Architectural Education as a Basis for Planning Work — The Pros and Cons of Professional Enculturation

Abstract

Planning education does not exist as an independent professional education in Finland. The educational background of the majority of practising urban planners (approximately 50–60%) is architectural education. Because of this national particularity, this paper concentrates on architect-planners as a professional group, and presents findings from a national survey the authors conducted in Finland in January 2009. The key question in this paper is how Finnish architectural education prepares urban planning professionals for their work, and how architect-planners perceive the strengths and weaknesses of architectural education with respect to the competence demands they face. The conclusions of the study point to certain inner contradictions inside the architectural profession. Architectural education passes on a somewhat narrow conception of art which translates into an emphasis on individual creativity, questioning and problem solving skills. Striving for excellence in the art of architecture, perceived in this way, seems to work against developing the students’ skills in negotiation, conflict management, interdisciplinary teamwork and leadership, all of which are indispensable for practising architects. Resolution to the contradiction is sought from the work of Dana Cuff (1991) and Kristina Nilsson (2003), who associate artistry with the social ability to manage complex problems creatively and reflexively, in cooperation with other professionals and actors from other fields. Such a redefinition of art and artistry in architectural education might help settle the tensions the authors have identified in the survey analysis.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 12 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.