• Architecture school is: Not as difficult as it's made out to be if you're moderately mature and can manage your time
• If you could change 1 thing about Arch School, what would it be?: Decrease the design fluff and increase times 10 the professional practice / legal classes.  You gain nothing by rendering models 14hrs/day.  
• Is the crit culture of assailing student with negative feedback useful or ineffective?: Learn to present your ideas and deflect criticism with thoughtful answers.  If your project is shit and lazy, expect shitty comments.
• How long did it take you to recover, mentally, psychologically, socially etc, after graduating from Arch School? : Zero time. I'm not some fragile special snowflake.  Millennials, amiright?
• Could one go as far as to say that some people have PTSD as a result of Arch School? : No, that's an insult to people who have real PTSD from real events.  Art school is not that hard.

Have these pedestrian questions passed your school's ethics board yet?

After going to architecture graduate school after being in the military, and coming home from an actual war, PTSD from arch school? what a joke! Too many people don't know how shit things get out there.

abuse is the perception of the incompetent who won't do what it takes - "Jesus H Christ - what a bunch of babies" 

damn...these millennial are soft.  Arch school is like Disney land compared to real life.  

If some UMC White Kid is being berated by a UMC Narcissistic Man Child dressed in all black and it's the worst thing they've gone through, Arch school must be heaven on earth.

-Is there abuse at Arch schools, whether done to you or observed being done to others?  NO

-Architecture School is : FUN

-If you could change 1 thing about Arch School, what would it be? More pro-practice info.  

-Is the crit culture of assailing student with negative feedback useful or ineffective? Most of what you do sucks.  If no one tells you they aren’t doing you any favors.  

-How long did it take you to recover, mentally, psychologically, socially etc, after graduating from Arch School?  I drank quite a bit afterwards, so just the following morning.  

=-Could one go as far as to say that some people have PTSD as a result of Arch School? NO.  If you do, you have deeper psychological issues and deficiencies.  Pstd is an appropriate response to war, not school.  School is a privilege.

Pelase create a proper survey tool through your school.

You are paying upwards of $50,000 a year to be abused? Let's get real, If you are in this year's special snowflake category you only have to have a pulse to graduate.

I remember one mid term crit after 3 days of all nighters, when a certain well known local architect dressed in black like some priest at a funeral was the visiting professor - he proceeded to dress us all down USMC style -" you people are idiots, you look stupid, my 8 year old can do better than all of you idiots put together"

-How long did it take you to recover, mentally, psychologically, socially etc, after graduating from Arch School?

I couldn't leave school fast enough to start my career.  Never looked back.

I thought arch school was great, fantastic actually. For the first two years. Then the last three years were completely unnecessary and I wish I could have used that time to learn how to be an architect. I didn't need 5 whole years of conditioning so, yeah, that part was awkward. Ot abusive but not smart either, rather selfish and silly. They were ready to see me go too. sigh-o-nar-uh

I have a picture of myself at my final review before graduation and I def. look really thin. Hmmm, archi-diet.

No PTSD that I recall, but there were a few "nervous breakdowns" and a couple of attempted suicides resulting in mental hospital stays.  I think that had more to do with the times (late 60s, early 70s).  Flunking out or even changing majors for an able bodied male could mean losing your student draft deferment and getting an all expense paid trip to Indochina courtesy of the US government.  As sucky as architecture school might have been, it was generally regarded as preferable to being shot at in the elephant grass by the Viet Cong.  Now, that was a real stresser.

Also, isn't it interesting that the overwhelming consensus for change is in the direction of less design theory and more real world emphasis?  Is anyone in the architecture academy listening???????

-Is there abuse at Arch schools, whether done to you or observed being done to others? 

Nope, never seen it, never heard about it. School has at least 50% female students.

-If you could change 1 thing about Arch School, what would it be?

Longer opening hours, more debates instead of lectures and better food in the cafeteria.

-Is the crit culture of assailing student with negative feedback useful or ineffective?

That's assuming there is a crit culture with negative feedback. We had crits and discussed our work but in a general constructive manner, or at least that's how I experienced it.

-How long did it take you to recover, mentally, psychologically, socially etc, after graduating from Arch School? 

I don't think I ever recovered from Arch School.

-Could one go as far as to say that some people have PTSD as a result of Arch School? 

I don't know anyone who did, but I'm not going to claim it couldn't happen. Mental health issues are a serious thing and different people respond differently in similar circumstances.

