The Landscape Performance Series offers resources for faculty to give landscape architecture students the awareness and skills they need to design for, evaluate, and communicate the impact of their work. When students have these skills, they are better equipped to design high-performance landscapes and to advocate for the value of landscape solutions upon entering the workforce. Accredited university programs are required to incorporate landscape performance into their curricula, since landscape performance has been included in the Landscape Architectural Accreditation Board (LAAB) Accreditation standards since 2016. 

In August 2024, LAF convened a group of faculty who will be teaching landscape performance courses during the 2024-25 school year. During this informal conversation, faculty shared their experiences and observations on teaching landscape performance at undergraduate and graduate levels. Below key takeaways from the conversation are presented. 

Faculty use a variety of strategies for teaching landscape performance:

• Most courses incorporate some combination of selection, testing, and/or critique of landscape performance tools and methods – including both field measurement and the use of predictive tools and modeling.
• All courses utilize content from LAF’s Landscape Performance Series.
• Many courses engage students in data collection for real-world projects. Some faculty assign students to collect data at the same site together or in groups, while others have students collect data at varied sites individually. Some faculty have taught courses that focus on the same site over many years, while others change field sites for each version of the course. Data collected as part of coursework ranges from publication-quality to one-off, lower quality data useful primarily as a teaching tool.
• Data collected during courses can be put to good use in communication with project stakeholders and ongoing partners. For example, faculty reported using student-generated landscape performance data during conversations with campus landscape managers, who respond well to talking in terms of numbers. Conversely, faculty who have collaborated with Indigenous partners were advised to not commodify how landscape performance and benefits are communicated – citing the shared importance of reciprocity with the land in Indigenous worldviews.
• Faculty described connecting their courses to other courses within the curriculum, for example, pairing a landscape performance course with a project assigned through a separate site implementation or design-build course. A site implementation course requires students to develop details like grading, planting plans, etc., which means they have enough information to conduct realistic performance projections and assessments for the landscape performance course.
• Several faculty assign students to develop mini Case Study Briefs using LAF’s model as part of their course. While several faculty tested an approach where each student in the course evaluated a different project, generally faculty felt that multiple students working together to evaluate a single project is more effective.
• Faculty discussed which tools were the most important to purchase for on-site data collection to make best use of limited funding. Tools used by faculty included: HOBO sensors for temperature, humidity, and light; air quality sensors; infrared thermometers and FLIR cameras; double ring infiltrometers, tensiometers and penetrometers to measure various aspects of soil; handheld weather stations; drones; pressure transducers and junction boxes to measure stormwater; rapid field tests for water quality; nets and cards for macroinvertebrate sampling; cellphone/mobile data software; wildlife cameras; and sound meters for bat sonar and birds.
• The order in which landscape performance tools and methods are introduced is important. One faculty described first introducing students to regional-scale tools like InVEST along with scenario generators, remote sensing tools, and python script. After exposure to these larger data sets and working at a more regional scale, students are more comfortable when more site-scale LAF resources and field assessment techniques are introduced.

Faculty reported positive impacts of teaching landscape performance:

• Students learn to use performance-focused language, speaking in terms of benefits and value to effectively communicate and connect with stakeholders
• Students have received recognition for projects conducted during landscape performance courses; for example ASLA state chapter research awards, publishing opportunities, and presenting at conferences like CELA
• Students have received internships and job offers resulting from landscape performance-based collaborations with design firms as part of their course
• Students have gone on to integrate landscape performance knowledge gained through courses in their subsequent masters/capstone projects and PhD research
• Students are highly energized by using handheld tools and getting out in the field, to the extent that they purchase their own tools to keep collecting data after the course is over and to use when they intern with or are hired by design firms
• A landscape performance course that can be taken by students who are pursuing degrees outside of landscape architecture can be a strong recruiting tool, as students of varied backgrounds seem to quickly connect to landscape architecture through the lens of landscape performance

Faculty discussed challenges in teaching landscape performance:

• When students take landscape performance courses earlier in their studies, or at a bachelors’ degree level, it is essential to get them up to speed on sustainability concepts more broadly before or in tandem with landscape performance topics
• Students often need more support than anticipated in basic scientific methods (even those with a science background) as part of landscape performance courses
• When landscape performance courses that involve field collection at a single site are held many times, large data sets are generated. It is difficult to leave enough time in courses for extensive data processing by students. When desired, data processing may require additional support outside of the course – for example with a research assistant, or a year of the course that focuses only on processing data rather than collecting new data.
• Economic benefits are one of the most difficult landscape performance topics to teach. Starting with maintenance savings can be the most manageable and easily understood by students.

For more resources on teaching landscape performance including sample teaching materials, syllabi, and reading lists, visit Resources for Educators.

Thank you to faculty participants in the conversation: Emily McCoy and Carla Delcambre (North Carolina State University), Anthony Fettes (University of New Mexico), Jessica Canfield (Kansas State University), Wonmin Sohn (Michigan State University), and Hongbing Tang (University of Rhode Island).

If you are currently teaching a university course on landscape performance, please reach out to Megan Barnes at email hidden; JavaScript is required for inclusion in future conversations.