I know a lot of people use adjunct positions as a means to gain tenure-track positions somewhere else - so it's probably good for them - but IMO - it really should be set up for professionals who practice in the area who care about teaching - and if someone is good you'd want to keep them around for a long time.
will - I don't think it's good for the students because it's a high-turnover position.
donna, I'll be sharing some 'news' shortly that might be able to change your teaching status (if you're willing to move to LA). Being an adjunct is tough. I second Orhan's view that adjuncts often bring fresh perspectives and state-of-the-profession wisdom to the classrooms that tenured faculty might lack (even if adjuncts don't have highly polished teaching chops).
oh, we had a frost this morning on the grass, luckily it didn't seem to hurt the citrus trees - so yes, california does get cold.
some advantages of being adjunct though, you have your eggs in different baskets, ample time to pursue practice of architecture in the field and being able to speak your mind without being part of inner faculty politics. it is just that pay is extremely low for the importance of the job, it is in fact, very scandalous..
i agree with orhan as far as the upside goes for students.
did that kinda gig before and my current position is halfway between proper professor and adjunct so i can see the benefits for students of having an outsider in the room, even with that lack of continuity. but as donna says the benefits to her (and me) are not so clear.
actually in my current position the salary is not bad so i can't complain on that end anymore. in which case i guess the system kinda works. job i have now would not have been possible without the previous experience...
the picketing starts tomorrow at CSU campuses. employer's message is "nothing today, less tomorrow" how can you not strike against an employer who says that?
yeah, that's the offer on the table. yet the chancellor of csu (and several campus presidents) have gotten record pay packages, and administrative staff now outnumber faculty. Oh, the chancellor isn't fighting for us in Sacramento (we got socked with a 22% reduction in state funds). so yes, the faculty are pissed. Guess this is our #occupy moment. makes me wonder if jumping from the frying pan into the fire was really a good idea.
I've heard spirulina is tasty, but I prefer wakame or nori. agar agar is just too bland.
lletdownl, hmm i saw that. tells you something about market-share of apple. although i think that per this wired article the abandonment has more to due with native HTML 5 capability than it does apple.
also i think it is an interesting data point in context of your comment (ft in last week's EP) on the Zaha jumped the shark thread re: ZHA creating an app.
hey! chicago... so where are you staying? the part that smells like sausage, the part that smells like chocolate, or the part that smells like feet? there's this one block where the three smells mingle into one intoxicating aroma - mmmm.... parfum de chicago.
wtf tint, sorry you're havin' such a rough go of it... come show me another city with lifted head singing... here is a tall bold slugger set vivid against the little soft cities...
toaster, they actually had to clean up the blommer chocolate factory emissions... wtf!
...and we dump our raw sewage in the river so St. Louisians swim in it!
Today was much better. I've been walking around with a big dopey grin
Which is prob why people keep asking me for directions - most of them I have been able to help!
I do! Would you even consider a young person, with an architecture degree, and a license to teach High Schoolers, but only 4 years work experience, and no research/thesis to show?
aw, sorry, tint - you happened to come during the only stretch of depressing weather we've had all year. Yes, nobody believes me but Chicago is usually sunny... Anyway, it should clear up today, so hopefully you're staying for a few more days...
They had to clean up the Blommer factory????? THAT EXPLAINS IT!!! I've be wondering where the choco smell went. Although I smelled it again recently for the first time in a long time.
i guess people are still smelling it... honestly, i haven't ridden down that way in while, so I'm not sure if whatever they had to do to their emissions stopped the smell... but it was one of the most wonderful things about chicago... you just ridden 8 miles, there's steep climb up to the corner of des plaines and kinzie, you navigate a nasty intersection, and look up... the sunlight is streaming through the city, your city, looks better than any postcard, the sun hits your face and you begin the descent down, the smell of chocolate grabs you, and the sweat evaporating rapidly off your face... you bike it almost everyday, you think you're the luckiest guy in the world...
Holy shiv. I went to Google street to reminisce, and the second K street bldg (i think that's what it's called) is up, and blocks the entire view... ruined! :'(
There are two major abilities needed to get the job - the ability to teach design processes tofolks who nothing about design (you seem to have this), and the potential ability to generate research/creative works to achieve tenure (we really don't want to go through the hiring process again in 5 years). So if you are really interested in engaging the landscape and have the other minimum requirements (like a terminal degree - MLA/MArch/MFA/PhD) for the gig, I hope you do apply! Pomona sort of feels like Texas with big pickup trucks, lots of highways, the county fair, and lots of cows...
