The uniform teaching programme of many schools will create “tasteless chickens”, says Tim Ronalds; while Richard Hayward argues that schools remain almost entirely free-range. BD
Considering many firms are now using schools as a means to do their research, essentially pocketing university's money. and using student interns as slave labor, can anyone really expect students to be instructed in the best interests of architecture? Our students are being shortchanged and sacrificed at the altar of ego and greed in the name of a few principals. Those whose position has only been established by their like-minded peers in academia and practice. Actually drawing something might require something more than consuming lox on a bagel while being fawned over by the empty-headed press at large, oh how terrible laborious actual travail or pedagogy would be! They have little regard to the public's tastes. pedagogy, or providing due compensation to employees whom do all the work, because of the insular bubble the faultless press, their principal level peers, and academia at large as provided.
Sadly this once was a profession which believed in ethics, teaching, and delighting the public with monuments to beauty, instead of masturbating individual egos. Oh how far we have fallen....
I think what's missing here is the lack of respect professors and institutions have for their students. During the renaissance if students were unwilling to comply to the wishes of a master they were disciplined or expelled. Is the situation no different today? Professors threatened the lively hood of students with failing if the student shows any sign of an individual design sense.
Tasteless chickens born from the homogeneous society that architecture schools have become.
I don't think its necessarily a bad thing for professors to use students for their research. I think its a rich learning experience that actually counteracts the "factory farm" education in most schools and keeps students up to date with contemporary ideas.
However, as a student I can say that the lack of respect that a lot of studio critics show students is disgusting at best. Students seem to be labeled a burden from day one, and if you're lucky (and talented) you can earn a 1/2 ounce of respect by the end of each semester.
It becomes refreshing to simply have a critic that encourages you. When considering that an instructing pattern as critical as encouragement is a rarity in architectural education, you realize "refreshing" quickly turns to "pathetic".
Too often a professors seems to be attempting to prove their worth to you by showing dominance and superiority. I wonder if the saying 'those who can't do, teach' has anything to do with this situation. Are they afraid that ultimately one day a student will accomplish what they could not?
I myself was a research assistant to may professors during school, and I agree, now I feel like that time really gave me a leg up once I graduated.
The architecture school (at least this one) has become a place for indoctrinating students into a "style" instead of a place to encourage thinking.
Those who succeed aren't necessarily the smartest or best designers, but the ones who can afford to spend their summers and even time after graduation as slave labor for their more established professors. It's simple economics.
Sep 15, 08 6:03 pm ·
·
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.
8 Comments
Considering many firms are now using schools as a means to do their research, essentially pocketing university's money. and using student interns as slave labor, can anyone really expect students to be instructed in the best interests of architecture? Our students are being shortchanged and sacrificed at the altar of ego and greed in the name of a few principals. Those whose position has only been established by their like-minded peers in academia and practice. Actually drawing something might require something more than consuming lox on a bagel while being fawned over by the empty-headed press at large, oh how terrible laborious actual travail or pedagogy would be! They have little regard to the public's tastes. pedagogy, or providing due compensation to employees whom do all the work, because of the insular bubble the faultless press, their principal level peers, and academia at large as provided.
Sadly this once was a profession which believed in ethics, teaching, and delighting the public with monuments to beauty, instead of masturbating individual egos. Oh how far we have fallen....
Im Art Vandalay and am I'm an Architect.
Seriously - thats the new perception.
Education is now BIG BUSINESS
I think what's missing here is the lack of respect professors and institutions have for their students. During the renaissance if students were unwilling to comply to the wishes of a master they were disciplined or expelled. Is the situation no different today? Professors threatened the lively hood of students with failing if the student shows any sign of an individual design sense.
Tasteless chickens born from the homogeneous society that architecture schools have become.
I don't think its necessarily a bad thing for professors to use students for their research. I think its a rich learning experience that actually counteracts the "factory farm" education in most schools and keeps students up to date with contemporary ideas.
However, as a student I can say that the lack of respect that a lot of studio critics show students is disgusting at best. Students seem to be labeled a burden from day one, and if you're lucky (and talented) you can earn a 1/2 ounce of respect by the end of each semester.
It becomes refreshing to simply have a critic that encourages you. When considering that an instructing pattern as critical as encouragement is a rarity in architectural education, you realize "refreshing" quickly turns to "pathetic".
Too often a professors seems to be attempting to prove their worth to you by showing dominance and superiority. I wonder if the saying 'those who can't do, teach' has anything to do with this situation. Are they afraid that ultimately one day a student will accomplish what they could not?
I myself was a research assistant to may professors during school, and I agree, now I feel like that time really gave me a leg up once I graduated.
"If the student is not better than the teacher, then the teacher is a failure"
I always liked that old proverb
The architecture school (at least this one) has become a place for indoctrinating students into a "style" instead of a place to encourage thinking.
Those who succeed aren't necessarily the smartest or best designers, but the ones who can afford to spend their summers and even time after graduation as slave labor for their more established professors. It's simple economics.
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.