This is an op-ed guest post written by Steve L. Wintner, AIA, Emeritus, an architecture management consultant and co-author of the book, Financial Management for Design Professionals: The Path to Profitability
The primary intention of this article is to provoke a response rebuking my belief about architectural education curriculum, in general, and hopefully educating me on the actual current status of such at the Colleges of Architecture, in the U.S.
“We don’t know what we don’t know; the knowing of which would alter our lives forever.”
The first time I heard this quotation was in 1984 at a self-help conference titled “The EST Training”. This quote was not attributed to anyone specifically, but it altered my consciousness, and I have never forgotten this phrase. I do believe that it applies to every living person.
In context, my formal architectural education at the University of California at Berkeley, while extremely beneficial in many areas, notably lacked any full semester courses in what, at the time, I “did not know what I did not know, the knowing of which would alter my life forever.” What I didn’t know I didn’t know was how much I would, in a brief few years, also have benefited had there been full-semester courses in the basic introductions to financial management, project management and accounting principles.
By the time I got around to starting my formal architectural education, I had already completed four years of employment as an intern with several architectural firms in New York and Los Angeles. And, during my time at Cal Berkeley, I worked full-time for a couple of local architects and engineers. It wasn’t until several years after the completion of my formal education that my lack of awareness and knowledge of what by then I knew exactly what I didn’t know was involved and needed to know to successfully own and operate my own small firm.
Being the managing partner of a 9-person firm required skills I had never learned in my studies at Cal. It was time for me to acquire these skills through self-education, thanks to the AIA Continuing Education program, the excellent books available on the market on these subjects, and a whole lot of trial and error.
So, what is my point?
Without making a generalization, indicting all of the U.S. Colleges of Architecture for the deficiency, in my opinion, in their professional practice curriculum, to the best of my knowledge, these types of classes mentioned above are not a standard part of the bachelor degree in architecture curriculum at the majority of these colleges. I find the focus and attention placed on design as the ‘be all, end all’ subject of an architectural education to be totally unbalanced and a disservice to those who want to be an architect, but not a ‘design’ architect, as was the case with me.
I find the focus and attention placed on design as the ‘be all, end all’ subject of an architectural education to be totally unbalanced and a disservice to those who want to be an architect…
To me, learning all I could about how to manage the numerous component aspects of an architectural firm was what I was looking for as an equal part of my education about the design process. To further illustrate my point, using any architectural project, the totality of the services required to competently complete the project includes 35% for design of the project and the remaining 65% for all the other phases of the project. The architectural education system is way out of balance with this ratio.
I look forward to all responses that will prove me wrong and help to educate me of the current standard architectural education curriculum that in fact does embrace those things that most of my professional colleagues “don’t know they don’t’ know”; the knowing of which would alter the operational practices of their firms forever.
Respectfully,
Steve L. Wintner, AIA Emeritus
Question: Are the architecture schools properly preparing students to become successful architects? Share your thoughts and be specific.
Photo Credit: Shutterstock / Matej Kastelic
Having attempted to gain a teaching position in architecture at a college/university I have finally given up. I always thought that having a full range of experience in the profession would be an excellent resume for that position. What I discovered is that colleges and universities [I’m sure not all] want academics. As one individual put it “We have many architects who can give desk crits and offer lessons from real world experience. That is fairly common. What is not common is framing those opinions into some larger issue or understanding. This must be done because the “real world” cannot (and often should not) penetrate into academia.”
Hi Richard, thanks for sharing your experience in attempting to gain a teaching position in architecture. I have had the very same experience over the past 20 years,no less than three times at three different colleges of architecture. The responses I received weren’t quite so blunt and misguided as what you were told, but I believe it is still a disservice to our industry.
The curriculum is badly and sadly in need of an overhaul which is likely never going to happen in my lifetime.
There are those of us who became architects for reasons other than to become the world’s next, best architectural designer. There’s a whole world of management that upper-class seniors sorely need to be exposed to before they graduate, that is only available if they take post-graduate courses. It’s a form of a ‘Ponzi Scheme’.
Respectfully (?)
Curious? A number I have never seen published (but that doesn’t mean is hasn’t been, just that I have never seen it)
What percentage of architectural graduates either end up owning their own practice or become a principal in a firm?
I am still friends with a handful of the people I graduated with and I ask them of the 125 that graduated how many are still in the architectural field today?
