Checking for non-preferred file/folder path names (may take a long time depending on the number of files/folders) ...
This resource contains some files/folders that have non-preferred characters in their name. Show non-conforming files/folders.
This resource contains content types with files that need to be updated to match with metadata changes. Show content type files that need updating.
| Authors: |
|
|
|---|---|---|
| Owners: |
|
This resource does not have an owner who is an active HydroShare user. Contact CUAHSI (help@cuahsi.org) for information on this resource. |
| Type: | Resource | |
| Storage: | The size of this resource is 28.1 KB | |
| Created: | Feb 12, 2026 at 5:56 a.m. (UTC) | |
| Last updated: | Feb 12, 2026 at 8:43 a.m. (UTC) | |
| Citation: | See how to cite this resource |
| Sharing Status: | Public |
|---|---|
| Views: | 42 |
| Downloads: | 3 |
| +1 Votes: | Be the first one to this. |
| Comments: | No comments (yet) |
Abstract
This supplementary material details the validation procedures, rubric operationalization, and effect size computation supporting Reviewer #1. In Spring 2025, the three-cycle site analysis model was implemented in Design III with an independent cohort (not included in the 2021–2024 longitudinal comparison) to test whether the instructional workflow remains effective under the same studio learning objectives. Student design outcomes were assessed using the manuscript’s established rubric dimensions: site evidence integration, conceptual clarity, responsiveness to context, and design resolution. Rubric descriptors were aligned with studio learning outcomes and applied consistently across cohorts; where multiple jurors are involved, calibration prior to scoring is recommended. Between-group differences were examined using independent-samples t-tests and a two-way ANOVA assessing the effects of instructional method, year, and their interaction, with assumptions considered conceptually (independence, approximate normality, and comparable variance). Educational impact was further quantified using Cohen’s d based on pooled standard deviation. This work aligns with Yahia et al. (2023) while extending it through performance-based outcomes, cohort comparisons, and effect-size reporting.
Subject Keywords
Content
How to Cite
This resource is shared under the Creative Commons Attribution CC BY.
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
Comments
There are currently no comments
New Comment