Tuesday, April 19, 2011

Future of the Profession - setting priorities for architectural education in the context of our current rapidly changing Profession of Architecture.


"One of the glaring ironies of modern education is that schools try to prepare
students to live in a time that does not yet exist by concentrating their studies on a
time that has ceased to exist. Except in very cursory ways ('You'll need this course
to get into college'; 'You'll need this skill to get a job'), the future is rarely
considered in the standard curriculum. Even 'contemporary' courses deal almost
exclusively with current events —which is to say events in the very recent past. The
tacit assumption seems to be that tomorrow will be like yesterday or, at the very
least, like today." [1]
_ R.T. LaConte


Our Profession is undergoing an unprecedented rate of change and any architectural education program must adapt to that change if it is to remain relevant. Admittedly I do not consider myself to be an expert on this subject – I am an architect, not an economist or a futurist, and I do not claim to be a prophet or someone with any special knowledge of what is to come. Nevertheless, the R.T. LaConte quote above notwithstanding, I do believe that we can make better decisions in the present to prepare for an unknowable future by regarding the past, or as the futurist once tagged as the “Nostradamus of American marketing” Faith Popcorn said in her book The Popcorn Report: “The future bears a great resemblance to the past, only more so.”

In Brief 

A review of currents and trends from a wide range of sources and market information is presented outlining expected changes to the architecture profession over the next few years and next decade including reduced employment opportunities for architecture graduates even to the extent that the current generation of young architects could be lost to the profession due to lack of jobs. The projections of a sustained recovery are uncertain at best and practitioners see staff reductions ahead especially in entry level positions due to advancing technology, greater reliance on consultants and foreign labor outsourcing. Maintaining fair fees for architects will be a constant challenge while increasing specialization among firms and individual practitioners will continue. Architect/Owner relationships are changing and architects will have less project control even as clients expect more specialized services which will cause increasing use of special consultants.
Key trends and forces that are changing the game 
Total annual revenue of architectural firms has declined 20-25% since the high point reached in 2007 and recovery will be slow. Increased decisions for non-mainstream career paths will naturally follow as mainstream job availability contracts. Even after the expected recovery the industry may be smaller. As such it will be characterized by a prevalence of energy upgrades, building renovation and smaller projects. Sustainable Design and Energy issues will continue to grow in importance as client interest, favorable government policy and funding sources for these all increase. At the same time, global humanitarian need will drive increasing awareness among students and practitioners and there will be greater opportunity for architects to engage in humanitarian assistance and disaster response/prevention.
Historical precedent coupled with current government monetary policies point to the strong possibility of a faltering recovery followed by a protracted recession or worst case: a major depression could be looming. In fact the profession of architecture may be facing a paradigm shift not unlike that taking place in the field of journalism at the dawn of the internet age.

Recommendations for the School of Architecture faculty and programs that would increase value and relevance

This is an ideal time to “rearrange our house” for both what is known about the future and what is uncertain, but likely. Some recommendations include: 
  • Dedicated employment placement assistance both for summer internships while students are in the program and for long-term placement upon graduation.
  • Supplement areas of expertise in Sustainable Design, i.e., energy and water, waste and pollution reduction, bio-mimetic and “whole-building” or “integrated design” methodologies.
  • Establish reputation as a leader in specific niche areas of architecture research, e.g. virtual reality visualization tools, energy design/simulation tools, evidence-based approach to design, etc.
  • Explicit integration of research into curriculum and life of the college in order to make it more accessible to faculty and students.
  • Make efforts to increase the level of interdisciplinary work and thought in both curriculum and research initiatives.
  • Continue to build collaborations with NGO’s providing humanitarian aid, disaster relief and community service and offer opportunities to students as extended learning/work experiences “beyond graduation”
  • Place more emphasis on teaching principals that do not change and on continuous learning skills, i.e., teach how to learn and adapt to change.

Questions that need answers  

Let’s begin by having a clear picture of the end in mind – one of Stephen Covey’s “7 Habits of Highly Effective People”[2] - a formula to which I try to adhere. At a recent Town Hall Forum on the future of our profession sponsored by AIA Minnesota, four questions formed the basis for the discussions. I have paraphrased these questions to be more relevant to the purpose of the discussion at hand.

