Educating for 2030

The Five Year Issue

Five years of education has been accepted as the norm, and there is international pressure to establish this is obligatory. However, why five years in education is so readily accepted is never properly investigated. The overriding reason appear s to be that there is so much to learn and that one needs this much time, but with increasing specialisation much knowledge is best learnt in practice.

There is also an underlying belief that architectural design is an iterative process that takes five years to achieve competency at. Too often I have heard the argument that students just need to be a studio for this long, as if architectural gilt will be transferred osmotically. This is decadent.

Five years is nice, but it is no longer tenable financially if we are to have an inclusive profession. It is perfectly possible to learn in practice and for that learning to be structured. One just needs a change of mindset.

1		The main elements of the proposed new structure are: • Part 1/Par t2/Part 3 structure replaced by single gateway • Roles of ARB and RIBA clearly seperated • A three year BA (with an exit at the end) followed by a year in practice, properly integrated with University, followed by a final year leading to an MArch (possibly validated by the RIBA but not prescribed by ARB). • This gives four years of education in a School of Architecture. The 'loss' of the year is made up by a better structured year out and more time in practice. • Extended period in practice prior to final ARB examination • Universities offering specialist Masters which can replace some of prescribed time in practice • Individuals take national examination prescribed by ARB to ensure competency to practice.

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10