What do you think about the fact that, at least as far as I know and please correct me if I’m wrong, it’s impossible to teach at a college level without a Master’s degree?
I would like to hear your opinion on this, particularly considering your recent thread “OccupyNCARB!”
i don't know how barry will answer, seeker, but i wouldn't say it's impossible - just unlikely. within the last decade i taught without a masters. i taught with several older architects who also had only their b.archs but had entered teaching prior to the current competitive environment. but, even after getting my masters, i couldn't find a next/fuller teaching position simply because of the competition i encountered: people with greater credentials who were angling for the same positions.
there are just too many people *with* masters and subsequent teaching and research and publishing experience for a young person with only a b.arch to get noticed UNLESS that person has a stellar record of work or some other distinguishing achievement.
depends which kind of m.arch you're talking about.
historically, an m.arch was additional education beyond a b.arch. you did the general education in architecture and then an m.arch was an opportunity to push further, whether to go to a particular school to study under a certain curriculum focus, to attach to certain faculty mentors, to focus on a particular thing yourself, or to otherwise channel your energy in a direction.
still, now that the m.arch is the first professional degree in a lot of places, it remains set apart from a b.arch in the way it's conducted. in b.arch you spend the first four years doing largely what you would do in the first four of a 4+2: general studies, structures, building tech, general studio, etc. then the '2' of a 4+2 is set apart, an opportunity to focus in the way that an m.arch had always been before, albeit with a little less freedom maybe. a big benefit is that in your first degree you may not know what you want but - if you were in b.arch - you finished in the same program you entered knowing nothing. in m.arch you have the opportunity to spend your last two years in a place your more educated/informed self can pick specifically based on the interests you've developed.
i don't think m.arch is universally better than b.arch, but it does put you in a different place for an *academic* post.
even the 4+2 m.arch is still not likely to make a teaching post easy. there are yet more advanced m.archs which require additional education beyond the '2'. they're distinguished by some schools as an m.arch1 vs m.arch2 or similar. there are so many different versions of degrees over the past decade, as university degree structures evolve, that it's generally a case-by-case issue: the school is going to look at what candidates have done, for how long, under whom and what kind of educational environment and rigor, what they've accomplished, and how they fit into the hiring school's big picture.
separate from all of this: in a lot of places a phd is becoming the standard to meet. again, there is just so much competition for so few positions.
As much as I value formal education, and I totally do, isn't much of the education of the architect done outside of the university? So then why isn't that type of education an important consideration for hiring staff to educate architects? Afterall, b arch grads aren't usually sitting around playing in the sandbox while their m arch colleagues go back to the classroom, they are gaining valuable educations themselves, aren't they?
those are rhetorical questions, right, tint? the work of the university is not only teaching but research and publishing. willing teachers are a dime-a-dozen, but those who can do effective research and get published are harder to come by.
the type of education that happens outside the university is likely to stay outside the university, though some universities are dabbling in getting their hands dirty with professional-type interactions. even those are pursued in an environment in which the students are buffered from the political, constructional, budgetary, marketing, and other practical concerns that offices have to face.
b.archs with professional experience are usually treated as fine for underpaid adjunct positions but unlikely to get into tenure track positions easily because they haven't shown that they can provide the kind of value ($$$, ranking, reputation) the university needs from them.
not good or right (or even universally true; i'm generalizing), but that's the way it typically works.
As an MLA/MArch in academia, I'm very aware the systemic bias against non-PhDs (ie, I can't get early career grants from the NSF and a myriad of other things). PhDs rule the ivory tower and begrudgingly accept terminal degrees in professional disciplines as nearly equal. From a training standpoint, PhDs do have expertise in advanced research methods that aren't provided at the masters level. At the masters level, there is an emphasis and training in critical thinking along with a disciplinary focus that isn't provided at the baccalaureate level. Undergrad education (even professional degrees) are required to provide a broad base (all those pesky general education requirements) to prepare folks for either graduate study or productive citizenship/lifelong learning. That is not to say that an undergraduate degree isn't sufficient to effectively teach, but that BArch or BLA isn't designed to provide you the skills for original scholarship. I've worked with very talented and expert folks (with decades of experience) with only a BArch - they had to jump through flaming hoops to get their research appointment.