  1. How will our profession change over the next few years and next decade?
  2. What are the key trends and forces that are changing the game?
  3. What changes to faculty and curriculum are needed to increase value to students and to the profession?
  4. What can the College do to maintain its relevance?

Rounded Rectangle: In a Blog called Career, dated July 11, 2010, there appeared a post entitled “Is it too late to get out of Architecture?” “Within the last few months, the number of emails I have received from people asking whether or not they should get out of architecture has been staggering. Equally surprising are the emails I receive that ask for direction on whether or not they should go into the field of architecture.” _from: Borson, B., Blog: Life of an architectA Profession in flux

Over the course of my 35 year career in the profession, change has been constant and accelerating. During the early 1990’s while researching historical trends in architecture style, we looked at the entire 5,000 year history of recorded human civilization and began to notice the reappearance of stylistic cues that indicated a cyclic oscillation between classicism and modernism. This thinking evolved into a theory of “architectural style life-cycle” very similar to product life-cycle concepts in contemporary marketing strategy which exhibit the five phases of 1) introduction or emergence, 2) growth, 3) mass acceptance or maturity, 4) decline and 5) re-birth (re-nascence). These cyclic trends became even more apparent when focusing on western residential housing style trends from about 1500 to the present day. The most obvious factor of all was the fact that these cycles had the characteristic of steady acceleration over time, i.e., they were of shorter and shorter duration individually and showing ever earlier re-emergence of an older defunct style in a “neo-classical” or “revival” form. The ability to see those trends in history would lead one to believe that once a pattern had emerged, you could then exploit the knowledge to predict the future. Unfortunately, that doesn’t work out very well, unless perhaps you have the full resources of Madison Avenue at your disposal to “convince” the market that your prediction is the latest trend.  I am relating this story to illustrate two important things: 1) It is easy to predict the future with great success as long as you only predict the inevitable; 2) change and the apparent acceleration of change are inevitable. As we consider the four questions presented earlier and review current trends and related analyses, I would invite you to keep this question in the back of your mind: “Does this prediction have a sense of inevitability or is it mere speculation?”

How will our profession change over the next few years and next decade?

We can further break this question down by asking: Will the present apparent downturn in opportunities for graduates from Architecture Programs continue or are the projections of recovery and job growth in Architecture more likely? And - are they mutually exclusive? As estimates of unemployment among licensed and intern architects in Minnesota exceeded 40% during 2009, the Minnesota AIA created a new committee called “Members in Transition” [1] the fastest growing and one of the largest of AIA Minnesota committees. Concurrently, AIA Minnesota has been working diligently to characterize the significant changes faced by the profession and generate an adequate response to help its membership weather the storm. In early 2010 the Recovery Task force was formed. Its mission is “to assist AIA members with information and ideas that can help reduce expenses, expand services and obtain work during the recovery from this severe economic downturn.” The activities of the task force are described on the organization’s website by current president Rich Varda, FAIA:
_The task force has worked with the Carlson School of Management to examine the current status and future opportunities for the profession.
_ A  Town Hall Forum was held to review the regional and national AIA Strategic Plans, the Carlson School report and to obtain input from members on the future of the profession
_The task force will collect and refine ideas and information in three areas: 1) Economic Information about the design and construction industry; 2) Resources to assist members overcome economic distress and return to growth. 3) Promotion – Articulate the unique value of architects, in the context of economic recovery. 
 
A number of the resources and publications cited here were obtained from the task force web page (http://www.aia-mn.org/int_membership/president.cfm). For example, according to the participants in the Town Hall Forum[1] mentioned above, several trends were highlighted. Some are obvious, some are shocking.


  1. Technology (BIM, Internet, etc.) will change our work. We will need fewer staff and face global competition.
  2. Executing CD’s will become a smaller part of our work.
  3. The current generation of young architects could be lost to the profession due to lack of jobs.
  4. Maintaining fair fees for our valuable work will be a constant challenge.
  5. More special consultants will compete for part of the fee.

