Assessment Plan | LAEP
LAEP Mission Statement
We prepare and inform exceptional practitioners, scholars, leaders, and citizens to address the challenges of landscapes and communities across the globe.
Vision
To be a premier academic program which empowers individuals and communities to make aesthetically, ecologically, and socially responsible landscape planning and design decisions in support of people and the environment.
Values
- Deliver an exceptional learning experience in preparation for practice. (Teaching)
- Drive impactful research and creative excellence. (Research)
- Empower prosperous local and global communities. (Community Engagement)
- Cultivate LAEP community and culture.
LAEP Assessment Plan
To ensure ongoing excellence in the delivery of an exceptional learning experience in preparation for practice, the Department of Landscape Architecture and Environmental Planning (LAEP) actively conducts assessments of its degree programs. These efforts include program review conducted by the LAEP Advancement Board, public juries, portfolio reviews, internal curriculum review, course review, and exit assessments. The primary assessment method used is the Landscape Architecture Accreditation Boards 6-year review process.
LAAB Professional Accreditation Standards
As a program with nationally accredited BLA and MLA degrees, LAEP’s degree programs are systematically reviewed by the Landscape Architecture Accreditation Board (LAAB). LAEP’s degree program became the 19th accredited program in North America when the BLA was provisionally accredited in 1966, and fully accredited in 1968. The BLA has been continuously accredited since that time, with the MLA accredited since 1986. These degrees are reviewed every 6 years, and were last assessed in the spring of 2023. LAEP undertakes a self-evaluation as part of the accreditation process. LAAB reviews the self-evaluation report and conducts rigorous on-campus reviews that focus upon the following 7 standards of assessment:
- Program mission and objectives
- Program Autonomy, Governance and Administration
- Professional curriculum
- Student and Program Outcomes
- Faculty
- Outreach to the institution, communities, alumni, and practitioners
- Facilities, equipment, and technology
While the entirety of LAEP’s self-evaluation report and LAAB’s accreditation review are forms of assessment, standards 3 and 4 are particularly central to USU’s goals for program assessment.
Standard 3 Professional Curriculum BLA
Standard 3 Professional Curriculum MLA
Standard 4 Student and Program Outcomes BLA
Standard 4 Student and Program Outcomes MLA
Both degree programs were given a full 6-year reaccreditation.
Advancement Board Review
LAEP maintains an independent panel of practitioners, academics and alumni to partner in assuring excellence in the program’s operations. Board members participate in three committees, including the Professional Development committee who oversee the Board’s assessment efforts. In addition to committee functions, the Board holds two annual meetings, during which members of the Advancement Board assess the program via the following activities:
- Interviews with students from each class level, including graduate students
- General review of students on their readiness to enter practice
- Review of curricula for applicability to current standards and emphases in professional practice
During the course of the year members of the Advancement Board also assess the program via the following activities:
- Reporting by Advancement Board members on recently graduated students and their performance in professional practice
- Interviews for job positions
- Participation in ASLA national student honor/merit award juries
Public Juries
Design education places a high priority on public critiques of design and planning solutions. LAEP courses annually integrate juried student presentations in studio classes as a means to utilize this most enduring of design assessment devices. Juries routinely include adjunct faculty, visiting scholars, off-campus professionals, alumni, and community stakeholders, as well as department faculty. Juries emphasize core areas of skill development, as well as the student’s command of specific course learning objectives. Juried presentations typically integrate a graded component, and may include written evaluations.
Portfolio Review
Students seeking entry to the BLA program undertake a matriculation process at the end of the sophomore year that includes the preparation and review of a design portfolio demonstrating evidence of core competencies and visual/graphic communication skills. Review of design portfolios provides LAEP an opportunity to assess the capstone work of students who have completed the lower division BLA curriculum. LAEP’s matriculation committee reviews the design portfolios, reports on their assessment to the entire LAEP faculty, who then consider the student outcomes as evidence of LAEP’s lower division program instruction efforts.
Portfolio Guidelines and Assessment Criteria are available for students on LAEP’s website at Matriculation Process, as well as additional information in LAEP’s Student Resources Canvas site.
Internal Curriculum Review
LAEP’s curriculum is reviewed annually by the department’s landscape architecture, environmental planning, technical skills programs (DMV, PDT), and PhD curriculum committees. The curriculum committee’s assessments are shared with the entire faculty annually, as are their recommendations for curriculum modifications, for consideration and consensus of the faculty.
In addition, the LAEP faculty, staff and students engage in a number of less formal reviews of the program and its progress. These include monthly LAEP faculty meetings, beginning and end of semester workshops to review the prior and prepare for the coming academic year, student interviews and discussion groups, and special initiatives such as the 2023-28 LAEP Strategic Plan process.
Course Review
Utah State University uses the IDEA Student Ratings of Instruction (IDEA SRI) system to gather end-of-semester feedback from students about their learning experiences in each course. This process emphasizes students’ self-reported progress toward specific learning objectives that the instructor has previously identified as essential or important for that course. Students rate their progress on a standardized set of objectives using a 1–5 scale, along with overall evaluations of the instructor and the course. Evaluations are anonymous. Instructors complete a Faculty Information Form before the evaluation period to identify which learning objectives align most closely with their course goals and are encouraged to discuss these with students to improve understanding and participation.
