as a council member, this issue is directly under my turf. there are a few things i cant comment here until we resort this thing out. but let me point a few things to clarify the issue:

i. LAM through the council of accreditation and architecture education (CAAEM) have approved UNITAR to run an architecture course.

ii. UNITAR ran it for 2-3 semesters, taking a few batches of students.

iii. UNITAR programmes came under review by their board of directors (or something), and decided some of the programmes are not feasible to run. one of it is the architecture programme.

currently CAAEM is advising the architecture school, the students and the parents on the possibilities, which i cannot discuss here yet.

it's unsustainable, i guess. architecture has one of the smallest lecturer:student ratio. the board set the maximum of 1:15. compare this to most other courses that has 1:100 ratio, it's very hard to break even.

i cant, yet.

this has always been the issue with our programme. private schools struggle to start because of the high requirements set by the board. there were other schools that had such trouble before, but it didnt get much publicity. i guess this is UNITAR, i more recognized name in the private education scene.

because we regulate anything about architecture education. if people have any issues with a school of architecture, there are two parties that will be responsible and could take action: MOHE and LAM. and under LAM, it falls under the jurisdiction of CAAEM.

as u might be aware, we take care of our own. even if they're just 1st year architecture students.