In the Carlson School of Management Report entitled “Shaping the Future of Architecture in Minnesota” several emerging challenges faced by our profession are identified:[1]
  • We are not as close to our clients as in the past – third party owners’ reps, construction managers and design/build firms are often consulted first in line ahead of the architect.
  • Many services formerly performed by architects have become specialties provided by outside consultants (code review, cost estimating, project management, lighting design, façade engineering, etc.).
  • Technology has transformed our work and reduced staff requirements.
  • Commoditization of some building types (hotels, retail, clinics, branch banks, etc.) has reduced fees through repetitive designs.
  • Economic bubbles in the late 1990’s have created an overbuilt environment that will limit demand for several years



In an article that recently appeared in Architectural Record entitled “2010 America’s Best Architecture Schools” the latest DesignIntelligence rankings of Architecture schools were reviewed. According to the author, Jim Cramer, “the rankings are a lightning rod for comment because they have become a tool for students choosing the academic programs that will launch their design careers. Today they are the only attempt to rank accredited Bachelor of Architecture (B.Arch.) and Master of Architecture (M.Arch.) programs in the United States” He goe son to say, 

“A vocational bent may only heighten the importance prospective students attach to this year’s DesignIntelligence rankings, as the recession has made new jobs scarce” for example “…the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign School of Architecture  reports that only eight of eighty-eight M.Arch. recipients in the school’s 2009 graduating class were able to get jobs, and most of those offers were the result of prior summer internships.” And “According to H. Ralph Hawkins, FAIA, the Dallas-based firm [HKS] established a fellowship program last year that offers a $20,000 hiring bonus to the top health-care architect coming out of graduate school. Since then, HKS has laid off 33 percent of its staff, so a formalized program represents “a way to keep some flow of students into our firm,” Hawkins says. “We do not want to lose those graduating classes to this economy, as we did back in ‘87.” [6]

Out of shear curiosity, I reviewed all of the listings posted to the AIA National Job Bank for the entire US on September 20, 2010. Of the nice round total of 100 job listings, 17% of the jobs were for non-architectural positions (i.e., financial services, human resources, etc.) Of the remaining 83 positions the breakdown was as Shown in Table1.
As you can see only 5% (4 jobs) could be filled by a recent graduate and over 60% require licensed professionals. If you exclude urban planning, teaching, marketing, executive and construction management positions, only about 65% are for mainstream architectural jobs while 35% are somewhat non-mainstream. I’ll get back to this later. Now I’m certain that there are more than 83 architectural jobs open nationally at the present time, however, this breakdown may be representative of the national average.
 

Intern
|
Licensed
Years Exp
0-1
2-3
3-4
5-9
10-15
Totals
Arch/Proj. Mgr
3
7
7
3
20
CAD/BIM

1
3
4
Design

1
2
1
4
Pl-UD

2
1
1
4
Housing


1
1
2
Medical


3
2
5
Education

2
1
3
Sustainable/LEED

1
5
6
Other Specialties
1
3
3
4
11
Marketing

3
1
1
5
Teaching

1
3
1
5
Executive

1
2
1
4
Const/Mgmt

3
1
4
Facilities Mgr

1
3
2
6
Totals
0
4
26
36
17
83
Table 1: AIA National Job Bank postings for the entire US on Sept. 21, 2010.
  
So what is the forecasted Job Outlook in our profession and what is the federal government saying about the outlook for the architecture employment?  In the latest edition of the US Department of Labor’s Occupational Outlook Handbook, the 2010-11 Edition under the category “Architects, Not Landscape and Naval” the job outlook presented is as follows:
“Architects held about 141,200 jobs in 2008. Approximately 68 percent of jobs were in the architectural, engineering, and related services industry. [others work for] construction firms and for government agencies [etc.] About 21 percent of architects are self-employed. “Employment change. Employment of architects is expected to increase by 16 percent between 2008 and 2018, which is faster than the average for all occupations. Current demographic trends will lead to an increase in demand for architects. [8]