From a practical perspective, completing an advanced (terminal) degree demonstrates the ability to pursue independent scholarship which is central to most tenure requirements. Not to say an exceptional candidate without those credentials is capable of that accomplishment.
Not all professional degrees MLA/MArch/MFAs are created equally. No, I'm not saying that the GSD is better than MSU - your individual choices in graduate school can open the door to academia. How do you do that? By participating in research projects and creating a strong independent thesis, not just taking the standard elective studios that most folks take at the upper level. Getting a TAship may help open doors, but isn't required. Being a brilliant designer isn't central to being an effective academic (it can help) - you need to develop and pursue an original topic of inquiry beyond school. Getting published helps (blogs aren't yet recognized as legitimate publications). Getting a post-professional degree does help, as does having a diverse educational background.
Many schools are now establishing 'professors in practice' that recognize exemplary professional practice. Most of these folks are gray-haired and have run successful practices for many years. These folks don't need the traditional academic pedigrees, just an impressive portfolio of built projects.
there are regional differences too in minimum credentials (colleges in the middle of the country have more PhDs more than the coastal schools do). Schools also vary in the emphasis between teaching and research - Cal Poly is very teaching intensive, but still requires the ability to produce scholarly/creative works.
I'm a crappy design teacher, as it turns out. Teaching design is a major skill that I don't have. I'd be really interested in being part of a program that focused more on the professional practice side of our discipline: I like questions with answers, though I do get far more of a thrill from an emotional design than from any "correct" answer.
yes, teaching intro to design is tough! If given a choice, there are other topics I'd rather be teaching too. but witnessing the 'ah-ha!' moments that the first few studios provide are priceless.
steven said: "separate from all of this: in a lot of places a phd is becoming the standard to meet. again, there is just so much competition for so few positions."
this is exactly why i decided to enter a phd program... even with an m.arch., one conference paper, several design awards, six years professional experience, and a publication of one of my projects i couldn't even get a whiff of a teaching position...
as far as teaching history/theory courses go, i used to think that an m.arch. and self-directed study/interest in history/theory was enough... now that i'm through all of my phd studies except for finishing my dissertation, i realize just how little i knew before... i now fall in the camp that believes that one shouldn't be teaching history/theory without an advanced degree...
now, even with all of the stuff listed above plus two years of TAing at an ivy league school, plus two years of teaching as an adjunct professor, plus being nearly done with a phd from an ivy league school it is still really difficult to even get an interview for tenure track positions because the competition is so high... such is the life in academia...
Phil, I hear your pain and agree the PhDs are required if you want to do original scholarship in history/theory. Most of the competition is in the old school traditional disciplinary focuses. Teaching gigs are also easier to find if you leave the overly popular coasts and head into the hinterlands.
There is less competition for sustainability posts as this is the new-n-hot field, but most schools don't produce folks that can teach it, so there is a shortage for a few more years.
(I think you should apply for Corner's gig at Penn)
"(I think you should apply for Corner's gig at Penn)"
hahaha, that would be amusing... i'm really interested to see how that one goes... particularly whether they go for another brand name... i don't even know who it could be... chris reed?
Having a 60s kind of evening: drinking an Old Fashioned (made with Jack Daniels - it's really, really good), eating steak, salad, and scalloped potatoes. Homemade Derby pie for dessert.
Thread Central
I know a lot of people use adjunct positions as a means to gain tenure-track positions somewhere else - so it's probably good for them - but IMO - it really should be set up for professionals who practice in the area who care about teaching - and if someone is good you'd want to keep them around for a long time.
will - I don't think it's good for the students because it's a high-turnover position.
donna, I'll be sharing some 'news' shortly that might be able to change your teaching status (if you're willing to move to LA). Being an adjunct is tough. I second Orhan's view that adjuncts often bring fresh perspectives and state-of-the-profession wisdom to the classrooms that tenured faculty might lack (even if adjuncts don't have highly polished teaching chops).
oh, we had a frost this morning on the grass, luckily it didn't seem to hurt the citrus trees - so yes, california does get cold.
hey Barry!
some advantages of being adjunct though, you have your eggs in different baskets, ample time to pursue practice of architecture in the field and being able to speak your mind without being part of inner faculty politics. it is just that pay is extremely low for the importance of the job, it is in fact, very scandalous..
It’s official, I’m on the jury of the International Algae Competition.
www.algaecompetition.com/participate/jurors/
Exactly, Orhan.
