“This is not a position that has been strongly represented in this school historically,” [said Professor Kathleen James-Chakraborty, who believes] The crux of the issue is whether courses that champion diversity in architecture should be taught as optional, specialized seminars or integrated into the curriculum of the school. — yaledailynews.com
Now with Deborah Berke as dean, the Yale School of Architecture is working to offer more courses focusing on women in architecture such as “Expanding the Canon: Making Room for Other Voices”, an optional seminar that would've been taught by visiting professor Kathleen James-Chakraborty. But only one student enrolled in the class “despite students voicing grievances about a lack of female representation”, the Yale Daily News reports.
James-Chakraborty questions if such diversity courses should become a requirement in the school's already rigid curriculum. Some female students say that YSoA still feels like “a gentleman's club”, and that the “student body is not well-primed to see the ‘radical nature’ of the course.”
More on Archinect:
Deborah Berke shares her vision as incoming dean at the Yale School of Architecture
Yale Dean Deborah Berke advocates pluralism in pedagogy
Struggles persist for women in the architectural workforce
When the pressure is on, dedicated architecture students show how to power nap like a pro
7 Comments
Deborah Berke was late to the social-identity trend and now she's late to fact that it is played out. What a pointless class. Let's get back to architecture, shall we? Maybe the women there are serious about becoming architects, thus bettering diversity.
Every non-studio class has to be selected so carefully. It MUST clearly be a good investment of the student's time. I don't know what the syllabus of this particular class was but - unless a student wanted to make Women in Architecture a theme of their future studies or career, a whole semester class on the topic *could* keep them from keeping up with other curriculum options to which the rest of their peers are being exposed. There's potential irony in marginalizing oneself by choosing a class about greater inclusion/integration of all voices.
This class either should be required - as is suggested above - or should be part of a required class like Professional Practice, or should maybe not be a class that sets this topic aside as a special study area at all.
A real culture change within the school could mean that this course's topics get covered in an integrated way across all other curriculum areas instead of being something a student has to specifically choose *instead* of something else. Topics of equity and the importance of a range of design voices in collaborative practice should be embedded through everything, not set aside. This doesn't mean that it should be handled in passing - or in a diluted or non-specific way. It would have to be intentionally and carefully introduced throughout history, practice, studio, and other courses.
I agree, Steven. It could be integrated into another course but *very explicitly* in a way that makes the student analyze why it so important that it BE a topic.
free information is better than privileged information if the cause is to educate society with intent on increasing awareness.
ELL. OH. ELL.
This doesn't surprise me at all. My university had a similar situation when the student body was complaining that there wasn't enough instruction on universal design. When a class was created to discuss that exact topic, it barely got enough people to register for it. The reason most people said they didn't take the class ... they didn't have enough time. I know, shocking.
Disappointing in another way as students are able to change things by complaining, but then when they get what they want, they don't know what to do with it ... like a dog who caught the car.
To add to Steve's point it is also very hard to get students excited about a class offered by visiting lecturers who may not have a history or be well known to the students.
When I was at U of I we had a similar optional class but it was much more successful in attracting students in that it was open to any student not just architecture students and it was taught by a tenured regular faculty member.
The Yale Class could also fail because it could be that it was in a bad time slot for studios and or lectures. Remember that this is a small student population too.
I think it is important to offer however making it a required course in a tightly packed academic schedule may create resentment and ruin the class for the few who take the issue seriously and want to devote time and effort to it.
over and OUT
Peter N
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.