (2006). Designing cartels: How industry insiders cut out competition. Retrieved October 21, 2006, from Design-Study.pdf. Council for Interior Design Accreditation (CIDA). (2008). Professional standards Retrieved February 25, 2009, from changes09.pdf. Council for Interior Design Accreditation (CIDA). (n.d.). Frequently asked questions. Retrieved February 25, 2009, from Creswell, J. (2009). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Guerin, D., & Martin, C. (2001). The interior design profession s body of knowledge: Its definition and documentation. Toronto, Ontario, Canada: The Association of Registered Interior Designers of Ontario (ARIDO). Martin, C., & Kroelinger, M. (2009). Comparison of CIDA professional standards and NAAB conditions. Proceedings of the Interior Design Educators Council Annual International Conference (pp ). St. Louis, MO. National Architectural Accrediting Board. (2004) Conditions. Retrieved February 25, 2009, from National Architectural Accrediting Board. (2009) Conditions for accreditation. Retrieved August 4, 2009, from naab.org/documents/home_origin.aspx?path=public+ Documents\Accreditation. National Architectural Accrediting Board. (n.d.). FAQs. Retrieved February 23, 2009, from aspx. Journal of Interior Design xxxi

24 Poldma, T. (2008). Interior design at a crossroads: Embracing specificity through process, research, and knowledge. Journal of Interior Design, 33(3), iii xvi. Sommer, R., & Sommer, B. (2002). A practical guide to behavioral research: Tools and techniques (5th ed.). New York: Oxford University Press. Stemler, S. (2001). An overview of content analysis. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, 7(17), Retrieved August 11, 2009, from n=17. Zeisel, J. (2006). Inquiry by design: Environmental/behavior/ neuroscience in architecture, interiors, landscape, and planning. New York: W. W. Norton & Company, Inc. Caren S. Martin, Ph.D., CID-MN is an Assistant Professor of interior design at the University of Minnesota. Before joining the academy, she practiced non-residential interior design and project management for nearly 20 years. Martin served two terms on Minnesota s professional licensing board and is a CIDA site visitor. In 2009 she was inducted into the ASID College of Fellows and she serves on ASID s Legislative and Codes Advisory Council. Her scholarship focuses on opportunities and threats facing the interior design profession. Martin authored Rebuttal of the Report by the Institute for Justice Entitled Designing Cartels: How Industry Insiders Cut Out Competition (Journal of Interior Design) and the book Interior Design: From Practice to Profession (ASID). With Denise Guerin, she co-authored The Interior Design Profession s Body of Knowledge, 2005 edition. Together, they co-created InformeDesign, and Martin serves as its Director. Martin is also co-editor of The State of the Interior Design Profession to be published in early 2010 (Fairchild). Michael D. Kroelinger, Ph.D., FIIDA, AIA, LC, is a Professor and the Executive Dean of the newly created Herberger Institute for Design and the Arts at Arizona State University. Kroelinger has lectured extensively on various aspects of the built environment and has conducted research projects that evaluate how buildings perform and how they should be designed. He maintains relationships with universities throughout the world and is a frequent lecturer on architectural lighting and daylighting. Prior to his faculty appointments, Kroelinger practiced full time and was previously an officer in the US Army. A partner in MK Design Associates in Tempe, Arizona, the firm provides daylighting, energy, and architectural lighting consultation and research. Kroelinger is a Registered Architect in Arizona and is also Lighting Certified by the National Council on Qualifications for the Lighting Professions. Kroelinger has a doctoral degree from the University of Tennessee and an M.Arch. from the University of Arizona. Journal of Interior Design xxxii