Georgia Bizios and Katie Wakeford – Learning and serving: Architecture students as community stewards

In the United States, the discipline of architecture has a history of providing community design as a public service. The political activism of the sixties found fertile ground in architecture, leading the American Institute of Architects to establish the Urban Design Assistance Team and the Rural Design Assistance Team, programs that sent professionals to work on site in a charrette mode to develop design proposals for community-revitalization projects. A number of design schools also established outreach programs to provide architectural services to communities and organizations in need. Such projects usually involved master planning, urban renewal, and adaptive reuse of existing buildings.

However, Professor Anthony Shuman contends that by the 1980s, architecture had begun to renege on its commitments to social engagement, retreating instead into theoretical debates over postmodernism and deconstruction, and focusing on explorations of digitally generated design. “The successive design trends of the past thirty years, although enriching the design palette in formal terms, have reinforced a narrow spectrum of architecture practice focused on the elite designer and the signature building,” Shuman explains.[1] Now that the tide is once again turning toward a socially and politically conscious practice of architecture, Shuman encourages design schools to offer students a broader understanding of the discipline and to train them in the skills required for community engagement. Similarly, in Building Community, a report exploring new directions for architectural education and practice, Mitgang and Boyer conclude that communities both want and need architectural services, and universities and students are eager to participate in service-learning projects, but the climates of many architectural education programs are not supportive of service learning.[2]

The discipline of architecture also has a long tradition of making, a legacy that dovetails well with public service. Recently, this tradition has manifested in the proliferation and popularity of design/build programs, which involve students in the act of making by allowing them to participate in the construction of a structure they have designed. Design/build projects typically have a public-service component because the built structure is usually intended for community use or is sponsored by a nonprofit, and the community of users is often involved in the design process.

A review of the literature, and of our own experience, clearly indicates that service learning in architecture curricula is sporadic, not systemic. When we consider the magnitude of the need for architectural design in community service and the benefit that service-learning experiences can provide to students, the need to expand service learning in architecture becomes apparent. To accomplish this expansion, architecture schools and practices must strive to create a climate of public advocacy and a culture of service. In addition, service-learning programs must constantly assess and adjust in response to changing community needs. Only by making a public-service ethic pervasive in our schools and practices can we teach the architecture students of today to become the stewards of tomorrow.

NC State University: A case study

As a land-grant college, North Carolina State University has been charged with the mission of serving the citizens of North Carolina, and each academic unit is called upon to participate in these efforts. One way in which the NC State College of Design strives to fulfill its land-grant mission is through the Home Environments Design Initiative (HEDI). HEDI partners with communities that have critical needs for affordable housing and that might not otherwise have access to design services. This type of university-community partnership is particularly useful in North Carolina, where there is an enormous need for affordable homes.

In 2004, HEDI established a partnership with the Lumbee Indian tribe of North Carolina to promote quality home designs and an increase in home ownership among tribe members. HEDI worked with Lumbee tribe members to develop a set of home-design guidelines, a set of neighborhood-design guidelines, and several prototype home designs for tribe members to use in building new homes for their families. For the student design team, the Lumbee Home Designs project offered opportunities to work in a unique cultural context while addressing the realities of a tight budget. Maximizing energy efficiency was highly important to the future homeowners, housing administrators, and students alike. The Lumbees’ Native American heritage of respecting the land and its resources stands in stark contrast to the designs, materials, and methods typically used in the provision of affordable housing, so all parties committed to ensuring that HEDI’s Lumbee home designs were energy-efficient.

What makes the Lumbee Home Design project distinctive yet replicable is the fact that it gives students the opportunity to design in response to particular cultural needs, with defined construction costs and budgets, while applying high standards of sustainability and energy efficiency. In other words, the Lumbee Home Design project is a challenging professional experience. In addition to learning about affordable housing and “green” design, participating students make a commitment to community engagement, discover the value of local expertise, and hone the interpersonal skills that build trust over time. They learn that in architecture, nothing gets done without collaboration and compromise.

Critiques of service-learning projects in architecture

The Lumbee Home Design project has not been without its frustrations and difficulties. A critique of the project points to the same issues that bedevil most efforts to involve architecture students in real-world project settings:

• Students can experience high stress levels when trying to balance other responsibilities with a service project. Community-service projects often require travel, necessitating excused absences from other classes or shifts in family responsibilities and job commitments.

• Most architectural course work is done by the individual, but community-design projects require teamwork, so students may be ill-prepared to work in a group. The demands of service projects may exaggerate the challenges of working as a team, and conflicts can result.

• For faculty, outreach projects require more time commitment and emotional involvement than any other course, including studio courses. The students involved are constantly challenged as designers, community organizers, and team members and they require the prompt, consistent support of an experienced faculty member. Due to these unusually high demands, there is significant faculty burnout rate in service teaching in architecture.

• It is difficult to evaluate the results of service-learning projects at the end of an academic semester. As is the case in practice, design is only one aspect of the work performed. Appraisals must include the value of other acquired skills. Also, this teaching is tutorial in nature and can involve only a few students at a time; and despite the close interactions — or perhaps because of them — it is sometimes difficult to grade the work produced and the knowledge gained.

