Thoughts on architectural education. Part 2. Architecture schools have long been a vibrant place for innovative ideas and radical change. Today, at a time when contemporary modes of thinking are challenging the idea of change itself, architectural educators are discerning the outline of the future architect’s mind: one like ours, yet profoundly different, and not yet clearly defined.
The education of an architect
Educators must consider afresh how the education of an architect is affected by these changes, and how, within the context of higher education, institutions that teach architecture and design should contribute to the process by which students adapt to a contemporary world. As part of this commitment, students who are the next generation of architects and designers must understand that they have a voice in this debate and be encouraged to weigh-in in an informed manner to pave the future of their architectural education and future practice.
Case in point. An apprenticeship in architecture is foremost an intellectual activity surrounding the fabrication of spaces for human habitation. Translating ideas into space is codified through curricula and sanctioned by a variety of degrees leading toward licensure and professional accountability. These degrees are an important first step for students to acquire a societal role as future community activists and leaders within their respective arenas.
In today’s complex social context, this means a heightened commitment to issues of social sustainability; a responsibility that I believe has moved the discipline of architecture—and in particular the role of the architect—from that of an architect specialist to that of a designer team generalist. This move has lessened the emphasis on academic design theory and formal bravura in favor of support for a sustainable path toward the environment in all forms and shapes.
The acquisition of knowledge
The traditional and formal model of imparting knowledge to students acquired its legitimacy in the French ideas of the 18th century through two important schools: The Ecole des Beaux-Arts and the Ecole Polytechnique; both situated in Paris, and at the center of a rising French cultural and encyclopedic influence. Since the founding of these schools, the ensuing democratization of the educational process has enabled generations of students to access a more formal design training and become masters of their art. These two foundational institutions were followed in the 20th century by the Bauhaus (Walter Gropius), the School of Ulm; (Max Bill) the University of Texas (Texas Rangers), the I.A.U.S (Peter Eisenman), The Cooper Union (John Hejduk), and Black Mountain College (Johannes Itten).
While the education of an architect varies from institution to institution, and from country to country, architectural programs are as much about grounding the inquiries of a constantly demanding student body—primarily through an understanding of their autobiography—as they are about providing an important framework for envisioning a dynamic future. Between tradition and innovation, today’s redefinition of the field of architecture has far reaching implications and should set itself at the intersection of a variety of adjustments ranging from the subtle to the radical.
A paradigmatic shift
The latter point is critical, as a new generation of students committed to various design fields will need to come to grips with a known paradigmatic shift. While my parents’ generation had to work within a box, I—as a late Baby Boomer—was asked to push the boundaries of that box. I understand that my generation was envied because of a prolonged time of world peace, and this despite continued tensions during the Cold War.
My generation witnessed and embraced a number of technological changes that were accompanied by the rise and development of culture-centric media. In this context, we were propelled into a world which demanded constant and increased prosthetic adjustment (e.g., finding a laptop essential to our daily work). All of this happened not over decades, but over a few years. On the other hand, our generation had stability in other ways; far from our parents lives that for many were ruined by profound losses between the two World Wars and the ensuing reconstruction of Europe into a new identity.
Today, Generation X, Millennials (Generation Y), and more recently the students that I mentor who are called Generation Z, no longer have a box that circumscribe their outlook. They are born with technology at their fingertips and live in a world defined primarily by their interaction with a screen and social media apps. Traditions are not part of their mode of living—although their daily rituals will eventually become tradition in the sense of an accepted pattern of behavior. Thus, Gen Z seems to have few stable references, and often express shock, fear, and joy about what their future holds for them.
Reinventing the practice
Yet, they have, in my opinion, the greatest opportunity to reinvent the practice of their calling (e.g., define a job/career that does not yet exist), and engage with the world in ways inconceivable during my studies. While I envy them for the rich and diverse opportunities this presents, the issues that they will need to confront are serious and call for nimbleness, resilience, and the promotion of innovative ideas. Students are now called on to set their gaze on how to steward the(ir) world. In this context, I like to provoke my students by saying that our generation polluted, and they have to now clean it up!
Urgent themes such as a lack of biodiversity; an increased digital gap among the population; resurgence of ancestral border conflicts with megalomaniac territorial claims; melting glaciers; ocean pollution due to microplastic and oil spills; irresponsible deforestation of the Amazon (not to mention the global hotspots of air pollution in many South Asian cities that cross municipal, state, and even national boundaries without regard for the impact upon population); and the continued effects of human destruction on cultural heritage sites because of religious dogma and economic pride are some of the pressing global questions that students will need to answer with plausible solutions.
If design and architecture strategies will become a meaningful force in responding to these outside forces is yet to be seen. One thing that is certain is that the word architecture has long since taken on new meaning: the architecture of the electrical car, the architecture of the brain, the architecture of warfare, the architecture of healthcare, the architecture of the Kyoto Protocol.
The praxis of architecture
The praxis of architecture has major influence on architecture schools from the erosion of traditional professional boundaries through time and distance; the broadening scope of interdisciplinary design projects by including non-design disciplines; the integration of global concepts as prerequisite to new modes of design thinking; an aging population; the holistic recognition of the importance of sustainable change and the urgent need for social justice; the off-shoring of select project components; the increased public awareness and democratization of design issues; the creation of new modes of design productions associated with a revolution in digital technology; and the leveraging of the challenges and the yet untapped presence of virtual reality (VR), augmented reality (AR), and Artificial Intelligence (AI). The latter tools allow powerful creative venues that have, in their own right, ushered the discipline of architecture and design into so many exhilarating unknown directions.
The potential within this new landscape is immense and both students and educators are acquiring responsibilities that are more complex and challenging than ever before. However, from all of the opinions on architecture and design education, the most important one rests on the conviction that there are few activities more important to the health of society than how it conceives, designs, and builds its environment. Central to this argument is that the education of design professionals is vitally important to social issues and the fundamental cultural values we bring to the students’ education.
Of course, these observations mean a variety of things. One important issue is that students entering architecture schools today are the product of globalization. They experience space and places instantly and simultaneously, yet their approach to real and virtual space seems to happen with little coherence and memory. This is further exacerbated by the immediacy of access to images, symbols and ideas that are in their own right astonishingly powerful, yet lack a hierarchy of values. For most students, this ubiquity seems to be innate and natural if not addressed and discussed generationally.
Conclusion
As a result, architectural education needs to respond and provide a much—and perhaps new—grounding. While any design process should value the setting of ideas into space through an empirical process (aka., learn-by-doing, or the art of making), the aesthetic adventure of any project should not only come from a developed and confident sense of perception, but first and foremost reflect unformed ideas students have of the world; those that primarily focus on the creation of places for human habitation.
If one truly believes that an architect must consider fundamental questions such as how do people live, how do people interact in cities (in public spaces and in buildings) and rural areas, then architecture’s role should make every effort to improve lives. Only then will the architectural built artifact be successful, and this, if architects (we) are willing to take a genuine interest in those lives.
Today’s academic environment could not be more promising as it offers the finest setting to debate the true challenges and meaningful articulations from which an enriched design professional may emerge. Students and faculty should find a complicity to engage in some of these critical discussions with intellectual acuity and maturity. Perhaps as the most paradigmatic shift, administrative leaders and faculty can be instrumental in reengaging students with issues during their academic tenure, with an obvious result of celebrating the creation of fascinating new places where alumni will unfold their careers.
Thoughts on architectural education. Part 1
Some thoughts on teaching. Part 1
Some thoughts on teaching. Part 2