So a few more questions come to mind from these responses...

1/Why isn't anyone berating my profile name? Are there HnB fans out there or did I just fly under the radar? 

2/It seems abuse isn't observed in A-school as much as unfairness or simple incompetence.

Extending the logic--of fair/not fair leads to topic of meritocracy. Someone mentioned to me that wherever subjectivity is involved, then preferential treatment, unfairness and maybe even unjust or biased treatment can flourish. For example, who hasn't been annoyed with the sexploytocracy that some students deploy to stack the deck in their favor? Is that fair or not fair? 

Here's an interesting thought-chain on the topic for anyone interested in further reading: https://thoughtcatalog.com/meg...

Back to the subject of fair/not fair (sorry got distracted reading about folks using sex to get ahead): So I was chatting with an international student who had done Psychology undergrad, then went on to do her M.Arch in the Midwest. She said she hadn't experienced or observed much sexual harassment or fraternization between Profs and students back home. She speculated because Professors are held in a much higher light and prestige in her country. To compare: lots of architecture critics are treated like shit -- many are, not all: Tenure track dilly dallying anyone?) Also, she speculates that Psychology has more objective means to evaluate students. They got x out of 100 on the test. They published y papers per year. They did z studies with w results, etc. Whereas Architecture school has been fashioned into a more subjective world. Structures class is quite objective (I did great in it btw), Studio is quite subjective, as s=r*(theta) also points out. He felt that professor gave benefit doubt to others and burden of proof to him. Another poster had the brilliant idea that studio shouldn't critique design much at all (this design is GOOD, that design is BAD....it does sound ridiculous! As RickBAstoria puts it, architecture activity is composed of listening, observing, understanding and researching the nature of the problem before coming up with ideas to solve the design problem.--to draw an analogy, I see the process like a slow, beautiful, drawn-out foreplay and scintillation. The burst at the end is short and sweet, maybe even amazing but instantaneous, right?) So: Some is there objective criteria in studio culture? If the tenets of studio were to come up with ideas to solve a design problem, then maybe we could objectively evaluate projects on the extent to which they solve problems. Or, to what extent the student's design supports the student's thesis/objective. However architecture studio briefs sometimes don't even HAVE a problem to solve. Finally, we spoke about the Art World--which has arguably even MORE subjectivity involved than in architecture. We concluded  that when criteria is more subjective, then each pupil does and should do anything in their powers to gain subjective favor and be in the good graces of the tutor. Some tactics include: working a shit-ton, feigning or embodying utter dedication to critic's studio or job, even making critic in love with you, and thus in love with your smudgy chipboard, or your dodecahedron 3D printed fun house. It's the difference between languishing at the back, or surging ahead to win awards, win travel grants, land that unpaid but prestigious internship, or get choice appointments in the Academy post-graduation. At least in the real world of architecture, there ARE objective criteria. Clients WILL fire you if you dilly-dally on their dime. Anyways...I could go on. Happy 4th everyone! 

Thanks Rando for your feedback. I have experienced abuse--not the tie up and whip kind of abuse, but you know to abuse falls along a spectrum: 

a·buse verb

əˈbyo͞oz/

1. 1. use (something) to bad effect or for a bad purpose; misuse. "the judge abused his power by imposing the fines" synonyms: misuse, misapply, misemploy; More
2. 2. treat (a person or an animal) with cruelty or violence, especially regularly or repeatedly.

aaron betsky delivers a strong statement too that part of the game for studio culture is toughening you up for the profession which isn’t easy - you have to love it. Let’s not throw out baby w bath water. 

Obviously all this houldn’t be a gendered thing - But rather the fact that let’s face it, some are more capable of handling a-school. Anyone would thrive if given support, a pat on the back, affirmed that their voice matters. Or if you do (and all of us do) get a metaphorical kick in the shins, that’s part of the process —  that this is everyone’s experience and thus there’s solidarity.

If all critics acknowledged this that would in some way either at the start or midstream, that might make their behavior easier to swallow. It’s all what’s good for us, it’s tough love.

So here’s some vignettes, qualitative data, not negative or positive— tho I admit my questions above are leading and make it sound negative. You’ll see that there’s a navigation, reaction or response from me to different degrees of success. Warning dear reader—Please stop reading if you’re not wanting to take all day. It’s longwinded and granular because I want to give the sense of action and impact . If you do read on, would be great if you ranked it, from positive to negative (1-10:)

1: tough love/affectionate, meant to propel you to try harder and achieve more

2: some could interpret as rude or insulting but those folks would be too sensitive.  

