Entry-Level Positions: For Learning or for the Man?
After myself and my peers have attended interviews with firms at the career fair this week, I couldn’t help but think about Habraken’s Questions That Will Not Go Away. In this reading, Habraken stated “Teaching architectural design without teaching how everyday environment works is like teaching medical students the art of healing without telling them how the human body functions.” After asking firms what I would be doing as an entry-level professional, the answer was almost always documentation. How can one gain professional experience if we are pigeonholed into drafting detail drawings all day and are not involved in the most important piece of architecture: research? Like Habraken stated, architects cannot learn architectural design unless they learn how our environment works.
I agree, an entry-level professional doing solely documentation really doesn't expose them to the design process at all. Doing grunt work (CDs) as an intern is accepted by a lot of people starting out in the field, but this really shouldn't be the case. If they're spending most their time doing CD's, they're only ever going to get good at making CD's, not actual good architecture and designs. Who knows maybe AI will eventually be doing all of these details?
ReplyDeleteThe application of the readings to our soon-to-be lives is interesting. The design process is necessary to the understanding all architecture. Becoming draftsmen and reiterating work doesn't necessarily formulate new ideas on architecture. Because of this, I appreciate the idea that Habraken holds- that architects are new to everyday architecture and should consider the community, overall needs and the continuation of the design process.
ReplyDelete