The document summarizes discussions from a seminar on the future of architectural education. Key points include: - There was discussion on the purpose of architectural education and ensuring employability amid higher education changes. - Regulatory bodies like the ARB and RIBA were reviewed in the context of criteria for architectural qualifications. - Pathways like integrated degrees and apprenticeships were discussed as alternatives to traditional education models. - Challenges for schools were outlined, such as being competitive and addressing affordability and diversity in programs. - The school's curriculum review was summarized, which explored more flexible pathways and satisfying new requirements. - Groups were tasked with discussing related topics and proposing action research projects on issues in

1. ARC571 Reflections on
Architectural Education
Seminar 4
Monday 18 November 2019

2. Today:
• Introduction
• Discussion Group:
‘The Future of Architectural Education’
• Feedback and further discussion
• Teaching innovation development
• Feedback and discussion

3. Discussion Group:
The Future of Architectural
Education

4. What is the Purpose of
Architectural Education?
• To broaden the appreciation of the built environment
within society
• As a route to professional practice (a minority but
fundamental purpose)
• As a route to allied professions and careers
• To support research in the discipline
• As a broadly based undergraduate education in both
the arts and sciences able to deliver a wide range of
transferable skills

5. Context – Higher Education
• New fee arrangement introduced in 2012
• Question of ‘is it worth it?’ becomes paramount
• Emphasis on employability and marketable skills
• Demographic changes – fewer 18 year olds in UK
• Increased competition – 60 Architecture Schools in UK
• Increase in alternatives to Higher Education
• Increase in number and standard of overseas Schools
• Introduction of the Teaching Excellence Framework (TEF)
• Implications of Brexit – uncertainty
Despite this architecture remains an attractive proposition
and attracts a high calibre of students.

6. Legislative Framework
The Architects Act (1997):
• enshrines in law the protection of the title ‘Architect’.
• establishes the Architects Registration Board (ARB).
• ARB maintains the register of those qualified to use title.
• ARB prescribes qualifications leading to entry.
EU Professional Qualification Directive (PQD):
• promotes common standards of qualifications across the
EU for the purposes of mutual recognition.
• PQD sets minimum requirement, but allows individual
member states to set a higher requirement.
Image – Flickr Creative Commons

7. ARB and RIBA
ARB:
• Independent regulatory body, protecting the consumer.
• Prescription of qualifications and training required.
• Ensures that minimum standards of competence are met
by any individual authorised to use the title ‘Architect’.
RIBA:
• Professional body rather than a regulator.
• No role in statutory regulation of the profession other
than as a consultee.
• RIBA validation does not offer access to the UK register.
• Only awards and examinations prescribed by the ARB
provide a pathway to UK registration.
Image – Flickr Creative Commons

8. ARB/RIBA Criteria
The two organisations publish agreed criteria for UK
architectural education:
• The UK’s Part 1, 2 and 3 requirements expand the EU
PQD’s 11 criteria to 106 criteria.
• Minimum period of academic study set at 5 years, plus
min. 2 years of Professional Practice Experience (PPE).
• Minimum period to professional qualification of 7 years.
The Criteria comprises three sections:
• The General Criteria at Parts 1 and 2
• The Graduate Attributes for Part 1
• The Graduate Attributes for Part 2
Image – Flickr Creative Commons

9. Criteria and Procedures Review
• Joint ARB/RIBA working group.
• Lack of consensus as to the desired outcome:
• RIBA preference to adopt only the 11 EU PQD Criteria,
plus revised graduate attributes at each stage:
• ‘increasing word count does NOT enhance quality’.
• ARB favour continued use of more developed and
prescriptive criteria:
• ‘PQD not sufficient to make informed and consistent
decisions when considering prescription’.
Revised Criteria were due to be introduced in September
2019, but the process has now been put on hold.
Image – Flickr Creative Commons

10. Pathways and Gateways
2013 report by The UK Architectural Education Review
Group – an independent panel instigated by SCHOSA.
• Examines issues affecting architectural education in UK.
• Recommends changes to existing framework:
• Single gateway at the entrance to the profession
(replacing Parts 1, 2 and 3).
• Greater variety and flexibility in the pathways leading up
to that gateway.
• Does not seek to determine a single model for delivery.
• Encourages development of numerous, varied and
interdisciplinary models linked to other careers as well as
to architectural qualification.
Image – Flickr Creative Commons

13. RIBA Education Review (RER)
Launched in 2013, concluded in 2017:
• Minimum of 2 years of assessed professional practical
experience (PPE) within a minimum 7 year period.
• Typically a 7 year integrated award (with the facility for
universities to still award a first degree in architecture).
• Academic credits available for 1 year of work based
learning.
• A 300 ECTS (600 UK credits) programme compliant with
the requirements of the Bologna agreement.
• Access to the register of architects and title of architect
on successful completion of the integrated course
Image – Flickr Creative Commons

14. RER – Implications for Schools
• 7 year ‘Integrated Award’ would be expected to include a
minimum of 60 ECTS (120 credits) relating to knowledge
and understanding of professional skills.
• By September 2019 all recognised UK schools of
architecture were encouraged to have completed
detailed proposals for offering an integrated academic
framework reflecting the 5 recommendations of the RER.
• Future RIBA validation will be based on the ‘principal
pathway’ offering registration upon graduation.
• New RIBA validation procedures, criteria, and graduate
attributes was to be introduced from 1 September 2019.
Image – Flickr Creative Commons