Figure 1  The Architectural Services industry derives the bulk of its revenue from work on non-residential building projects, including the institutional building market (mainly educational and healthcare buildings), and the commercial and industrial building market (mainly offices and retail store developments). Only a small share of industry revenue is derived from contracts in the housing construction market.[1]
Based on this prediction, the job outlook would seem to be favorable since an increase of 1.5% per year is anticipated. But is this forecast based on more than merely optimism in economic recovery in general? I hope that this prediction bears out but there are reasons to be skeptical. One concern is that the reasons cited for growth are the increased need for healthcare facilities, nursing homes, and retirement communities due to the aging “baby boom” population and the need to replace and renovate aging education buildings. These trends have characterized the architectural services market to some extent since the mid 1990’s and although there may be continued growth in the public and institutional sector, is this enough to counteract the downward spiral in all other market segments? The market breakdown in the chart below shows that this sector accounts for roughly 1/3 of architectural revenues. That means that for every single point drop in the other major market segments, the healthcare and education market must grow by 2 points in order to just maintain the status quo.
Another reason for concern is that the very same report is less than rosy in some of its other analysis. For example, foreign outsourcing, cyclical changes in the construction industry, increases in the number of architecture graduates and short supply of capital are all identified as potential factors that may limit job growth, particularly for recent graduates. The report contains these specific warning trends as limiting factors to growth.
“… architecture firms have outsourced the drafting of construction documents and basic design for large-scale commercial and residential projects to architecture firms overseas. This trend is expected to continue and may have a negative impact on employment growth for lower-level architects and interns who would normally gain experience by producing these drawings.
“A growing number of students are graduating with architectural degrees and some competition for entry-level jobs can be anticipated. Competition will be especially keen for jobs at the most prestigious architectural firms [omitted text] architects who have had internships while in school will have an advantage in obtaining positions after graduation.
Revisit the chart above and you will note that about 65% of architectural revenues come from commercial, industrial and residential market segments. Another part of this occupational outlook report makes the following statement about the relative health of these markets.
“Employment of architects is strongly tied to the activity of the construction industry and some types of construction are sensitive to cyclical changes in the economy. For example, during recessions nonresidential construction of office and retail space tends to fall as funding for these projects becomes harder to obtain and the demand for these spaces falls. Firms involved in the design of institutional buildings, such as schools, hospitals, nursing homes, and correctional facilities, will be less affected by fluctuations in the economy. [9]
A little later I will attempt to address current economic trends in the construction industry and in the economy as a whole in order to present an alternative outlook for employment and revenue growth in the Architectural Industry. But first let’s shift gears and talk about paradigm shifting trends in our profession.

What are the key trends and forces that are changing the game?

Non-mainstream career paths and specialization are becoming more and more important as students prepare for entering the work force in a contracting labor market. The importance for architecture schools to provide for flexibility in the career path choices open to graduates is not new. In an article in Business Times Magazine dated May 6, 2005 entitled “Building careers in architecture but taking them elsewhere” the author quoted Laura Lee, head of Carnegie Mellon University’s School of Architecture:
"About 80 percent of the CMU graduates will go into mainstream architectural practices and the remainder will go into related fields like construction,"[10]
It is likely that this 4:1 ratio was the norm for at least a decade (from about 1995-2005) but as recently as 2008 there is evidence that the ratio may be approaching 2:1.[11] Previously in my review of the 100 job postings on the AIA Job Bank on Sept. 20, 2010 we saw that only about 65% (2/3) were for what I would consider to be mainstream practice in architecture. Another piece of that puzzle can be found in the Architecture Record Article cited earlier that featured the  DesignIntelligence Architecture School rankings. Reported in the same article were the results of a the survey with the question “What students do after graduating.” [12]


 Figure 2: What students do after graduating (%) 
33        Pursue an advanced degree in architecture
6          Pursue an advanced degree in something else
50        Work in private practice
3          Work for a corporation
3          Self-employment
3          Undecided or other
1          Work in government
1          Community service                                      
100%   Total                                                           
85        Planning to take Architect Registration Exam
77        Planning to become LEED certified