3: it’s not nice, but not personal either. Thin skinned millennial, thicken up and grow some calluses. 

4: it’s dismissive but not disrespectful.

5:  neutral, or standard behavior for a-school. You got what you signed up for. 

6: mildly disrespectful 

7: mean and personal 

8: rude and insulting. Critic: Aren’t we all adults here? Are you really that insecure that you target a a sleep deprived underling?

9: spiteful or hostile behavior- you need help critic. 

10: Abusive, no place for this in an educational setting. 

Ok here are some stories: 

A: Action: When I was told by my critic that I talked too much during my final review. Response: I was armed w my iPhone anticipating this feedback. I had timed my presentation. I had spoken a reasonable 5 mins to introduce my project. Others in studio had certainly spoken longer.

B: action: When a critic told me after my final, during studio celebration that they’re just sorry I didn’t achieve more in studio, because they’ll  look back years later and say “you could’ve been great.” Reaction: I narrowed my eyes slightly and said, “I will be great.” When critic LPed me later on (I didn’t receive any warning, and it was unexpected -my final review had critics praising my work even tho they weren’t architects, they were rich as fuck politicians and developers...they mattered more in terms of giving me paid gigs eventually than that dude) I challenged the grade, got the opportunity to do more work and thus they changed my grade to a Pass.

C: When a critic told me in a review that it seems I don’t care about my work — to explain, I was simply a newbie who didn’t even know gasp how to put a vector mask in photoshop — look it up if you don’t know how to do it, it’ll save your PS  life — I summoned them to a meeting and told them that their  personalizing feedback in a review in front of my peers was completely inappropriate. Their jaw dropped and they apologized profusely, they didn’t intend to do that at all. There’s more. Anyone else want to tell?

—-

So I don’t say to you check your bias. Per Sir Apple Chrissy— it’s always about you. It’s the only thing you can actually control — I look first to what I can do. I do have externally recognized identities ie 99.99999999% would identify me as a woman— thus to some I am a target of certain behavior. When i want to check my or other’s biases, I ask: would you have said that to a man? How about a woman? How might your saying that to a black female be taken in a certain way? Is that the impact or impression you want to have on them? 

Ok now I’m really heading to my friend’s 4th of July pool party!

"Anyone would thrive if given support, a pat on the back, affirmed that their voice matters."

Thriving according to who(m?)?

One thing i noticed as I progressed through the program of undergraduate studies, I became more and more aware that  sexism and fraternization with the professors were just as much factors of doing well (in school) as simply being a naturally good designer. This awareness stemmed mostly from realizing when I myself was treated unfairly. On the other hand, The more people worked those into their favors the less obvious it become for them. For example, when the women in studios were blatantly disregarded in an obviously sexist way, any discussion about the injustice was put down and made up to be just an 'excuse' to not being good enough (in design) by the males of the class. Pointing out the biases to those in charge become frowned upon. Anyone who tries to one-up the professors, falls lower on the pecking order for things unrelated to school at all. They want you to just accept that you are powerless and move on because "it doesn't really matter". I think in any other major at university this would be easy to make aware but in arch school because of just how subjective it really is they can continually get away with it. You can't deny getting all the grades correct on an exam but not getting an A in a studio class while the guy who sits next to you who never even finishes a project does? It never adds up and it just continues to breed students that are egotistical, brownnosers that probably are not that great at designing anyways. 

Thanks Non Seq. I went to GodSgifttoDesign.

GSD is a high-priced SM chamber without the perks. LOL. kidding. 

So cool Miles Jaffe btw-Love your work! 

Fun! Very cool. See, Gds-Gft-Dsgn should let there students at least have fun. Then it would be an appropriate justification of the money spent!  

I got stiffed by a few professors, even when I had signed contracts and sent out invoices, who didn't pay me for side-work.  

I also put in way more work in the attempt to get a GRA than I should have.  

The hours everyone were expected to put in was pretty abusive.  I agree with a lot of sentiments above that if "you're mature and manage your time" you didn't have to put in crazy hours.  I was not "mature" enough to deflect the professor and peer pressure to "excel".  All the "mature" people who never pulled all nighters got Bs in studio.  Thinking back, that should have been acceptable, but at the time I was trying to prove some things and get paid, so I went above and beyond.