15. Architecture Apprenticeships
• Apprenticeship Standards for Architectural Assistant
(Level 6) and Architect (Level 7) approved in June 2018.
• The Standards developed by the ‘Trailblazer’ group of
Universities and 20 architecture practices.
• An alternative, more affordable route to registration.
• Strengthens ties between the profession and academia.
• Level 7 apprenticeship satisfies the RIBA Education
Review’s aspiration for registration on graduation.
• Duration for each levels typically 48 months – minimum
8 years to professional qualification.
• ‘Earn while you learn’ route to professional qualification.
Image – Flickr Creative Commons

16. Architecture Apprenticeships
• All fees covered by the Govt. funded by employers’ levy:
• Firms with a wage bill of more than £3 million a year
charged 0.5% of wage bill to fund new apprenticeships.
• For Universities the funding band set at £21,000 for each
4 year programme (£5,250 per year).
• Level 7 Apprenticeship programmes (RIBA Parts 2 and 3)
started in September 2018 at five Universities: London
South Bank, Leicester De Montford, Northumbria, Oxford
Brookes and Portsmouth.
• At present only London South Bank and Northumbria are
offering the Level 6 Apprenticeship (RIBA Part 1).
Image – Flickr Creative Commons

17. Competitor Analysis
• Unclear how other Schools will adapt courses to meet
the expectations of the RIBA Education Review (RER).
• Most Schools will increase the proportion of MPL to
meet the Part 3 Criteria within Part 2 programme.
• A number of Schools have either joined, or are
considering joining, the IFA Apprenticeships
programme, either at Level 6, Level 7, or both.
• Part-time courses are offered at a number of Schools –
these still require an additional two years of practice
experience for PEDR, and extend the minimum period
of time to professional qualification.

18. Competitor Analysis

19. SSoA Curriculum Review
The Curriculum Review was carried out in two stages:
Stage One (completed June 2016) explored changes
which can be made within the existing course structure,
without a requirement to rewrite module descriptions,
and compliant with the School’s existing professional
validation.
Stage Two (completed Nov 2018) explores more radical
changes to course structure and content responding to
changes in higher education and the professional
context.

20. Curriculum Review – stage one
Existing programmes looked at to address the following:
• Maintaining and enhancing content and delivery
• Identifying and addressing areas of over-teaching and
over-assessment
• Reducing excessive bunching of deadlines
• Creating opportunities for whole school activities,
reflection and celebration
• Identifying opportunities for the incorporation of TEL
All modules now follow HEA and University guidelines:
• 10 cr = 10 hrs delivery; 90 hrs self-directed learning
• Assessment in line with self-directed learning hours

21. Stage Two – Aspirations
• Introduce flexible pathways – accredited and non-
accredited routes, single and dual honours.
• Level One entry year to be undertaken by all students.
• Be competitive with new apprenticeships model.
• Offer something distinctive and academically rigorous.
• Ability to develop a specialism.
Reduce the financial implications for students:
• Allow students to achieve PPQ in less than 7 years.
• Expand ‘Collaborative Practice’ model.
• Opportunities for distance and part-time learning.
• Academic credits alongside PPE (through block
teaching and/or self-directed distance learning).

22. Satisfying RER Requirements

23. Flexible pathways at UG and 12 month MArch

26. Discussion Group
• Discuss your thoughts as a group
• Make reference to given texts
• Relate to your own experience
• Prepare notes for group discussion

27. Questions to address:
• Vocational training or broad education? – What
should the relationship to practice be?
• How do we increase diversity – in cohort and
curriculum? – flexible pathways, etc.
• How can the course be made more affordable? –
overall length, earn-while-you-learn, etc.
• How do we incorporate more interdisciplinary
learning opportunities?
• What are the appropriate learning objectives,
teaching methods and assessment criteria?
• How much reality and ‘liveness’ should there be?
• Are there alternatives to studio-based learning?

29. Action Research
Proposal should outline:
• Who is in your group? (2 or 3 students)
• What is the issue you wish to address?
• How do you propose to address it?
• Which year group will you be working with?
• When and where will the action take place?
• How many participants, and how are they identified?
• How will you evaluate the impact?
Refer to last week’s Action Research slides

30. Questions you might ask
• What is my concern? And why am I concerned?
• What kind of evidence can I produce to show why I am
concerned?
• What can I do about it? And what will I do about it?
• What kind of evidence will I produce to show that what I
am doing is having an influence?
• How do I evaluate that influence?
• How do I make sure the judgments I make are reasonably
fair and accurate?
• How do I modify my practice in the light of my
evaluation?

31. Dissemination
• Written assignment will present reflections and
research findings in a Journal paper format
• Collaborate to produce consistent approach so that
articles can be collated and published on-line

32. Looking ahead:
Monday 2 December falls during the strike period.
We will arrange alternative dates/times for tutorials on
your action research and written assignment – email to
arrange…