ACQA – UOM survey

The survey was conducted in order to determine the level of representation of practice in the existing curricula at the Faculties of Architecture (UNSA, UBL, SUM and UOM), as well as the achieved cooperation with external companies (“stakeholders”).

The survey was implemented through two segments:

• SURVEY FOR THE ACADEMIC STAFF
• SURVEY FOR CURRENT STUDENTS AND FOR ALUMNI

23 survey participants

Professors and Teaching Assistants, Faculty of Architecture, Podgorica, UoM

//   It was recognized that there is a satisfactory level of representation of practice in the existing curriculum, but that it needs to be partially improved.

(52.2% of of survey answers)

//   The academic staff sees a potential improvement of the curriculum through the following activities:

•   by intensifying cooperation with local and state institutions, through concrete interventions in (urban) space
•   organizing professional practice during the summer vacation
•   opening of institutes and innovation centers that would strengthen the connection between science and practis
•   creation of an online platform for better communication and ”market recognition”
•   by organizing workshops where employers would recognize and “recruit” students who stand out with quality work according to stakeholder profiling, and through the implementation of solutions in practice
•   organization of interactive events aimed at networking students and people from practice
•   the introduction of dual education and taking exams partially based on practical work
•   adapting the teaching program to technological requirements in real time     

73 survey participants   

Students 61,6% and Alumni 38,4%, Faculty of Architecture, Podgorica, UoM

//   We conclude that students, although there is a significant representation of various forms of practical teaching (> 25%), perceive that it is necessary to significantly increase the percentage of practical subjects, as well as professional practice during their studies. Students (57.5%) do not perceive synthesis project, where they practically address specific problems and practice with teaching assistants and professors as a form of practice, even though it is widely represented.

//   The students see a potential improvement of the curriculum through the following activities:

• Introduce mandatory professional practise in the curriculum (most responses were related to this; it already exists in the five-year integrated plan and program since 2017, 5+0)

• Employ a larger number of experts from praxis in the teaching process

• Continuously organizing site visits

 • Visits to architectural firms (volunteering in firms )

• Monitoring legislative changes during studies

• Integrating subjects on the same project (construction, architecture, urban planning, new technologies)

• Organizing workshops

• Partnerships with firms (architectural and landscape biro) abroad

• Establishing an Institute at the faculty where professors and associates would design and students would be actively involved

• Introduce a requirement for at least one synthetic project to be completed at the level of the main project, so that students go through the complete work process before entering practice.

//   Most of the answers from alumni state that it is necessary to improve the curriculum, with the aim of greater participation of practice in the teaching process itself. That is the expected answer for alumni who completed their studies in the 3+1 or 3+2 program. The 5+0 program significantly improved the representation of practice, through a specific teaching subject in the 5th year of study called “professional practice” . In addition to that, the students of the 5+0 program show through their answers that they would like cooperation with practice enabling firms outside the faculty to be strengthened even more (bureaus, state institutions, etc.).

//   The curriculum was graded with an average grade of 3 (moderately satisfactory/middle grade) in terms of elective modules related to practice (34.2% of answers), despite the significant improvement of the 5+0 curriculum since 2017. This leads us to the conclusion that it is still necessary to revise the current plan, as well as investigate the quality of the subject “professional practice” that is compulsory in the 5th year. Also, the question arises as to whether it is necessary to monitor the quality of the professional practice in the bureaus in order to make sure whether the “stakeholders” are sufficiently committed to the assumed obligations toward students.