Exciting, Barry! What is your favorite algae?!
i agree with orhan as far as the upside goes for students.
did that kinda gig before and my current position is halfway between proper professor and adjunct so i can see the benefits for students of having an outsider in the room, even with that lack of continuity. but as donna says the benefits to her (and me) are not so clear.
actually in my current position the salary is not bad so i can't complain on that end anymore. in which case i guess the system kinda works. job i have now would not have been possible without the previous experience...
cool barry.
the picketing starts tomorrow at CSU campuses. employer's message is "nothing today, less tomorrow" how can you not strike against an employer who says that?
is that what they are offering ? wow.
yeah, that's the offer on the table. yet the chancellor of csu (and several campus presidents) have gotten record pay packages, and administrative staff now outnumber faculty. Oh, the chancellor isn't fighting for us in Sacramento (we got socked with a 22% reduction in state funds). so yes, the faculty are pissed. Guess this is our #occupy moment. makes me wonder if jumping from the frying pan into the fire was really a good idea.
I've heard spirulina is tasty, but I prefer wakame or nori. agar agar is just too bland.
Barry,
I always figured you for a Blue Algea kinda guy! I think they grow the stuff in Oregon.
Yep, the "higher education bubble" is about to burst, isn't it? I need to start setting up a school based on craft guilds. I'm only partly joking.
Made it to Chicago. Thought I would be really excited to be here but it is depressing. I see three shades of grey everywhere.
donna, wasn't that a comment you first made back in 2007?
oofda... bad news for anyone w/ a flash website...
http://www.chicagotribune.com/business/breaking/chi-adobe-cuts-flash-development-conceding-to-apple-20111109,0,693803.story
lletdownl, hmm i saw that. tells you something about market-share of apple. although i think that per this wired article the abandonment has more to due with native HTML 5 capability than it does apple.
also i think it is an interesting data point in context of your comment (ft in last week's EP) on the Zaha jumped the shark thread re: ZHA creating an app.
hi all.
Hum...think I will start the Tomas B. Crapper school of plumbing...it is a craft.
The three rules of plumbing as I learned at UA:
1. The boss is always right.
2. Paychecks come on Friday.
3. Shit flows downhill. See #1.
hey! chicago... so where are you staying? the part that smells like sausage, the part that smells like chocolate, or the part that smells like feet? there's this one block where the three smells mingle into one intoxicating aroma - mmmm.... parfum de chicago.
I'm in the part that smells like sewer and cigarettes.
ah - downtown, by the river.
did you know the reason the city dumps raw sewage into the river is to deter people from swimming in it?
barry , my short list:
christoph ingehoven
thomas herzog
thomas auer
hermann kaufmann
beat kämpfen
wtf tint, sorry you're havin' such a rough go of it... come show me another city with lifted head singing... here is a tall bold slugger set vivid against the little soft cities...
toaster, they actually had to clean up the blommer chocolate factory emissions... wtf!
...and we dump our raw sewage in the river so St. Louisians swim in it!
i love that our bridges smell like chocolate! its the best thing about biking to work
Today was much better. I've been walking around with a big dopey grin Which is prob why people keep asking me for directions - most of them I have been able to help!
Our ad is up! Anybody want to teach first year design (undergrad/grad)?
I do! Would you even consider a young person, with an architecture degree, and a license to teach High Schoolers, but only 4 years work experience, and no research/thesis to show?
aw, sorry, tint - you happened to come during the only stretch of depressing weather we've had all year. Yes, nobody believes me but Chicago is usually sunny... Anyway, it should clear up today, so hopefully you're staying for a few more days...
They had to clean up the Blommer factory????? THAT EXPLAINS IT!!! I've be wondering where the choco smell went. Although I smelled it again recently for the first time in a long time.
No, I don't believe Chicago is usually sunny! But then again I live in a city that has 300+ days of sun a year...
I am here through tomorrow evening. Been having fun walking around, taking pictures and talking to people.
How did I miss this until now?!
i guess people are still smelling it... honestly, i haven't ridden down that way in while, so I'm not sure if whatever they had to do to their emissions stopped the smell... but it was one of the most wonderful things about chicago... you just ridden 8 miles, there's steep climb up to the corner of des plaines and kinzie, you navigate a nasty intersection, and look up... the sunlight is streaming through the city, your city, looks better than any postcard, the sun hits your face and you begin the descent down, the smell of chocolate grabs you, and the sweat evaporating rapidly off your face... you bike it almost everyday, you think you're the luckiest guy in the world...
