A systematic approach to evaluating architectural portfolios: architectural portfolio evaluation rubric (APER).
Saved in:
| Title: | A systematic approach to evaluating architectural portfolios: architectural portfolio evaluation rubric (APER). |
|---|---|
| Authors: | Tastan, Hasan1 (AUTHOR) hasantastn@gmail.com, Er, İhsan Erdem1 (AUTHOR) erdem.er@yildiz.edu.tr |
| Source: | International Journal of Technology & Design Education. Nov2025, Vol. 35 Issue 5, p2093-2128. 36p. |
| Subjects: | Architectural education, Scoring rubrics, Quantitative research, Professional peer review, Employment portfolios, Delphi method |
| Abstract: | This study presents the development and validation process of an architectural portfolio evaluation rubric (APER) aimed at assessing the quality and effectiveness of architectural portfolios. The research adopts a systematic approach, employing a series of consecutive methods to construct and validate the rubric. Firstly, a thorough examination of relevant literature is conducted to determine the appropriate criteria. After, the modified Delphi technique is employed to validate the rubric with input from subject-matter experts. Fifteen field experts attempt to achieve consensus by refining the rubric via multiple rounds of qualitative and quantitative data collection. The study also addresses the raters' agreement and consistency of the rubric through statistical analyses, including Fleiss's kappa coefficient, intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC), and generalizability coefficient based on generalizability theory (G theory). Findings indicate that the APER provides a robust framework for evaluating architectural portfolios, facilitating informed decision-making in academic and professional contexts. The study contributes to the continuing discussion about portfolio assessment approaches in architecture, providing significant insights for learners, practitioners, and scholars. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
| Copyright of International Journal of Technology & Design Education is the property of Springer Nature and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.) | |
| Database: | Engineering Source |
|
Full text is not displayed to guests.
Login for full access.
|
|
| Abstract: | This study presents the development and validation process of an architectural portfolio evaluation rubric (APER) aimed at assessing the quality and effectiveness of architectural portfolios. The research adopts a systematic approach, employing a series of consecutive methods to construct and validate the rubric. Firstly, a thorough examination of relevant literature is conducted to determine the appropriate criteria. After, the modified Delphi technique is employed to validate the rubric with input from subject-matter experts. Fifteen field experts attempt to achieve consensus by refining the rubric via multiple rounds of qualitative and quantitative data collection. The study also addresses the raters' agreement and consistency of the rubric through statistical analyses, including Fleiss's kappa coefficient, intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC), and generalizability coefficient based on generalizability theory (G theory). Findings indicate that the APER provides a robust framework for evaluating architectural portfolios, facilitating informed decision-making in academic and professional contexts. The study contributes to the continuing discussion about portfolio assessment approaches in architecture, providing significant insights for learners, practitioners, and scholars. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 09577572 |
| DOI: | 10.1007/s10798-025-09980-3 |
