This paper addresses the history and culture of how knowledge of environ-metal studies is validated, encouraged and rewarded in its developmentwithin universities.Both in the loftiest theoretical and conceptual arenas and in the practicalrealms of university legitimation, faculties of arcitecture are facing seriouschallenges to their conceptualizations of what forms knowledge productionor scholarly activity. Quections are being raised as to what forms scholar-ship, both as creative activity as well as research and publication. Some-times these questions have been raised In the form of the university imposi-tion of guidelines, over strenous faculty objection, for what are appropriatescholarly ativities. Other examples come from within faculties themselves,asking how should we decide which efforts are a contribution to knowledgein our fields. From whatever direction it emanates, the question of whatforms scholarship in architecture and how do we seek to validate it, Is inserious need of being addressed directly,This paper addresses how scholarly activity is being defined and evaluatedwithin arcihtectural education in North America. It identifies the models fordefining scholarly activities that are being used in a number of universityschools of architecture. It also identifies how these definitions are used toreword faculty performance. The paper then compares and contrasts thesemodels and seeks to identify where these models may provide benefits to thedevelopment of scholarship as well as where these models may inhibitscholarly activity and, thereby, provides a description of the current cul-ture f the production of knowledge in environmental studies. The presenter is in a nearly unique position to compile and present this in-formation. From his position as Editor of the Journal of Architectural andPlanning Research and from having conducted a survey of architecture, hehas assembled this information describing the culture facing researchersand knowledge producers within the university setting.