...and then you move to the burbs.
Holy shiv. I went to Google street to reminisce, and the second K street bldg (i think that's what it's called) is up, and blocks the entire view... ruined! :'(
Sarah,
There are two major abilities needed to get the job - the ability to teach design processes tofolks who nothing about design (you seem to have this), and the potential ability to generate research/creative works to achieve tenure (we really don't want to go through the hiring process again in 5 years). So if you are really interested in engaging the landscape and have the other minimum requirements (like a terminal degree - MLA/MArch/MFA/PhD) for the gig, I hope you do apply! Pomona sort of feels like Texas with big pickup trucks, lots of highways, the county fair, and lots of cows...
postal, i bike that all the time. it's stil lovely, just different. and definitely still smells like chocolate, just not quite so often :-)
there's a grate thing on desplaines right there that's a bitch, though. one of these days i'm gonna go over the bars.
Barry,
What do you think about the fact that, at least as far as I know and please correct me if I’m wrong, it’s impossible to teach at a college level without a Master’s degree?
I would like to hear your opinion on this, particularly considering your recent thread “OccupyNCARB!”
i don't know how barry will answer, seeker, but i wouldn't say it's impossible - just unlikely. within the last decade i taught without a masters. i taught with several older architects who also had only their b.archs but had entered teaching prior to the current competitive environment. but, even after getting my masters, i couldn't find a next/fuller teaching position simply because of the competition i encountered: people with greater credentials who were angling for the same positions.
there are just too many people *with* masters and subsequent teaching and research and publishing experience for a young person with only a b.arch to get noticed UNLESS that person has a stellar record of work or some other distinguishing achievement.
And I don't really understand that, Steven. I mean, what does a Masters of Arch offer over a Bachelor's of Arch?
depends which kind of m.arch you're talking about.
historically, an m.arch was additional education beyond a b.arch. you did the general education in architecture and then an m.arch was an opportunity to push further, whether to go to a particular school to study under a certain curriculum focus, to attach to certain faculty mentors, to focus on a particular thing yourself, or to otherwise channel your energy in a direction.
still, now that the m.arch is the first professional degree in a lot of places, it remains set apart from a b.arch in the way it's conducted. in b.arch you spend the first four years doing largely what you would do in the first four of a 4+2: general studies, structures, building tech, general studio, etc. then the '2' of a 4+2 is set apart, an opportunity to focus in the way that an m.arch had always been before, albeit with a little less freedom maybe. a big benefit is that in your first degree you may not know what you want but - if you were in b.arch - you finished in the same program you entered knowing nothing. in m.arch you have the opportunity to spend your last two years in a place your more educated/informed self can pick specifically based on the interests you've developed.
i don't think m.arch is universally better than b.arch, but it does put you in a different place for an *academic* post.
even the 4+2 m.arch is still not likely to make a teaching post easy. there are yet more advanced m.archs which require additional education beyond the '2'. they're distinguished by some schools as an m.arch1 vs m.arch2 or similar. there are so many different versions of degrees over the past decade, as university degree structures evolve, that it's generally a case-by-case issue: the school is going to look at what candidates have done, for how long, under whom and what kind of educational environment and rigor, what they've accomplished, and how they fit into the hiring school's big picture.
separate from all of this: in a lot of places a phd is becoming the standard to meet. again, there is just so much competition for so few positions.
As much as I value formal education, and I totally do, isn't much of the education of the architect done outside of the university? So then why isn't that type of education an important consideration for hiring staff to educate architects? Afterall, b arch grads aren't usually sitting around playing in the sandbox while their m arch colleagues go back to the classroom, they are gaining valuable educations themselves, aren't they?
those are rhetorical questions, right, tint? the work of the university is not only teaching but research and publishing. willing teachers are a dime-a-dozen, but those who can do effective research and get published are harder to come by.
the type of education that happens outside the university is likely to stay outside the university, though some universities are dabbling in getting their hands dirty with professional-type interactions. even those are pursued in an environment in which the students are buffered from the political, constructional, budgetary, marketing, and other practical concerns that offices have to face.
b.archs with professional experience are usually treated as fine for underpaid adjunct positions but unlikely to get into tenure track positions easily because they haven't shown that they can provide the kind of value ($$$, ranking, reputation) the university needs from them.
not good or right (or even universally true; i'm generalizing), but that's the way it typically works.
