More Questions

 After reading Questions That Will Not Go Away by N. John Habraken, I have lots of thoughts but mostly more questions to add.

·        “learning a skill demands exercise, and exercise demands failure and time to try again.” As this relates to education, the questions that I have are:

o   Skill implies that something is teachable.

§  Which aspect of architecture is a teachable skill?

§  If learning a skill requires failure, which skill is the most important and should be enforced from day one in order to allow for the proper amount of time for failure?

§  Is this skill case by case? How do educators help people to identify weaknesses in addition to strengths? Do they actually care? Is education a business just like the profession?

·        “In studio, it is impossible to exercise distribution of design responsibility, or to deal with the sharing of values and qualities among designers, or to handle issues of change…. Studio can no longer be the only format for teaching design. Other ways must be invented.”

o   We are supposed to have a basic understanding of everything. It is supposed to help us with design as well as help us to better communicate with our clients and consultants. However, are our future clients and consultants taught how to communicate with us? Should they be?

o   At an institution like Clemson, should the collaboration be only between emerging architects, or should studio projects include required collaboration between landscape students, and engineering students in addition to our current collaboration with faculty?

o   How do you help people who have not been formally trained in architecture better understand the importance of their contribution whenever they choose to pursue an architectural education?

o   How do you get those formally trained in architecture to value this contribution and view these individuals as equals?

o   Is our profession too aggressive? How does this influence the sharing of information?

o   Are we entrepreneurs or public servants?