I also share a lot of sentiment that we should have been trained more for the real world.  What people don't seem to be remembering is that we had the classes, 2-3 structures courses, 2 construction courses, 2 architectural history courses, 2 MEP systems courses, etc... I'm sure it slightly varies at each school.  The problem is that whenever possible, schools seem to take opportunity to subvert these courses and wrap them back into studio time.  I think the BIGGEST change that would address this is that at least 2 of the studio semesters should be devoted to taking a previous studio penultimate project, calling that your "approved SD package" and going into DDs and CDs during studio without any major programming design changes.  

There were definitely a couple abusive (verbally) professors and/or critiques, and I'll admit that there were a couple times that I "broke" and became non-communicative after a couple all nighters and a poignant comment from a reviewer.  Sometimes in that state your mind just goes blank and you can't get back on track.  Then you get to listen to an adult roughly a decade your senior berate you for 10 minutes.  Luckily for me those were not typical, though for others it was more often.  Even if it isn't abuse, I'd definitely call it non-productive.  

In graduate school and for a few years post-grad, I got multiple opportunities to be that older reviewer.  When there were students who clearly did not put in the time on their projects, and were not showing presentation worthy material, I treated the conversation more like a desk crit, focused on a part of the project that I thought needed to be addressed, or was critical, pointed out projects in the room that had addressed the issue, and asked the student how they could go in that direction.  Also, I tried to spend less time on those students... as they clearly spent less time thinking about the task at hand, and there's no sense beating a dead horse.  

Interesting! We have some consensus forming on the one hand: Architecture school is FUN. 

For some, no recovery is needed. Maybe one needs to eat, sleep or recover from celebratory drinking. It's only physical recovery, not psychological. 

If someone ever did say that they experienced trauma and then developed post-traumatic stress disorder, then this is a by-product of them arriving in school with pre-existing psychological condition. A psychiatrist and psychologist could be helpful. They also might be psychologically deficient. They should change professions to other professions such as: 

• Armed forces occupations
• Clerical support workers
•  Craft and related trades workers
•  Elementary occupations

 Managers

• Plant and machine operators and assemblers

Well, to elaborate, and push a bit on the other side of the scale "consensus: fun...." pshhh...

After grad school I spent 4 years flipping houses and doing property condition assessments and doing construction administration due diligence for banks before I felt ready to go back to a design firm.  I definitely knew that my next "design" job I didn't want to be low enough on the totem poll to be the grunt or to be the one 'blamed' if things went wrong.  I say 'blamed' because I do believe that in most instances, if a project goes south the responsibility is correctly directed to the project manager, but that doesn't stop some PMs from trying to blame their team, and who wants to work for an inept PM.  

In the years between the recession 2009-2015 while I was getting my grad degree and doing non-traditional work, I did notice a significant change.  When I left, many firms still used autocad and many projects still had large teams.  A small project typically still had 2-3 people assigned to it.  Now, it seems to be all revit all the time, and except for the biggest projects in-house, you're assigned a lot of jobs that you do solo.  I guess the entire industry is running more lean now and there are less higher-up but non-managerial staff that don't know the projects.  I haven't seen a true sheet of redlines besides my own scribbles since I got back into the office and when I've been caught redlining stuff for interns, I've gotten some odd looks.  

@jose totes. And then there’s a hollowing out of the middle guy who actually can do redlines. The revit technician and revit honcho in office couldn’t see the value of having an efficient way of printing out to scale 11-17 which makes me think it never gets out of computer until the phased submissions. Physical Models are seldom made, and the chip or balsa wood models of quainter days are placed on pedestals as a relic. I don’t think  physical models are necessarily needed all the time however there’s a danger that scale and dimensions are not understood.

And god the “job captain” guy, who also claims to be Revit Honcho in office; this guy proliferates inefficiencies in the way to set up revit project throughout office. Upper management has no clue with how long it takes revit honcho’s team to make things, this the prisoners hold the hidden authority over the prison guards, so to speak. 

I don’t get the impatience of higher ups with teaching and showing the youngsters how to do things. Why is there a shame in not knowing and a snobbery with helping and giving clear direction?

I totally agree that somewhat clueless PMs then blame the other team members despite claiming in some contexts to not have hierarchies. Oh, hierarchies are alive and well.

The shirking, shafting professor is real: these folks are the powerholders in the schools and hire students for choice summer and winter internships. They pay or not—who cares because you get invaluable experience and unspoken leg up over your classmates. 

