Working life perspective

The programme is useful and prepares students for an ever-changing working life.

The programme offers enough breadth to allow doctoral students to sufficiently prepare themselves for both an academic career and a professional career. Compared to other theoretical disciplines, architecture has a thorough integration between research and working life and practice. For example, the higher education institution has a continuous engagement with society through two large research and collaboration platforms – DECODE and Grön Bostad – that integrate research with society and practice, involving several doctoral students. In addition, several doctoral students have worked at the department, either with teaching or administration, prior to being a doctoral student or during or following doctoral studies. The higher education institution has a high range of publications in different types of non-academic publications such as daily newspapers and industry specific magazines. Four doctoral students are industrial doctoral students working part time at an office or municipality. The department offers courses that are important for a professional career, such as the courses in scientific theory, research methodology, communication, and teaching. This ensures the programme continues to be relevant from a working life perspective.

However, the assessment panel notes the following weaknesses relating to preparation for working life outside the academy. The self-evaluation states that preparing for working life is largely up to the individual supervisor. This might provide unequal opportunities for the doctoral students regarding to what extent they are prepared for working life. Therefore, the upcoming revision of the syllabus as stated in the self-evaluation, with its focus on developing local goals in this area, is welcome.

The programme's design and teaching/learning activities are systematically followed up to ensure that it is useful and prepares for working life. The results of the follow-up are translated, when necessary, into actions for quality improvement, and feedback is given to relevant stakeholders.

According to the self-evaluation, the systematic follow-up of the working life perspective includes development dialogues, research training meetings, and questionnaires. ResArc has carried out two general surveys for architecture doctoral students, one addressed to the alumni in 2014 and one addressed to all active doctoral students in 2015. When necessary the results of the follow-up are translated into actions for quality improvement, and feedback is given to relevant stakeholders. For example, the self-evaluation notes that one representative of The Swedish Architects Association is a board member of ResArc and provides feedback from the private sector. The assessment panel notes, however, that the follow-up mentioned in the self-evaluation is quite general and rather vague. There is no evidence that the higher education institution uses specific mechanisms to develop and consolidate links with alumni and to use their feedback to improve the programme. Questions also arise regarding transferrable skills, competencies outside architecture, employment rates of graduates, competitiveness in winning postdoctoral awards, or success in the international context. This is a potential area of improvement.

In the overall assessment, the working life perspective is deemed to be satisfactory.