In this survey 50% have stated they plan to pursue a mainstream career path and 39% plan to get additional education. Could the bleak outlook for employment possibly be reflected in that choice? There are of course many other potential career choices that don’t show up in this survey and it would be a good subject for a follow-up research project to identify what career path choices are typically followed and the corresponding percentages. The trend is certainly towards greater non-mainstream avenues especially as increasing complexity and technology are breeding more specialization and special consultants in the industry. Add to that the traditional migration into teaching, government and public policy, planning, construction, real estate, product design and marketing fields.
Another small but growing alternative includes humanitarian and community development. Humanitarian assistance and disaster response efforts which traditionally have been predominantly medical and food aid oriented are becoming more and more architecture focused. Witness the school’s partnerships with organizations like Habitat for Humanity and Architecture for Humanity as well as the increasing awareness that recent disasters in New Orleans and the gulf coast, Afghanistan, Indonesia, Sri Lanka and Haiti could be much more effectively addressed in a preventative fashion by creating earthquake and hurricane resistant buildings in vulnerable urban centers and coastal areas throughout the developing world.[13] The list of other architectural NGOs providing disaster relief and community development including basic services such as schools, hospitals, clinics, sanitation, drinking water and local power facilities, is long and growing[14] while at the same time interest among students and underemployed practitioners in pursuing opportunities is increasing.[15]
Another factor that is going to propel this divergence of mainstream vs. non-mainstream career paths for architects and perhaps also compel greater diversity and specialization in the field is the continued uncertainty about economic conditions and particularly, doubts about a hoped for recovery in commercial construction activity.  According to a June 2010 report by the AIA Minnesota Recovery Task Force the following financial trends have the potential to contract and permanently alter the profession:[16]
  • Total annual revenue of architectural firms has declined 20-25% since the high point reached in 2007. Unemployment or underemployment in the profession reflects this fee decline.
  • Recovery of architectural fees will be slow – particularly due to reduced asset value and tight lending in commercial real estate (housing, offices, hotels, retail.)
  • At full recovery, the industry may be smaller than it was in 2006 and 2007.
  • Recovery will be led by smaller sized projects, but less likely to be led by housing, which normally comes out of recessions first.
  • Corporate profits and borrowing are mostly back to normal and they will start projects.
  • Changes in attitudes and government policies will drive sustainability projects and energy savings projects
  • Building owners will upgrade their existing facilities to reduce expenses and increase operational efficiencies in response to tight economic times. [greater investment in building renovation]


What is the short and long-term economic outlook for the Construction Industry?

According to a report by IbisWorld, inc. recent trends in constant dollar GDP as compared to Architecture industry revenues indicate a parallel downward trend beginning in 2008 through 2010.[17] In the same report they go on to project an upturn in both GDP and Architecture revenues for the period 2011-2015 at roughly 4% per year based on expected growth in three of the four major market segments, namely commercial and institutional buildings as well as new housing, although it is the least important to our industry. If that happens it will result in a new peak level of architecture revenues at about $47.5 billion, 3.7% above the peak recorded in 2007. This is in keeping with the previously cited projections of growth in Architectural employment by the US Bureau of Labor Statistics, however there are several reasons to suspect that this prediction is overly optimistic and possibly even in the realm of just “wishful thinking.”

Is the current downturn about to turn around or will it deepen?

An alternate view of the long term economic conditions for the building Industry is outlined by the Institute for Trends Research based on more than 45 economic indicators. Here is a series of far more gloomy predictions for the construction industry from a recent EcoTrends Report.
“The latest input from the leading indicators is positive and the rates-of-change from… [list of indicators] are heading higher. Recovery is in our future for 2010 and likely beyond. Unless you are involved with nonresidential construction…
“Deficit spending and money supply creation have been the primary vehicles the government has employed to stimulate the economy.
“A significant consequence of the deficit and inflation trends that we have embarked upon is that the decade spanning 2030-2040 will be one of lost opportunities, great economic distress, lost fortunes, deep regrets, and despair …. Depression.
“In most cases, short-term economic imbalances lead to business cycle phases that last for three to four years. That’s the usual case. However, these imbalances can be combined in such a way and in a synchronous manner that they can cause problems that may haunt us for a decade or longer.
“Deficits create an increasing national debt. That debt carries a service charge (interest) that must be paid. Taking on debt when interest rates are cheap (as they have been through early 2010) makes a great deal of sense as long as you are borrowing money to invest in wealth-creating assets. However, borrowing to create wealth works best in the short-term, not when it is an ongoing decades-long process. 
“Rising interest rates and the nearly inevitable use of inflation by the government to “pay” for the debt (which in turn breeds higher and higher levels of unemployment) will come to an unfavorable climax around 2030 based on extant demographic trends and ITR’s business cycle theories. Please note that the apex prior to the next depression may come sooner than 2030. That is simply our best estimate based on the trends to date.”[18]
EcoTrends® ITR Forecast Note: Look for 2010 to come in 22.5% to 25.8% below 2009. 12MMT decline is projected into 2011.[19]
This report goes on to specifically identify several leading indicators as the culprits in this doom and gloom forecast such as supply of commercial credit, interest rates which are certain to increase, and expected downturns in commercial construction.
If this assessment of current economic trends is accurate, then even if there is a mild recovery beginning in 2011, it may be short lived and followed by a steady and protracted decline. A further piece of evidence which does not favor the earlier “rosy” recovery scenario is seen by taking a more extensive look at business cycles during the last 100 years as expressed in stock market indicators.
Granted, there is no direct correlation between Stock Market activity and Construction activity in the same period, however it would be interesting to see construction indicator data for the past 100 years, if it were available, overlaid on the Dow Jones Industrial data presented here. The key message is that beginning in 2001 we entered into a period of market “correction” and historically, these periods of correction, even though there is some fluctuation within the sharp growth trends, are typically 18-20 years. We have been in a significant decline in construction since 2008. The question is, will that decline be a short lived 3-4 year anomaly or is it part of a more protracted 18-20 year cooling off period? History would seem to suggest the latter.