I should have slept with my professors then blackmail them for school favors. Except my dignity would be sullied and I would be seen as that woman.

There was a beautiful woman in my grad program who was dating a powerful guy. Paradoxically the critics sucked up to the guy and dismissed the girl — it’s a strange dynamic— you would think they’d try to suck up to the girlfriend who might then get them favors. It makes me realize how little I understand about the hidden structures of power, patronage, patriarchy. PPP? Why don’t we switch this conversation to abuse in the ARE 4.0 to 5.0 transition? 

"The shirking, shafting professor is real: these folks are the powerholders in the schools and hire students for choice summer and winter internships. They pay or not—who cares because you get invaluable experience and unspoken leg up over your classmates." 

So true. The work these students do is very rarely actual work that would be done in a real firm. So most of these talented students come out not knowing any idea about real-life architecture and are ready to head right back in (as professors). 

right and they don’t invite me back to be on their reviews since I want to be helpful as @jose up above in thread describes. And I sort of ridicule loser critics who are picking on vulnerable targets. Lame.

+++++ a culture of privilege is how choice internships are doled out. the criteria appears to be as follows:

1/are you sexy, interesting, or otherwise exotic? YES SEXY. not really interesting or exotic.

2/does your appearance fit within the brand of luxury and elite sophistication the professor is trying to build around himself/herself?  Does pasty skin count? 

3/does your pedigree fit within existing narrative structures?  are you easy to explain to people? Can't say I am. 

4/Do you have an elegant minority story which will be paraded around as a token of that individual/firms enlightenment?   There was this elegant minority who went back to own nation and started their own practice and is doing great work, having impact, bringing the invaluable skills she obtained while at a US a-school. It's a privilege and gift to have attended Ivy League. 

5/have you sucked up sufficiently to that professors design ethos?

Do these critics actually want brown-nosers or do they want people who will challenge their ism? I tell professors how wonderful they are for welcoming diverse feedback. 

6/are you a white dude with zero institutional barriers?  

Naw: White dude has to fit ALL of the above criteria:
1/Be sexy and interesting: sport pencil-thin 3% spandex American Apparel acid-washed jeans to show the full package.  

2/Yes, this is best achieved through slightly gelled hair, sunglasses, and access for glittery onesie halloween costumes at the drop of a hat. 

3/Yes, father and mother kept you in a Glass House for all the neighbors to see. You ate architecture for breakfast and given complex LEGO assemblies to complete.

4/Yes there's one somewhere around here- will get back to you. 

5/You don't suck up to professors because you BREATHE their design ethos. 

I hope Archinect is watching, because this Forum has got legs.

How about we not call it abuse though if what we are talking about is unsatisfactory performance. Then we can actually start to address the deficiencies instead of causing a stir. Actual abusive behaviors, starting with swearing, fool's errands, mockery, and name-calling, is a separate matter. 

Also emerging from recent discussion are key concepts for the workplace or school, and then when it's sent through the Architectural Meat Grinder this is how Architects frame it, define it, say It's a wrap or make a verdict on concept. 

Concept 1: Explain to peer or underling how to do something that they don't know how to do or shouldn't be expected to know.
Architects' Frame: That's condescending. You're telling the underling something they should know. I can't believe they don't know this. They should crawl under their desk, and I want to barf in my mouth. 

Concept 2: Collaborate and compromise.

Architects' verdict: Hung Jury. If the team is homogenous enough, then they can get along quite well in the sandbox--that's the power team. Go team, go. If team is rag-tag, riff raff, or a mixed bag, the the weakest link (we all know who THAT is) should be buying the supplies, cutting the plex, assembling the materials and summoning the troops to come to studio (all the communication is quite fucking exhausting. Who knew that Dana's class schedule, Michael's make-up psychiatrist appointment or Justin(e)'s structures homework group would leave only midnight as a time when everyone can come. Leave it to the All-stars to make the design decisions. The all-stars might not show up to model-building session, as they've already designed the damn thing and done all the hard work. It's only fair if the weaker ones carry out the vision. If  woman, POC, or POC woman leaves studio at 2 am when work's not done for personal reasons, discount and dismiss them: they're not pulling their weight. Consider reporting to TA or critic so you don't look bad at the final review when things go South. CYA - cover your ass.

Concept 3: Express a contrary point of view as there are more than one way to do things and maybe you've come across a better way to do them. 