After the evaluation period closes, IDEA compiles results into detailed reports that include scores. The adjusted scores account for factors such as course difficulty and student motivation, allowing for fairer comparisons across different classes and instructors. The primary metric of effectiveness is “Progress on Relevant Objectives,” which reflects student growth in areas the instructor identified as key to learning. Faculty use these results to reflect on and improve their teaching practices to make meaningful, evidence-based improvements to course design, instruction, and student engagement.
Exit Assessments
LAEP’s graduating students are invited to complete an exit survey and participate in an exit interview at the end of their degree program. The exit survey assesses each students experience throughout their degree program and solicits critique for program improvement. Specifically, the following questions are asked:
- What is your immediate career plan?
- My education in LAEP has advanced my skills in… (various aspects such as writing, working on a team, development of a land ethic, etc.).
- How well do you feel the LAEP curriculum prepared you for your future activities (career, grad school, etc.)?
- Was the sequencing of courses appropriate?
- How do you rate the overall quality of your LAEP education?
As well as asking for general feedback and suggestions with regard to many of these questions and the others asked on the exit survey or during the exit interview.
LAEP Assessment Outcomes Data
LAAB Professional Accreditation Standards
In 2023, LAEP conducted a self-evaluation and underwent systematic review by LAAB for accreditation. LAEP’s BLA degree was granted continued accreditation for a period of six years with no recommendations affecting accreditation. LAEP’s MLA degree was granted continued accreditation for a period of six years subject to review of one recommendation affecting accreditation regarding Standard 3 Professional Curriculum.
BLA Notice of Accreditation
MLA Notice of Accreditation
Advancement Board Review
The LAEP Advancement Board did not identify any concerns in 2025 related to LAEP’s curriculum and therefore made no substantive recommendations, affirming satisfaction with the current structure and direction of LAEP’s academic offerings, noting strong enthusiasm and engagement among the students they interviewed.
Public Juries
Public juries serve a unique, continuous form of assessment. Corrective action within the courses during which juries occur emphasize assistance to the student (e.g., graphic presentation methods), and, to a lesser extent, the instructor (e.g., framing of the project). Consequently both manifold decisions resulting from both types of assessment are not findings readily reported here.
Portfolio Review
Assessment of students’ design portfolios is not made publicly available to maintain student confidentiality. LAEP faculty discuss portfolio reviews, and assess evidence of instruction in core competencies and visual/graphic communication skills, in a closed meeting each April.
In aggregate, the mean design portfolio score was 88.38, and the mean GPA of students completing the lower division LAEP curriculum was 3.76, in 2025. The mean design portfolio score was 82.32, and the mean GPA of students completing the lower division LAEP curriculum was 3.74, in 2024. The mean design portfolio score was 75.53, and the mean GPA of students completing the lower division LAEP curriculum was 3.79, in 2023.
Internal Curriculum Review
In 2025, following an extensive self-assessment process, LAEP outlined a set of curriculum changes including:
- Approving additional Depth Science course options for the BLA and environmental planning bachelor degrees.
- Approving additional Depth Social Science course options for the BLA and environmental planning bachelor degrees.
- Minor changes to the BLA and environmental planning bachelor degrees reflecting changes to USU’s general education requirements, allowing for more flexibility in meeting these requirements.
- Increasing the available elective credits in the BLA curriculum to allow for a BLA plus certificate curriculum model.
- Minor changes to the environmental planning degree program curriculums to address course sequencing and increased instruction in theory in the graduate programs.
To meet LAAB’s recommendation affecting accreditation with regard to the MLA program, the MLA curriculum has been revised to increase instruction in Woody Plant Materials and Planting Design. The LAEP faculty have assessed the provision of History/Theory in landscape architecture as sufficient at present, albeit the primary theory course is incorrectly referred to as Planning Theory. The LAEP faculty continues to discuss means of addressing deficiencies in Construction Technology in the MLA program. The MLA curriculum has also been revised to eliminate GIS instruction as core coursework to provide room within the curriculum for these additions in instruction. In addition, the LAEP faculty continue to adjust course sequencing as appropriate to ensure students outcome success.
Course Review
Courses in the LAEP department are above the IDEA system averages for Progress on Relevant Objectives, which reflects student growth in areas the instructors identified as key to learning. Compared to the IDEA database average, LAEP’s courses have been 6% Much Higher, 19% Higher, 67% Similar, 3% Lower, and 6% Much Lower.
Exit Assessments
The aggregate results of LAEP’s 2025 exit survey are:
- The majority of students indicate strongly agreeing or agreeing (on 5 point scale) that My education in LAEP has advanced by skills in… thinking critically, writing, public speaking, working on a team, information literacy, becoming a lifelong learner, creative problem solving, developing a land ethic, sensitivity to issues of the Intermountain West, the ability to practice as a leader in a complex global society, and conducting research.
- The majority of students (20 of 21 respondents) indicated that the LAEP curriculum was excellent (13) or average (7) in preparing them for their future activities (career, grad school, etc.).
- 12 of 20 graduating students indicated that the sequencing of courses was not appropriate.
- 12 of 21 graduating students indicated that the quality of their LAEP education was excellent, 7 indicated it was good, 1 indicated it was average, and 1 indicated it was fair.