Public Interest Design: A Vehicle for Change in Architectural Education and Practice

Since architecture became professionalized and distinguished from thebuilding trades during the Renaissance, its practice has been largely reactivewith the architect responding to the wants and needs of a paying client.The object of the architect’s work thus becomes the articulation in termsof form and function of a product that has been pre-conceived by the client.The architect does not question the product proposed by the client butrather offers alternatives ways in which it can be realized, thus operatingas a passive producer of consumer goods as well as a producer of spaceaccording to the predominant economic structure (see Harvey 1985, Bell2010). Professional expertise thus becomes associated with form-makingand technical organization rather than the synthesis of multiple types ofinformation that is the true hallmark of design.Professional design education has traditionally followed a similar structureto that of practice, focusing on the design studio as the locus of productionin which students learn the methods of a “master” professor who acts asa substitute client. While professional accreditation requires that students“prepare a comprehensive program for an architectural project,” this focuseson physical and technical requirements rather than broader socio-politicalconcerns and assumes that design students will go on to practices inwhich project agendas are determined by others (see NAAB 2009). Currenttrends toward the integration of “support” coursework with design studios,the expansion of interdisciplinary offerings, and the growth of researchbasedstudios and practice indicate that the traditional model is no longerenough. Sustainable design, integrated practice, and BIM demand a moreintegrated, holistic approach to design education that is just the beginningof what will be needed to confront global climate change, increasing urbanization,and population migrations, all of which will have substantial impacton the built environment.This paper presents examples of university-based activist practices that offeralternatives to conventional models of education and practice and describesthe ways in which they operate with respect to university and practicesystems. Whether structured as design centers, design/build studios,outreach studios, or research courses these practices engage a wider scopeof work that includes what Bryan Bell describes as “help(ing) to define problemsand locat(ing) opportunities where design has the potential to changethe lives of individual people and communities” (Bell 2010). Typically interdisciplinaryand operating at multiple scales, the most effective of theseprograms engage design in a proactive, systemic way that focuses on civicissues rather than products and uses the built environment as an instrumentalforce to include those who have been at the political-economic periphery.They not only give students opportunities to truly integrate a broad rangeof knowledge and skills but also create opportunities for interaction withdesign professionals and offer new opportunities for professional work. Thepaper concludes by proposing ways in which activist practice can be moreeffectively integrated into design education with respect to both accreditationand professional internship and the opportunities that this can createfor design practice.

Volume Editors
Martha Thorne & Xavier Costa

ISBN
978-0-935502-83-1