Architect's Verdict: Who the fuck does so and so think they are? Blast them with a long explanation of how wall assemblies with 1/2" GWB (gyp) have different thicknesses than those with 5/8" GWB (gyp?) Oh and don't forget the backer board! 

Concept 4: Cooperate with the Project Team: you're all in this together. See something, say something on-site. You don't want the Contractor to screw-up and have to pay for it later.

Architect "It's a Wrap": Scribble down in your notebook, take copious pictures of it like at scene of crime (the more pictures, the more it puts Contractors in their place), send it to the client. Telling directions to contractor: not your job. 

Concept 5: Take your time to submit a water-tight drawing set. Confusion and harried sets make for unhappy contractors

Architect's frame it: Bury key information about one aspect of construction is another place of the Construction Documents where no contractor will find it until the "Oh Shit" moment when mistakes are made because you didn't have time to pack the page efficiently with drawings. Point them to the sheet with buried information. GOTCHA Supervisor! --OR-- Have contradictory information in Specifications and Drawing set. Example: Specifications for siding says WRC Cedar, clear vertical grain,  Drawings say: WRC Cedar rustic, plain bevel. When contractor buys wrong materials, Architect points out that the Specifications rule out the drawings. 

I want to understand why we scramble and make things more complicated when, as RickBAstoria says, it really isn't that complex what we do. It's 5% design/inspiration, 95% systematic, logical, list-making.... 

@mightyaa 

The profession is so broadly demanding of such a diversity of skills that it is all but impossible for one person to successfully manage all of the various aspects of even a modest project from start to finish.

In a small practice, add up the time spent "designing" - if it's over 5% you're incompetent and should be doing something else. The larger portion of the practice of architecture requires technical competence in building systems, properties of materials, dynamic environments, human factors, administration from codes and contracts to client management, etc.

Students should be exposed to all aspects of the profession instead of focused on the most glamorous one at the expense of all the others.  Instead we get a bunch of no-experience "designers" without any technical competence who are all set to be the next Pritzker winner.

The "basics" as you call them are the foundation of the profession. Ignoring them creates the situation I described.

Instead we get a bunch of no-experience "designers" without any technical competence who are all set to be the next Pritzker winner.

Yet, almost everybody here was trained to be the next Pritzker winner but somehow managed to make the transition into the day-to-day profession. So, apparently those skills can easily be obtained while working...

This needs repeating... architecture school is fun, enlightening, educational... but 5 years of this type of educational conditioning outside of the real and technical aspects of our profession is too much. It's like the guy at the gym who only works out his upper body and has chicken legs. This is a conclusion I drew during architecture school because of the emphasis on critical thinking, btw. If I just followed directions and did what I was told I wouldn't even be able to think such thoughts.

-Is there abuse at Arch schools, whether done to you or observed being done to others? Nope

-Architecture School is : When you learn what you like and don't like about architecture. What kind of architecture you want to lean towards. Make connections. Practice. Learn. Listen.<< Fill in the blank! 

-If you could change 1 thing about Arch School, what would it be? More exposure to real world situations and work flow. what it's like to work with other related fields (contractors,engineers, int. designers..) more encouragement on getting licensed.

-Is the crit culture of assailing student with negative feedback useful or ineffective? useful. why would other points of view on your work not be useful. as long as it's constructive. take it as a learning op.

-How long did it take you to recover, mentally, psychologically, socially etc, after graduating from Arch School?  recover from what... it's school, you chose to be there. no ones forcing you....

=-Could one go as far as to say that some people have PTSD as a result of Arch School? nope..more like they don't manage time well and get anxiety because of it. normal stresses of school not ptsd.

I found a pretty great book that sums it up in a lite but satisfying manner. 

Abuse in architecture schools?  Like financing and/or grading; when favoritism occurs by category of adult employment in class, offices, and out somewhere on campus.  Abuse like verbal, physical, and financial hardship on controlling interests apt to these properties of ownership by human cargo or indentured servants.

"these properties of ownership by human cargo or indentured servants." There are the Chosen Ones who are hand-picked by voracious studio critics. I know some folks who worked for GSD instructors over the summer on stipend or hourly. Stipend meant that the poor vassal would be expected to work day n night. Even folks I know were never reimbursed for their efforts. Therefore, the instructors have a leg-up in all the work they do--- renders for design competitions, etc. The hours aren't accounted for, the bills aren't paid. This is LA-LA land. This cycle and system ain't sustainable. It doesn't show the rest of us plebes a realistic picture of what being an architect is actually like.