As an MLA/MArch in academia, I'm very aware the systemic bias against non-PhDs (ie, I can't get early career grants from the NSF and a myriad of other things). PhDs rule the ivory tower and begrudgingly accept terminal degrees in professional disciplines as nearly equal. From a training standpoint, PhDs do have expertise in advanced research methods that aren't provided at the masters level. At the masters level, there is an emphasis and training in critical thinking along with a disciplinary focus that isn't provided at the baccalaureate level. Undergrad education (even professional degrees) are required to provide a broad base (all those pesky general education requirements) to prepare folks for either graduate study or productive citizenship/lifelong learning. That is not to say that an undergraduate degree isn't sufficient to effectively teach, but that BArch or BLA isn't designed to provide you the skills for original scholarship. I've worked with very talented and expert folks (with decades of experience) with only a BArch - they had to jump through flaming hoops to get their research appointment.
From a practical perspective, completing an advanced (terminal) degree demonstrates the ability to pursue independent scholarship which is central to most tenure requirements. Not to say an exceptional candidate without those credentials is capable of that accomplishment.
Not all professional degrees MLA/MArch/MFAs are created equally. No, I'm not saying that the GSD is better than MSU - your individual choices in graduate school can open the door to academia. How do you do that? By participating in research projects and creating a strong independent thesis, not just taking the standard elective studios that most folks take at the upper level. Getting a TAship may help open doors, but isn't required. Being a brilliant designer isn't central to being an effective academic (it can help) - you need to develop and pursue an original topic of inquiry beyond school. Getting published helps (blogs aren't yet recognized as legitimate publications). Getting a post-professional degree does help, as does having a diverse educational background.
Many schools are now establishing 'professors in practice' that recognize exemplary professional practice. Most of these folks are gray-haired and have run successful practices for many years. These folks don't need the traditional academic pedigrees, just an impressive portfolio of built projects.
there are regional differences too in minimum credentials (colleges in the middle of the country have more PhDs more than the coastal schools do). Schools also vary in the emphasis between teaching and research - Cal Poly is very teaching intensive, but still requires the ability to produce scholarly/creative works.
hope this helps!
Very useful answers! Thanks guys!
I'm a crappy design teacher, as it turns out. Teaching design is a major skill that I don't have. I'd be really interested in being part of a program that focused more on the professional practice side of our discipline: I like questions with answers, though I do get far more of a thrill from an emotional design than from any "correct" answer.
yes, teaching intro to design is tough! If given a choice, there are other topics I'd rather be teaching too. but witnessing the 'ah-ha!' moments that the first few studios provide are priceless.
steven said: "separate from all of this: in a lot of places a phd is becoming the standard to meet. again, there is just so much competition for so few positions."
this is exactly why i decided to enter a phd program... even with an m.arch., one conference paper, several design awards, six years professional experience, and a publication of one of my projects i couldn't even get a whiff of a teaching position...
as far as teaching history/theory courses go, i used to think that an m.arch. and self-directed study/interest in history/theory was enough... now that i'm through all of my phd studies except for finishing my dissertation, i realize just how little i knew before... i now fall in the camp that believes that one shouldn't be teaching history/theory without an advanced degree...
now, even with all of the stuff listed above plus two years of TAing at an ivy league school, plus two years of teaching as an adjunct professor, plus being nearly done with a phd from an ivy league school it is still really difficult to even get an interview for tenure track positions because the competition is so high... such is the life in academia...
Phil, I hear your pain and agree the PhDs are required if you want to do original scholarship in history/theory. Most of the competition is in the old school traditional disciplinary focuses. Teaching gigs are also easier to find if you leave the overly popular coasts and head into the hinterlands.
There is less competition for sustainability posts as this is the new-n-hot field, but most schools don't produce folks that can teach it, so there is a shortage for a few more years.
(I think you should apply for Corner's gig at Penn)
Great comments Steven and Barry. Thank you.
"(I think you should apply for Corner's gig at Penn)" hahaha, that would be amusing... i'm really interested to see how that one goes... particularly whether they go for another brand name... i don't even know who it could be... chris reed?
Reed would be a long shot - the gsd has him in their tractor beam. guess we'll have to wait and see.
Having a 60s kind of evening: drinking an Old Fashioned (made with Jack Daniels - it's really, really good), eating steak, salad, and scalloped potatoes. Homemade Derby pie for dessert.
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.