Business classes in architecture? Really?? LOL Hell they wouldn’t even teach us drafting or drawing. We were told if you want to learn how to draw take an art course we don’t teach that here. If you want to learn how to take pictures, go take a photography course, we don’t teach that here. So if they wouldn’t even teach us the things we needed to know to represent / express our “design side” , God forbid they would try to teach us the pragmatic business part of architecture! 🙂 Obviously if we wanted to learn business we needed to take classes in the Business department. I don’t mind not being taught certain things while in architecture school, but I do mind not being told or recommended to take other courses outside the school of architecture. We had a building construction degree and never once was it recommended to me to take a class there.
Tim, thanks for your supportive response. It is my opinion that the schools of architecture in this country have somehow managed to arrive at the same conclusion about what is appropriate for their respective architecture course curriculum. It relates to the theory that ‘architecture is design’, which to a certain degree is accurate. But not to the exclusion of the preponderance of the subjects, beyond art history and the history of architecture, that a green grad would benefit knowing before getting into an office. One of those subjects would be project management, which could consume two semesters of aligned course material just to capture the essence of the process.
I am hoping someone out there cab shed light on what is happening in today’s schools of architecture that would indicate it has evolved to the benefit of the students and their future employers.
Respectfully,
I began School of Architecture in 1978, and was glad that I had amassed several years of Technical College and Work Experience beforehand. Both Part 1 and Part 2 were ‘Pure Design!’ Part 3 (Professional Practice) was biased towards Building Contracts. I can remember only one lecture that dealt with Finance, and that was limited to VAT!
Forty years on, and things have not changed significantly. I give Guest Lectures in Professional Practice at two Schools of Architecture in Manila. In both instances, I was told to base content around the Code of Professional Conduct! – Which I did not! – It has not been overhauled in nearly 50 Years, and contains some rather ‘Dangerous Principles!’
Steve is quite correct in stating that Finance and Business Management are seen as being almost ‘Vulgar!’ – Permanent Lecturing Staff refer to me as ‘The Person from Industry!’ – Almost as though it is an ‘Affliction!’
However, I would state that many Schools of Architecture are poorly equipped when it comes to such a fundamental area of study. Many Lecturers are NOT Practitioners, or have never had to deal with the more practical side of Practice. It is therefore, not surprising that School Staff are a significant contingent on the front row of my Lectures!
Such shortcomings also become apparent during the Recruitment Process! However, help and encouragement are always available. Indeed ‘Practice Matters’ form part of my own CPD Programme within the office.
The ‘Problem’ however, is Endemic! – It is International and has not changed for the better! We are still dealing with this at an almost ‘Remedial Level!’
Bob, thank you for sharing, can we all say “Amen brother, amen”?
My husband and I met in graduate school at Tulane and with much hubris and craziness started out firm one year after graduating. The idea of vulgar is most certainly true. It is as though in school , the idea of money or business was taboo and not important – which is short sighted because architects need to eat too.
Also the art of negotiation was never brought up- how to discuss intelligently about all aspects of the project, not just defending the design you created.
Why this Experience of the education of an architect is clearly prevalent across all colleges, I do not know the history, but I will acknowledge that it left a lot of information out that only experience can teach. Today in the business of architecture, young architects come into the workforce and maybe be able to pass tests but the idea of apprenticeship is not existent. A lot of training goes into detailing, drawings, how projects and drawings and buildings are put together, how to communicate with clients contractor and engineers. Trying to bring employees into the business component is almost impossible, so if inclined you end up either hiring business managers and trying to figure it out yourself.
Perhaps the architecture profession as a whole needs to be overhauled.
We need more control over the product and the venue to deliberate our case during the entire process while ensuring that intelligent property has value that can be turned into income for our business and families. it is a question of value- that is what should be impressed upon the education community. Value and negotiation.
Hi Teri, I applaud you and your husband for taking a leap of faith and going for the brass ring. I can only imagine that you both have spent many days, months and years operating and learning on the trial by error method. OJT isn’t all that bad. I did a lot of it myself when I started my own small firm, back in the early 70’s. Unlike you and your husband, I had more than 10 years of experience in the profession. I knew how to run a project, but I soon learned that i didn’t have much of a clue about running a small business.
I believe that Richard’s experience (see his reply above) and the response he received, when attempting to become an adjunct professor, totally captures the essence of the issue: “…because the “real world” cannot (and often should not) penetrate into academia.” In my opinion, this comment is so inappropriate, for so many reasons. Not the least of which is the enormous disservice it provides to the industry and to the parents who pay thousands of dollars to have their children educated, in the hopes of becoming an architect one day.
I totally agree with your thought that “Perhaps the architecture profession as a whole needs to be overhauled.” If I were given the power to do that, I would start with abandoning the notion promoted by our professional society, that “Design is the be all end all” focus of architecture. Along with overhauling the profession, it goes without saying, but I’ll say it, perhaps the entire architectural education curriculum needs to be overhauled.
Respectfully (?)