Trend: Architects asked to do more but getting paid less and have less control over the project

A recent survey of AIA members[20] indicated the following trends regarding fees and additional services being requested:
  • Architects believe they are adding high value to projects, but they are receiving disproportionately low fees.
  • Architects feel relatively unprepared to provide some of the specialized services clients need – code review, construction admin, project management, planning/zoning approvals, cost estimating, green/LEED design, feasibility studies, FFE, acoustical analysis, energy analysis, interior design
  • Services that may become more important in the future include financial analysis, energy analysis, cost estimating [control], strategic planning, post occupancy evaluation, asset management.
  • Additional training in the specialty services described above would be valuable.

What changes to faculty and curriculum are needed to increase value to students and to the profession?

Regarding the DesignIntelligence rankings of Architecture schools mentioned earlier, as you probably already know, the university of Minnesota did not appear in the top 10 undergraduate schools, or in the top 10 graduate architecture schools and it did not rank in any of the skills categories including Sustainable design practices and principles. The schools noted for Sustainable Design Skills are ranked as follows: 1 University of Oregon; 2 University of California, Berkeley; 3 University of Texas, Austin; 3 University of Virginia; 5 Auburn University; and of those several were also ranked in the top 10 Graduate Architecture Schools, namely, U of Texas, Austin (5);  UVA (9) and UC Berkely (10.) Nevertheless according to ACSA’s website, “There are 125 schools offering professional architecture degree programs in the United States and Canada[21]” so perhaps not making the DesignIntelligence top 10 list is not such a great defeat. However, in the survey published in the same article entitled “What students do after graduating” that was cited earlier, you may recall that 77% said they plan to become LEED certified. [22]
You may ask: So what changes to faculty are being made at the top ranked architecture schools? After briefly attempting to research this question, I have come to the conclusion that this is an important subject for further research, but perhaps one better carried out by those with better connections to the other colleges through groups such as the ACSA and other networking affiliations. On an anecdotal note, a good friend of mine, Kevin Burke AIA, who has been the partner in charge of Design at William McDonough + Partners for a number of years and one of the top Sustainable Design Professionals in the country, was just hired to join the faculty at the UC Berkeley School of Architecture which was included in both the top 10 Graduate Architecture Schools and top 5 in Sustainable Design rankings mentioned above. After I wrote to congratulate Kevin, he wrote back:
“… thanks so much and great to hear from you! We are enjoying the fall out here, and my transition from WMP … Keep your eyes open for a couple of sustainability job positions at Berkeley (one jointly with LBNL)…”
And I don’t think it will be surprising to many that in the US Department of Labor’s Occupational Outlook Handbook for 2010-11 for Architects cited earlier, these same skills are identified as important for graduating students.
“There should be demand for architects with knowledge of “green” design. Green design, also known as sustainable design, emphasizes the efficient use of resources such as energy and water, waste and pollution reduction, conservation, and environmentally friendly design, specifications, and materials. Rising energy costs and increased concern about the environment has led to many new buildings being built green. [23]
In fact public funding for renewable energy and energy efficiency in “green” buildings has catapulted ahead of all other sources as highlighted in the recent report by Congressional Research Service which outlines in detail the BILLIONS of federal dollars[24] that have been earmarked for energy improvements in buildings. The three key pieces of recent legislation that have contributed most to the exponential growth in this funding are:

  1. Energy Policy Act of 2005 (EPACT) P.L. 109-58.
  2. Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008 (EESA) P.L. 110-343, including the Energy Improvement and Extension Act of 2008.
  3. American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA) P.L. 111-5. 
 
