How do we know when we and others understand something?

(COPYRIGHT © 2010 MIKAEL POWELL. All Rights Reserved)
The question “How do we know when we and others understand something?” is very interesting to me because it actually queries the depth of learning and the validity of the knowledge. This week’s readings and discussion cites the inability of students to understand the lesson well enough to apply it outside of class and the absurdity of trying to teach the totality of human knowledge to the detriment of focusing on the important.

Likewise, in university arts and design education, while each professor has an opinion as to what is most valid to learn and how deeply the student must grasp the concepts, the final arbitrator is the college accreditation boards (CIDA for Interior Design and NAAB for Architecture). CIDA describes understanding as “a thorough comprehension of concepts and their interrelationships… [as] demonstrated in completed student work, or may be found through student interviews” (CIDA 2009 Standards).

Validity is prescribed in the framework of interior design practice and the historical, theoretical, and technical contents of interior design practice. Likewise, NAAB describes understanding as “the capacity to classify, compare, summarize, explain and/or interpret information” which is evidenced by proficiency in using specific information to accomplish a task, correctly selecting the appropriate information, and accurately applying it to the solution of a specific problem, while also distinguishing the effects of its implementation” (NAAB 2009 standards).

With both standards seemingly aligned with the tenets of teaching for deep understanding, it seems strange that significant teaching practices in university arts and design are rooted to the practice of didactic instruction with coursework from the History of Architecture to Building Construction Technical courses delivered to present an overview of the world and assess rote responses. Perhaps this is because most architecture professors have no formal training in teaching. The terminal degree in architecture and design is the Masters and most instructors were project architects or project designers that led teams of designers at a firm. Master degrees in design and architecture do not include teacher training, but rather, offer specialization in a project type. Many professors rely on their university experiences as a student in the latter 1970’s and 1980’s. Even a PhD in architecture does not include instruction in teaching at the university level.

Regardless, with accreditation standards that set application as the test for determining how we know when we and others understand something, pedagogical practices should eventually revise themselves.

image from http://edcommunity.apple.com/ali/galleryfiles/16536/2_Faculty_in_fog_of_UC.jpg