anchor
RIBA poll finds both students and employers think education prioritizes theory, not practice
RIBA seal (via brookes.ac.uk).
Last summer, the Royal Institute of British Architects' polled 149 employers and 580 architecture students/recent grads about which skills they think are most valuable for new-grads seeking employment. Their findings were recently published in RIBA's 2014 Appointment Skills Survey, and show some interesting alliances between what students and employers think about the shift from education to practice:
- 86% of employers and 82% of students agree that "students/graduates lack the knowledge to build what they design"
- 81% of employers and 74% of students agree that "architectural schools put theoretical knowledge above practical ability"
- 80% of employers and 73% of students think "students/graduates lack the practical skills needed to practise architecture"
- 79% of employers and 77% of students think that "students/graduates should spend more time learning in practice"
The entire study is available here, and includes more data on student/employer expectations for software, CVs, initial salary, and more.
Similar articles on Archinect that may interest you...
6 Comments
Should students know everything about professional practice when they graduate? That's not realistic.
The last point they make is that it should all be learned in an office. Ok? So basically make no change to formal education.
So what would balance theory? More design/build projects, where students build formally complex designs?
Or is this post from RIBA just a "kids these days" hand wringing?
I just have to look at what is presented by the "top" design schools and the reason for the disconnect becomes apparent. Most work is either unbuildable or uninhabitable, but turned out and celebrated nonetheless. No wonder there is such a disconnect between the academic world, and professional practice. It would be usefull for students to be given more opportunities to develop real practical skills rather then figuring out how to make their computer create more complex Boolean operations.
That's more of your personal taste. Why not figure out how to build complex forms? Likewise why can't there be room for theory and why does everything need to be buildable or habitable? There have been fantastical spaces dreamt of before that were unbuildable. Perhaps things are out of balance? Where is the line between architecture as practical trade and as an education in design thinking?
I'm not familiar with the British system, but the concerns seem quite similar to the problems in American practice.
The issue of practical skills among new graduates is closely related to that of low intern salaries. One reason starting salaries are so stunningly low is that fresh graduates really have nothing valuable to offer a typical employer. There are exceptions, but it's hard to tell who they'll be. The nature of individual studio projects is so different from collaborative design work that portfolios can't really show a full view of a student's potential.
These practical skills are indeed appropriate for a professional degree; the whole purpose of a professional degree being to prepare a person to practice. For those who really don't intend to practice schools can (and do) offer non-accredited degrees in design research, methodologies and theory.
More and more I wonder if the studio-focused model of education really makes sense for architects. It inculcates a culture of competitive individualistic struggle focused on presentation skills that just isn't quite relevant to what real architects do. As the report notes, design ability is only one of several important skills for a new employee - and in fact ranks 3rd behind team work and self-initiative. Unfortunately the intensive nature of studio projects tends to suck up time that might be better spent learning the material architects are assumed to know, and working on smaller projects that help develop some sense of confidence and businesslike sensibility.
This quote from the interview with a recent graduate in the report reflects my view on the current educational system too:
"[ed. on starting his first job] I remember feeling stressed, anxious and useless. Most of all, I was annoyed. I was furious that the hard-earned first part of my architectural education had provided me with a grand total of zero skills which could be usefully and helpfully applied to the realities of practice within the building industry. It almost felt like a betrayal. The stress, the countless sleepless hours and the radical recession of my hairline seemed to have
been in vain."
Rob_c. The disconnect is obvious in your statement "Where is the line between architecture as practical trade and as an education in design thinking?"..................if design thinking is not based on practical trade or within the "confines" of practical trade then why associate what you supposedly learned with architecture, could be anything right?...............the thinking about architecture in academia is the equivalent of learning French for 5 years and then getting a job where the only language spoken is English, which occasionally uses a French term to define something, but for the most part English is not French.................in the US as a student the first thing you should do is see how much your studio professor has built before you are convinced their 'process' and 'approach' is relevant or useful.
Why not figure out how to build complex forms? Likewise why can't there be room for theory and why does everything need to be buildable or habitable?
Duh, because building are functional constructions?
What do complex forms have to do with anything? As if they are precluded by historic or contemporary building practices.
If carpenters were trained the way architects are they would be taught biology, genetics and evolutionary theory. After graduation they'd start learning how to work wood as a clueless intern in a wood shop.
mid, it's not the studio model that is broken, it's the context that it's placed in. Practical and cooperative would be much more reflective of professional practice.
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.