Envisioning the Future in Architecture Education – a blast from the Past?
Back in 1999 Architecture Schools were already dealing with the rapidly changing nature of our profession, the following are citations from a paper entitled “The Future In Architectural Education” presented by Julio Bermudez at the 87TH ACSA ANNUAL MEETING here in Minneapolis.[25] Dr. Bermudez in his introductory remarks says:

“As the US and the world move into the 21st century and beyond, the practice and the very idea of architecture will experience dramatic changes. The population growth, the information knowledge revolution, the changing social and cultural realities, the globalization of the economy, the arising new technologies and materials, the increasing environmental degradation/consciousness, the pressures of urbanization and migration, etc. will pose unprecedented challenges to our 2 of 11 profession and lives (Drucker 1992, Kennedy 1993, Naisbitt & Aburdene 1990, Negroponte 1995, Toffler 1990, 1980).

He concludes with several general recommendations which resonate when considered in the context of the recent changes made in the curriculum.

“We can conclude with a series of general principles for future architectural education based on a seminal article written by Rittel (1986)[26]. A successful architectural curriculum should:
  • produce flexible professionals that are adaptable for a varying, uncertain class of future tasks. As Rittel adds ". . .even today's master of the art cannot be prototypes for tomorrow's architects; mastership must be paid for with a decreasing capability for relearning" (p.361);
  • emphasize the use of general principles and theories as economical cognitive devices for organizing, understanding and dealing with changing knowledge. They allow adaptation under varying circumstances and help learning;
  • "do not only teach general rules but also rules for the changing of rules. Teach how to design a theory and how to test it" (Ibid., p.362);
  • teach the "knowledge necessary to obtain the knowledge needed for a particular project" (Ibid., p.373), that is teach how to learn;
  • increase the level of interdisciplinary work and thought into concrete areas of need or research”

  It would seem therefore that we in the School of Architecture at the University of Minnesota have been on a course that embraces these types of innovative approaches for some time. But how might these principals be reconsidered in light of the more recent trends impacting on the architecture profession outlined in this white (sort-of) paper? As I started out by saying, no one can know what the future holds, but we can begin to make decisions based on current trends and past history that will better prepare us for that future.
It would seem therefore that we in the School of Architecture at the University of Minnesota have been on a course that embraces these types of innovative approaches for some time. But how might these principals be reconsidered in light of the more recent trends impacting on the architecture profession outlined in this white (sort-of) paper? As I started out by saying, no one can know what the future holds, but we can begin to make decisions based on current trends and past history that will better prepare us for that future.

Final Conclusions

“Now is the accepted time, not tomorrow, not some more convenient time. It is today that our best work can be done and not some future day or future year. It is today that we fit ourselves for the greater usefulness of tomorrow. Today is the seed time, now are the hours of work, and tomorrow comes the harvest and the playtime.”
 — W.E.B. DuBois 1868-1963  

 The following is a preliminary and not exhaustive list of recommendations for any accredited architecture school, in no particular order, that I hope can serve to address many of the current issues and trends discussed here relative to the future of the architecture profession. More analysis and discussion is needed, certainly,but this is what I interpret the trends to suggest.