• Projects move slowly, and the change they create is often small. For example, the Lumbee Home Design project, which produced three modest homes in three years, is considered a great success. It takes patience, perseverance, and good will from both the academy and the community to keep projects moving and relationships strong.

The Importance of training stewards

Given the difficulties and limitations inherent in service-learning projects, why should architectural curricula provide these opportunities to their students?

1. Public-service work is rewarding. For students and faculty who have the affinity — and the patience — for community service, the sense of effecting positive change is gratifying. One house at a time, one student at a time, the results count.[3]

2. Service learning is becoming increasingly important in higher education. Universities are encouraging faculty to connect the classroom with the community, and faculty are recognizing the enrichment such activities can bring to the curriculum: real-world application of theoretical concepts deepens a student’s understanding of the linkage between conceptualization and implementation. Architectural design, by its very nature, strives to meet the client’s needs, which makes architectural education the perfect venue for learning about a discipline while performing a service for the community. Architectural curricula that take leadership roles in community engagement can become significant players in universities’ efforts to achieve the extension aspects of their mission. This is particularly true for land-grant institutions such as NC State.

3. Student creativity and enthusiasm are valuable resources to harness. Architecture students are actively seeking opportunities to commit their developing skills to public service through outreach activities. Boyer and Mitgang found that nearly one-fourth of architecture students named “improving the quality of life in their communities” as their number-one reason for entering the profession.[4]

4. Communities learn and grow as a result of their engagement with students, faculty, and the resources of the university. Before a single structure is framed, the client community involved in a community-design project is exposed to the design process, which teaches them what architects do and how architecture can benefit them. Students become teachers, sharing their newly acquired knowledge. When the first Lumbee Home Design was built with vinyl siding in spite of our recommendation for other siding materials, the student team undertook a campaign of research and education that eventually convinced the tribe to use cementitious siding, a more environmentally responsible choice, for future construction. Our profession, typically perceived as catering to an elite few, demonstrated its capacity to care for and contribute to the welfare of many.

We also made special efforts to include Lumbee children in our outreach. The community workshops we conducted included special activities for children in an effort to involve them in the process and possibly attract a new generation to the profession of architecture, especially from a socioeconomic group that might have had little prior awareness of or interest in design. Additionally, plans are under way for a Lumbee Home Designs Career Exploration program for middle-schoolers.

5. The relationships forged between the academic institution and partnering organizations yield reciprocal benefits. Community engagement provides valuable opportunities for research and education, while dissemination of the discoveries and achievements of faculty and students lead to a robust public discourse, enhanced economic development, healthier and happier citizens, and a stronger state.

6. Community-design projects teach architecture students to place a high value on public service. We know that architectural internships often influence the direction a student will take in professional life. If only a few members of the HEDI student team embark on a career path dedicated in some way to meeting the affordable-housing needs of our state, the project will have reaped a significant benefit. If the others maintain a public-service ethic as they establish themselves in their firms and their communities, the ripples will spread.

Expanding architecture’s community-design heritage beyond the curriculum

We are now imagining how our public-service efforts might develop and expand. One opportunity might be found in the Intern Development Program. This required three-year internship, which provides the transition from school to the profession, continues to be much discussed and criticized. At this time, there are very few opportunities for interns to gain experience while working for the public good.

In 2005, Dean Marvin Malecha, FAIA published a monograph proposing a bridge between the academy and professional practice.[5] He suggests that some schools could become more integrated into the profession by taking on additional roles and developing internship programs. Conversely, some firms could organize themselves as “practice academies” — learning organizations that are transforming both the internship culture and the practice environment. Public-service projects would be ideal for these types of efforts.

The Lumbee Home Designs project has given us the opportunity to test a new model by providing recent architecture graduates with nonprofit work experience. We have found that these interns have contributed significantly to the success of our projects due to their enthusiasm for community service, their capacity to apply their acquired skills, and their ability to work thirty or more hours a week. These internships have also provided our interns with a supportive, rewarding transition from academia to the professional world.

Obviously, there are many ways to train citizen-architects in the principles of public service and environmentally responsible design. Ours is one small, successful effort, one option among many. Yet the program’s farther-reaching consequence is that it trains young designers to be good stewards of their communities and our environment. Incoming architecture students are longing for such opportunities. Schools must meet this need by teaching future architects how to serve a wider range of clients while building a more sustainable world.

Notes

[1] – Shuman, Anthony. “Introduction: The Pedagogy of Engagement,” in From the Studio to the Streets: Service Learning in Planning and Architecture, ed. Mary C. Hardin and William Zeisel. Washington, DC: American Association for Higher Education, 2005. p. 8.

[2] – Boyer, Ernest L. and Lee D. Mitgang. Building Community: A New Future for Architecture Education and Practice: A Special Report. Princeton, NJ: Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching, 1996.

[3] – In three years, sixteen students have participated in HEDI projects. Thirteen have worked as paid research assistants, and three have received independent-study credit for their efforts. Also, HEDI has employed two recent graduates as interns.

[4] – Boyer and Mitgang. Building Community: A New Future for Architecture Education and Practice. p. 9.

[5] – Malecha, Marvin. The Learning Organization and the Evolution of the Practice Academy Concepts. Raleigh, NC: NC State University College of Design, 2005.

Special issue: read also, recent articles
Tags: architecture, design, Georgia Bizios, Katie Wakeford, USA