Site Scoring In Architectural Education: Assessment Structures and Decision Logic In Undergraduate Final Projects

Site scoring is commonly employed in architectural education to compare alternative locations, yet limited empirical evidence exists regarding how assessment structures and decision logic are documented in undergraduate design projects. This study examines site selection practices in 173 undergraduate final project reports published at Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia between 2023 and 2025. Using descriptive document analysis, quantitative mapping and thematic coding were conducted to examine site alternatives, assessment criteria, scoring scales, weighting, aggregation procedures, and decision-making functions. Of the 173 reports, 104 (60.1%) documented site comparisons, while 96 contained numerical scoring entries. Three-site comparisons predominated (73.1%), with accessibility and transportation (94.2%) and location and functional relationships (87.5%) emerging as the most frequently recorded criteria categories. Among reports with numerical entries, 91 (94.8%) employed unweighted additive scoring, while only five (5.2%) documented explicit criterion weights. Two illustrative cases revealed that eligibility-related spatial planning criteria could influence comparative rankings differently, highlighting the distinction between numerical contributions and regulatory eligibility. These findings suggest that numerical scoring structures, although useful for organizing comparisons, do not necessarily communicate the underlying decision-making functions of assessment criteria. The study identifies three interconnected areas for strengthening architectural education: criteria formulation, scoring and aggregation literacy, and decision-rule literacy. Emphasizing these dimensions can improve methodological traceability and support more transparent, context-sensitive site selection decisions.