 Take advantage of this moment in time to “rearrange your house” around multiple scenarios – namely for 1) what is expected and relatively certain about the future as well as 2) the case of what is uncertain, but probable  –  i.e., hope for the best but plan for the worst.
  • As both a recruiting tool but also as an important way of increasing overall success of the programs, create a dedicated staff position for job placement assistance. The objectives should include both summer internships for students currently enrolled in the program, since these will give them a better chance after college, and for long-term placement upon graduation as well.
  • Continue to add expertise on the faculty in the areas of sustainable design and particularly energy, water and resource related topics. Distinction could be sought in niche areas such as energy design tools, integrated building systems design, holistic systems integration, etc.
  • Explicit integration of ecological research into the curriculum and life of the college. E.g. make Center for Sustainable Building Research work (in the areas of cold-climate building envelope design and construction, energy design tools and life cycle assessment tools development, ecological resource mapping and ecological materials, etc.) more accessible to faculty and provide more opportunities for student research projects and research positions.
  • Establish a reputation as a leader in specific niche areas of architecture research, e.g. virtual reality visualization tools, energy design/simulation tools, evidence-based approach to design, etc.
  • Continue to build collaborations with NGO’s providing humanitarian aid, disaster relief and community service and institutionalize this as an integral part of the curriculum and student learning experience. Offer opportunities to students as extended learning/work experiences even “beyond graduation” as a stopgap measure for students who would otherwise find fierce competition for mainstream jobs.
  • Identify new areas of specialization that are of interest or needed to meet emerging needs in the profession (e.g., asset management, energy analysis, BIM and 3D visualization, value analysis and cost control, etc.).
  • Create structures that help to develop more flexibility in individual skill and knowledge development for varying career path choices and diverse areas of specialization.
  • Since technologies and knowledge change rapidly, place more emphasis on general principals that do not change, on continuous learning skills and cognitive devices for organizing, understanding and dealing with changing knowledge, i.e., teach how to learn as well as how to adapt to change.
  •  Make efforts to increase the level of interdisciplinary work and thought in both curriculum and research initiatives.

Conclusion

Until one is committed, there is hesitancy, the chance to draw back. Concerning all acts of initiative (and creation), there is one elementary truth, the ignorance of which kills countless splendid plans: that the moment one definitely commits oneself, then Providence moves too. All sorts of things occur to help one that would never otherwise have occurred. A whole stream of events issues from the decision, raising in one's favor all manner of unforeseen incidents and meetings and material assistance, which no man could have dreamed would have come his way. Whatever you can do, or dream you can do, begin it. Boldness has genius, power, and magic in it. Begin it now.  
_a paraphrase of William Hutchinson Murray (1913-1996)
from his 1951 book entitled The Scottish Himalayan Expedition.

As I offered at the outset, I do not claim to be any more qualified or knowledgeable than anyone else to offer this analysis and I highly recommend that many other opinions be sought and a great many minds brought to bear on these difficult issues as I am certain will be the case. What I believe is evident from the research that has been presented, is that these are complex and critical times for the profession of architecture… and that just hoping “that it will all turn out well in the end” is not, in my opinion, an adequate response to the demands of these times. As with any difficult situation, the potential for great benefits far exceeds the potential for loss, if earnest hearts, good planning and providence are proven in the end to be sympathetic partners. 

[14] Architectural NGOs, Spatial Agency research project at the School of Architecture, University of Sheffield
[15] Hughes, C.J., How Can Architects Get Involved in Haiti Disaster Relief?, Architectural Record, January 22, 2010
[16] AIA Minnesota Recovery Task Force June 2010 Report
[18] EcoTrends®  ITR February 2010 Issue,  Institute for Trend Research (ITR®), 2010; EcoTrends® is a widely read monthly publication prepared by ITR® and contains current information on more than 45 economic indicators, forecasts for those indicators, and suggested appropriate management actions. Information for the construction industry sectors can be found on pages 14-19 of the report.
[19] EcoTrends®  ITR February 2010 Issue,  Institute for Trend Research (ITR®), 2010
[23] Architect Occupational Outlook 2010-11, Bureau of Labor Statistics, US Department of Labor
[24] Cunningham, Lynn, Roberts, Beth, Renewable Energy and Energy Efficiency Tax Incentive Resources, Report for Congress, March 23,2009, Congressional Research Service (Doc 7-5700 www.crs.gov R 40455) This report contains numerous web links to all the important publications regarding incentives.
[25] Bermudez, Julio, The Future In Architectural Education, 87TH ACSA Annual Meeting Proceedings, Minneapolis, MN: ACSA Press, 1999, pp.321-325
[26] Rittel, Horst (1986), Some Principles for the Design of an Educational System for Design, Design Methods and Theories, v.20, n.1, pp.359-375

Posted by at
Labels:

No comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)