It is time for a " Design Revolution"
Professor Jaffer AA Khan B.Arch (Madras)., M.Sc Arch (Bartlett UCL,)., PhD (RMIT, Melbourne)
Head of Programme - Architectural Studies, Interior Design and BIM & Research Chair Department of Engineering and Architectural Studies, Ara Institute of Canterbury Christchurch New Zealand
It is time for a “Design Revolution”
Jaffer AA Khan RIBA
“Education is something which is always on trial because no system can ever capture the real meaning of learning” Louis I Kahn , “ I love Beginnings” 1972.
The profession of architecture is at crossroads today. With the tag, that the future is India and a growth target of more than 8% as the agenda of the Modi government, the growth in the construction industry is inevitable. Both the Private and public sector are geared up for the infrastructure work opportunities and to create 100 Smart Cities, which seems to be the pet project of the Prime Minister. But many argue that do we need “SMART” or “SAFE” Cities Whatever may be the agenda, can this justify the growth of the architecture schools in the country? Their growths seems to have overtaken the growth of the “fertility clinics” and are on fast track producing hybrid architects who will be the custodians of the built environment for this century and beyond. I only hope they do not become “beefalos”, of India to produce architecture that will lack the sense of being and reflect the psyche of the people of this great multi-cultural nation.
While the Council of Architecture, (CoA) is on the fast track to add more schools and to increase the intake in every school and department, many find it difficult to find suitable teaching resources as per the CoA norms or by the norms stipulated by the respective universities. The CoA does not have an idea to tackle this issue and to formulate a policy to resolve the matter.
Architectural education itself is a unique process. It can never fit into the University system. It has to independently exist with minimum control. This freedom will open up different avenues and options to involve the professionals and experts in the field of architecture to assist in academics. Hence the traditional, idea of academic positions needs to be questioned. Walter Gropius, after leaving Bauhaus and spending some time at Harvard, concluded that universities were far too bookish for architectural education. Architectural knowledge was to be advanced through architectural practice, in the office not the library.1 In this context, it is interesting to know the story of the University of Pennsylvania, the Architecture School under Louis I Kahn. Kahn was not just a teacher but also an excellent practitioner at the time when he was there.
Penn’s2 program in architecture has a long and distinguished history and Kahn was the most sought after teacher of his time. With the figure like Kahn on the faculty there is little need for a vision or structure of a curriculum. He was a magnet to students throughout the world. After his death there was enormous vacuum and a struggle for identity. Penn was never the same again.1
领英推荐
Practice and Academics are seemed to be the two poles apart. Rarely these two professions go together. But in architectural education, the studio-based programs have been very successful world over. Holmes Perkins, who headed Penn after Kahn, appointed and retained only those faculty who are and would remain active in both theory and practice; which is to say, all professors- no matter what their subject area- were expected to maintain some involvement in project making and design work.1
However, this century is very significant for India, which is the fastest growing economy in the world. Success in the profession will be dependent on the effectiveness to deliver quality architectural services and produce design products with high value. And hence the time has come for a “Design revolution”. This revolution will ensure the continued existence of quality institutions, which will galvanize the design talents, and energize the profession to meet the challenges of the 21st century India.
Article written in 2015
________________________________________________________________
1 Leatherbarrow.D, The Beginning of the Beginning: Kahn and Architectutral Education in Philedelphia, Docomomo 49-2013-2
2 University of Pennsylvania, USA ( Short form)
--
1 年I totally agree !!
Qualified Builder, Polished Diamond Grader, AJP, Student of Business Leadership/Management and Architectural design.
1 年After speaking with several architectural professionals, I have discovered that many graduate students have a strong ability to dream but lack the practical skills to ground these dreams. Without a clear purpose, a dream can never be realised and will remain just that - a dream. It was also noted that architects are the least paid among most construction consultants. Could it be because of a lack of practical and technical understanding of building construction, in other words, how to ground the dream?
Chartered Architect / Planner ARIBA, ARB, MITPI, MAPM, MUDG
1 年The blame lies with the Architecture fraternity also in addition to respective professomal bodies. Because they have failed to work and explore ways as to how that crucial aspect of practice and acedemics can be amalgamated.
Well written article. Thanks for sharing I have seen govt policies / policy makers COA or universities always keep on talking about practical knowledge & connection with industries . But again it stays in paper within word only. For practical knowledge faculties should have practical experience then only students will learn that approach . I totally agree on your opinion... universities, architecture course cannot fit within university framework. HOds, deans has to pour maximum.energies to convince to conduct course co curricular activities(hands on or practical etc). In fact COA itself has started working on theoretical manner . COA has started inspections by online assessing. FDP online programs n only lectures will not work. Genuinely they should start promoting faculties for practical knowledge/ involvement (not by giving lectures). Curriculum should conducted in practical oriented manner which is out of brain of managements who run the courses. Unfortunately COA has started acting management pro. Instead of increasing arch institutes efforts are needed to increase admissions in existing institutes. The main reason behind Smart cities failure is the non practical approach while framing policy..
Creative Director
1 年Rightly said! While aesthetics may be a subjective choice, the functionality takes precedence. Our teachers/professors need to experience the 'reality' of any built environment, the challenges and shortcomings - the user feedback, both long term and short term - so that they are able to imbibe the essential skills into the new generation, one of them being able to foresee critical points and adapt to circumstances, without compromising end result. (However, this might not be restricted to the field of architecture only) Well, maybe we first need to identify if the expected end result is actually the desired end result. ?? One more thing is desperately needed - with the amount of technological advancements and new building materials, there is a need to embrace sustainability (as not an optional subject) for the global betterment. Architects are the creators of livable space for all, and they have the duty (like doctors) to provide for 'healthy' environments - physical, mental and emotional. It should not be optional. Smart cities cannot be developed and sustained on outdated practices, explained by narrow-visioned professors as well as government officials.